What is Lassana Diarra case? Will it change football like Bosman ruling?

Diarra’s case could have a massive impact on football transfers.

The issue of Fifa versus the player “BZ,” also known as the former midfielder for Chelsea, Arsenal, and Portsmouth, will be decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on Friday. The decision might put dynamite under the system since it pertains to how the transfer market operates.

What is it about?

Lassana Diarra was a player for Lokomotiv Moscow. In the summer of 2014, the club and the France international were at odds about the player’s pay. The club terminated his contract after determining that this constituted a violation of the contract. In order to obtain damages, they then brought Diarra to the dispute and settlement chamber of FIFA.

The DRC ruled in Lokomotiv’s favour and punished the player €10.5 million in spite of Diarra’s counterclaim. The Belgian team Charleroi made Diarra a contract offer at the same time. But there was a catch: Charleroi wanted FIFA to affirm that Diarra could go and that his new team would not be responsible for any of the expenses owed to Lokomotiv.

FIFA did not provide those assurances, with its regulations requiring that an international transfer certificate be issued by the league if a player quits. This certificate thing has to be done before any deal can be completed. Since Lokomotiv had not received any payment, the permit was not issued. Diarra thus filed a lawsuit against FIFA and the Belgian football league in December 2015, alleging a loss of profits and initiating the protracted proceedings that culminated in this week’s ruling.

What will be the final ruling?

There is still a chance that the court may rule in favour of FIFA and nothing changes. On the other end of the spectrum, the court might rule that a player should be free to terminate a contract without limiting their ability to sign with another team or causing them to incur any fees.

Additionally, there are many possible outcomes in between, most of which would include a legal or technical repair for the current system. For instance, proving that a buying club was involved in a player’s contract violation without “just cause” will need a burden of proof.

What could be the issues?

A ruling that violates FIFA’s regulations would essentially give players (and their agents) more negotiating leverage over clubs in transfer and contract discussions. More contracts being violated and more ambiguity around transfer costs would result from it. To decide what reimbursement, if any, a club ought to receive (and by whom) in the instance in which a player walked out, a new body would most likely need to be established.

The repercussions can be profound. Dealing in transfers is an essential way for many European clubs to stay afloat. A verdict against FIFA would go against that and most likely favour larger clubs that have the ability to convince players to terminate their contracts in a manner that is currently impossible. However, clubs would essentially lose control over career trajectories, and the transfer arrangements that support multi-club ownership groupings would also become less solid.

For more updates, follow Khel Now on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram; download the Khel Now Android App or IOS App and join our community on Telegram.