Audio By Carbonatix
A dispute between Luis Suarez and Liverpool over the terms of the Uruguayan's contract could be taken to the Premier League, reports the Telegraph.
On Suarez's side, they believe the clause in his contract means Liverpool are obliged to sell him if a bid over £40 million is received, given that Liverpool failed to make the Champions League, while the bidders Arsenal are in the competition qualifying stage.
These are the details of the clause that Suarez and his agent Pere Guardiola believe were agreed when the striker's contract was renegotiated in the summer of 2012.
With Liverpool failing to make the top four and Arsenal in the competition, the bid should be accepted in their view.
However, Liverpool are adamant they do not have to sell the player to Arsenal, because that is not how they have interpreted the clause.
They remain firm that the clause entitles Suarez to be informed of the bid and allows him the possibility to negotiate personal terms with Arsenal, although they have and will not accept a bid below £50 million, they say.
The Premier League are able to settle disputes between players and clubs, under the rule T.30, which could be taken up by Suarez and co, if Liverpool refuse to back down.
They would make an unbiased decision based upon the evidence provided to them from both sides and a decision over the true nature of said clause would be made.
This would not be the first time that Luis Suarez moved to take such a bold action. During his time in Holland, where he made his name, the Dutch league rejected his appeal that he should be allowed to move to Ajax, from Groningen.
Regardless, he ended up at Ajax, where he started to make a name for himself and earned the £22 million price tag that Liverpool ultimately paid for him.
Now the Merseyside club want more than double that, valuing the 26-year-old at £50 million - the same amount they received for Fernando Torres before buying Suarez.
However, if Suarez were to win the appeal, Liverpool would still have a healthy profit for a player who quite clearly doesn't want to be there any longer.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Tags:
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Latest Stories
-
Jinapor demands answers as Alima Mahama is asked to pay for Embassy spending outside her tenure
8 minutes -
Russia doubles scholarships for Ghanaian students to 240 annually
9 minutes -
Cedi’s year-to-date loss slumps to 4.09% as recent gains gather pace
28 minutes -
‘Home has spoken’ – Justin Kodua Frimpong says as Ashanti delegates back his re-election bid
32 minutes -
Mustapha Abdul-Hamid, seven others’ NPA case adjourned to August 27
41 minutes -
Alima Mahama Refund: Jinapor challenges Ablakwa’s authority, says only Auditor-General can surcharge
41 minutes -
Wontumi Conviction: 2 star witnesses placed under police protection amid death threats
55 minutes -
Srem-Sai reveals surge in death threats after Wontumi conviction
1 hour -
GCB, Ecobank, 4 others are top tier banks in Ghana – PwC Banking Survey
1 hour -
Today’s front pages: Tuesday, August 18, 2026
2 hours -
Banks’ sustainable success will be defined less by interest margins – PwC
3 hours -
CJ Baffor-Bonnie was part of ‘grand conspiracy to remove Torkornoo – Afenyo-Markin alleges
3 hours -
The GIPA Act: Resetting Ghana’s investment framework
4 hours -
GIPA secures investor leads at Invest Fest 2026
4 hours -
Ghana’s missing billions: What 16 years of Auditor-General reports show
4 hours