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 ÂŁ40 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 ÂŁ50 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 ÂŁ22 million price tag that Liverpool ultimately paid for him.
Now the Merseyside club want more than double that, valuing the 26-year-old at ÂŁ50 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
-
Ghana’s banking system nears full recovery after debt restructuring shock – IMF
34 minutes -
Banks back to full capital adequacy – IMF declares progress in Ghana sector clean-up
51 minutes -
IMF says BoG’s multi-billion cedi losses were part of economic recovery
1 hour -
The losses were necessary – IMF backs BoG’s costly economic rescue
2 hours -
People on the ground recognise the gains – IMF backs BoG strategy
2 hours -
Oil prices slide on hopes of US-Iran peace deal
2 hours -
Italy busts €300 million streaming piracy ring
2 hours -
Texas sues Meta, WhatsApp over encryption privacy claims
3 hours -
US appeals court revives $82 million of verdict against Ford in trade secrets case
3 hours -
Activision shareholders reach $250m settlement over Microsoft buyout
3 hours -
Google appeals US court ruling on search monopoly
3 hours -
QNET, Manchester City Host Grassroots Football Clinic in Ghana
3 hours -
StanChart CEO Bill Winters apologises for ‘upset caused’ by AI comments
3 hours -
Grok falls flat in Washington, undercutting SpaceX’s AI growth story
3 hours -
Bank of Ghana was not too aggressive – IMF defends tight policy measures
4 hours