Just ask the players to invoke Article 17:
Pioneer Webster's contract buy-out clears path for hordes to follow
Ewan Murray
Wednesday May 9, 2007
The Guardian
Andy Webster was yesterday hailed as a pioneer by senior players' union officials after he became the first player to successfully invoke article 17 of Fifa's transfer regulations and buy out his contract in moving from Hearts to Wigan Athletic.
In what has become a test case which promises to have ramifications for players across Europe, Webster took advantage of a Fifa ruling which permits players to terminate their contract after a "protected period".
Article continues
That period is three years for players who were under 28 when they signed the contract and two years for others. Webster claims Hearts induced what was technically a breach of contract by freezing him out of the first team while he refused to extend his deal.
The defender served notice to Hearts last May that he intended to leave Tynecastle almost immediately, by cancelling his contract three years into its intended four-year duration.
Yet in setting compensation of £625,000, due jointly from Webster and Wigan, whom the player joined in August, Fifa insisted Webster did not have "just cause" to end his deal prematurely without a payment to Hearts.
Union representatives have hailed confirmation that players can buy out their contracts as a victory for top-level professionals. Hearts will get only 12% of the £5m they had demanded for Webster and the union believes such cases will soon be replicated across Europe. Chelsea's Frank Lampard is among players who will soon be able to buy out their contracts.
"If Andy Webster was not entitled to do as he has done, he would not have been allowed to sign for Wigan," said Fraser Wishart of the Scottish Professional Footballers' Association. "It will have a big impact at the top level and it will bring a bit of sense to the transfer market. Some of the transfer fees are exorbitant but clubs will be easier to deal with now.
"It frustrates players that sometimes they may fancy a change but their club won't allow that. Players at the top level can now afford to take a risk, knowing roughly what they will have to pay."
It is unclear, though, what formula Fifa used to reach the £625,000 figure. FIFPro, the international players' union, believes the maximum compensation should have been the average of Webster's salary at Hearts and Wigan, multiplied by 1.5.
The 25-year-old was paid £150,000 per year in Edinburgh and FIFPro's lawyer, Wil van Megen, said the average wage had been multiplied by a far greater figure.
Fifa has refused to disclose how the final amount was reached but the governing body appears to have taken into account Hearts' role in Webster's development during his five years at the club. "The compensation was far higher than we thought it would be," said Tony Higgins, a FIFPro representative.
Webster did not attend a media conference called yesterday to discuss his case. It is believed Wigan's lawyers did not want the Scot, who has since been loaned to Rangers and is widely tipped to move to Ibrox on a permanent basis this summer, to speak about the case within the 21-day period set aside for appeals.
It is likely that Wigan and Webster will contest the level of compensation payable to Hearts. The Edinburgh club, who stand by their valuation of a player they signed for £70,000 from Arbroath, are sceptical of Webster's conduct. He could not have invoked Article 17 to move within Scotland yet swiftly returned to the SPL after an ill-fated time at the JJB Stadium. Hearts refused to sell Webster directly to Rangers in the summer of 2005.
Webster has been suspended for the opening two games of next season because, according to Fifa, he informed Hearts that he intended to cancel his contract outside a stipulated 15-day period after the conclusion of the season. That matter is likely to be contested by the player at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland.
Webster verdict could 'dramatically' affect transfer market
By Roddy Forsyth
Last Updated: 1:08am BST 09/05/2007
Have your say Read comments
Scottish football fans' forum
When do a massive financial sanction and a suspension also count as a victory for player power and a landmark ruling for greater freedom of movement within professional football - and one which looks likely to mean the end of obscenely high transfer fees for top players? When they concern Andy Webster, it seems.
The central defender's saga began 15 months ago when he declined to extend his contract with Hearts, which would have expired next month. Webster was dropped from the side and, at the behest of the Scottish Professional Footballers' Association, cited Article 17 of the Fifa statutes as justification for quitting the Tynecastle club and subsequently signing for Wigan Athletic.
Fifa sanctioned the player's move to England but last autumn Hearts complained that Webster, who is now on loan to Rangers, had not given them due notice and also demanded to know how much they would receive in compensation, helpfully suggesting that £5 million would do nicely.
Fifa's Dispute Resolution Chamber issued a statement last Friday night saying that Webster had indeed left Hearts without giving appropriate notice - hence the two-game ban which will apply wherever he plays football at the start of next season - and that he should pay his former club £625,000 in compensation for the unexpired portion of his contract.
advertisement
However, at Hampden Park yesterday the SPFA, along with FIFPro, the international association of players' unions, hailed the decision as a breakthrough in the struggle for greater freedom for professional footballers throughout the world. The complexity of the explanation, never mind the original judgement, was such that a 21-panel Power Point presentation was required just to outline how the situation had come about, along with the likely consequences.
Like a Harrier Jump Jet demonstration, it was soon soaring over the heads of the assembled media. They had come in hope of hearing Webster rip the lid off the seething cauldron of Hearts' dressing room politics, only to discover that the player had changed his mind at the last moment and would be keeping schtum 'on legal advice'.
Nevertheless, the ruling - and any subsequent appeal against it by either Webster or Hearts - will be examined throughout the professional game and must already alarm clubs who have signed players for vast fees on contracts of four years or more. Tony Higgins, the FIFPro representative at Hampden yesterday, said: "This decision will be of great interest within the football world and will have to be recognised by all clubs, players, agents, national associations and confederations as an official part of a player's right as set by the world governing body of football, Fifa."
Fifa allowed Webster to walk away from his Hearts contract because he had reached the fourth year of a five-year deal, had passed beyond the three-year compliance period designed to ensure contractual stability, and was moving to a foreign country. They ruled that he had not given statutory notice - within 15 days of the final game of the season - because Webster quit in the aftermath of being left out of the Hearts squad for last year's Scottish Cup final against Gretna.
Fifa ruled that the cup final could not be considered the last game of the Scottish season - although it is - for reasons that have not been made clear but probably hinge on the fact that the last day of the league season is the only date on which all clubs can be sure of playing.
As for the £625,000 compensation Webster - or, in practice, he and Wigan Athletic - must now pay Hearts, Fifa took into account the average of the residual value of the player's outstanding contract at Tynecastle, plus the salary of the first year of his new contract with Wigan, and multiplied this by a factor of 1.5. Again, it is not clear why this factor was chosen.
It is not yet known if Webster or Hearts will appeal against the decision, but with FIFPro and the SPFA unhappy about the size of the compensation - both believe that Hearts induced the breach of contract by freezing the player out of the team - it looks probable that there will be another round of legalistic argument.
The upshot, according to Fraser Wishart, chief executive of the SPFA, will be the reduction of high transfer fees. "This will have an impact at the top level and we will probably see three-year contracts become the norm, with big transfer fees being reduced.
"It is not another Bosman type of judgement, because in Belgium and Portugal there have been recent civil cases in which the rulings have gone even further that this, but this is the first time a dispute over Article 17 has gone this far with Fifa and it sets a precedent.
"A player who is three years into a five-year contract can now say, 'I'm going'. The compensation to the club he leaves will not be measured in terms of supposed transfer value because that is a subjective judgement - it won't matter if the club says it wants £25 million or £50 million.
"Ask a dozen people the transfer value of any player and you will get a dozen answers. Compensation will be worked out according to known factors, such as the length of the player's unexpired contract and his wages.
"I think it will dramatically affect the transfer market. Some people predicted that Bosman would mean the end of professional football as we knew, but everything settled down after a year or two and that is what will happen because of the Andy Webster judgement."
As for Webster's own future, the impact of the judgement is not yet obvious. He has been on loan to Rangers, but has not played since January because of damaged knee ligaments. Rangers want to keep him but their notion of a suitable transfer fee appears to be around £250,000. However, there is the question of how much Wigan will want for a player who made only four appearances for them, especially if they have to meet half or more of the compensation due to Hearts.
And Webster himself might wonder if he would have been financially much better off staying at Tynecastle, even if it meant that he could not play.
Webster appeal 'could be as significant as Bosman'
STEPHEN HALLIDAY
ANDY Webster is preparing an appeal against FIFA's decision to find him guilty of breaking his contract with Hearts last year without just cause in a landmark dispute which world players' union FIFPro believe may prove as significant as the Bosman ruling.
The Scotland defender was due to appear at a FIFPro media conference at Hampden yesterday afternoon, but informed organisers less than an hour before it began that he would not be attending as a result of advice from his lawyers.
It is understood Webster's legal representatives did not want the 25-year-old to say anything which may prejudice an appeal against the FIFA verdict which must be lodged within 21 days of the ruling being issued last Friday.
Webster left Hearts at the end of last season to sign for Wigan Athletic, becoming the first player to cancel his contract under article 17 of FIFA's transfer regulations. FIFA ruled that Hearts are due a compensation payment of £625,000 for the loss of Webster, currently on loan at Rangers, and imposed a two-match ban on the player for failing to serve notice of breaking his contract within 15 days of the last match of the season.
FIFPro, who say Hearts submitted a claim for £5 million compensation, believe the figure should have been closer to £250,000 as the residual value of Webster's contract. The two-match suspension is also being contested as FIFA calculated the 15-day notice period from the last SPL match of the season and not the Scottish Cup final the following week.
Hearts were unavailable for comment last night, but the Tynecastle club also have the right to appeal the FIFA verdict in pursuit of greater compensation for a player they signed from Arbroath for just £75,000 and developed into a full international.
Tony Higgins, the former SPFA secretary who is now a FIFPro executive, said: "A lot of players and agents around the world have been in touch with us for advice on Andy Webster's case. In many ways, it could be as significant as the Bosman ruling in terms of players' employment right
Player power at stake in test case
STEPHEN HALLIDAY
NOT since Jean-Marc Bosman emerged from a Belgian court in December 1995, having established that RFC Liege were acting unlawfully in preventing him from moving to Dunkerque, has the football transfer system faced the kind of seismic change which was outlined at Hampden yesterday.
Just as being signed on a Bosman has become an established part of the footballing vocabulary, so the back pages of newspapers may come to be peppered regularly in the months and years to come with tales of players moving clubs on a Webster.
It was probably the furthest thing from his mind last year when he invoked a then little known FIFA regulation to break his contract with Hearts and sign for Wigan Athletic, but Andy Webster has now become a test case which the world's richest players and opportunist agents are watching intently.
It is not too far fetched to suggest, for instance, that if the 25-year-old Scotland defender emerges favourably from an anticipated appeal against FIFA in the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne this summer that a player such as Frank Lampard will rip up his contract with Chelsea and join Barcelona on a Webster.
Lampard is just one of many luminaries of the sport who would be in a position to follow Webster's lead and invoke article 17 of the FIFA transfer regulations if players decline to agree a new deal with their clubs while they still have a year of their existing contract left.
Where Bosman paved the way for players around the world being free agents at the end of their contracts, Webster's case is set to establish a precedent that those in his profession will move closer to operating under general employment law in having the right to move to a new place of work within a fixed-term contract.
Webster and FIFPro, the world players' union, are set to appeal the £625,000 compensation figure set last Friday by the Dispute Resolution Chamber of FIFA, for which the player and Wigan Athletic are jointly liable, along with the two-match suspension imposed for allegedly failing to terminate his contract with Hearts within 15 days of the final game of last season.
FIFA reached the £625,000 fee by multiplying the average figure from the residual value of Webster's contract with Hearts and the first year of his salary with Wigan by a co-efficient of 1.5. FIFPro claims the Wigan contract should not have been taken into account, as it was signed only after the Hearts contract was cancelled, and that a co-efficient of 1 would have been sufficient as it was Hearts who "induced the breach of contract".
According to Fraser Wishart, the secretary of the Scottish Professional Footballers' Association, however, it is of greater significance that FIFA has established the legitimacy in general terms of a player ripping up his contract when he is effectively frozen out of playing football by his club for failure to sign a new deal, the scenario Webster faced at Hearts after declining contract talks.
"It is important to emphasise that Andy has been vindicated," said Wishart. "The outcome of this ruling is that footballers across the world have increased rights. Clubs still have the greatest control of the situation, because players can only do what Andy did after two or three years with a club. But this will rationalise the transfer market where fees are currently far too high at the top end of the game."
Webster cancelled his scheduled appearance at yesterday's media conference on legal advice that his appeal may be affected. Instead, he provided a short prepared statement.
"When a footballer is stopped from doing what he enjoys most, and that is playing the game, naturally he will seek to have that situation resolved," said Webster. "Now that a decision has been made, I can focus on playing football again.
"I would like to take this opportunity to thank the world players' union FIFPro and Fraser Wishart who have supported and advised me to make this outcome possible. I also hope it will be of benefit to other players who find themselves in a similar situation to the one I found myself in at Hearts."
Webster has been on loan at Rangers since January, having failed to hold down a first team place at Wigan, but any permanent move to Ibrox may depend on the outcome of an appeal.
Q & A
What is Article 17?
Introduced by FIFA in 2001 to rule on compensation due to clubs for players who terminate their contract with a year remaining. The rule headed off an EC threat to scrap the transfer system.
When can a player resign?
He must serve notice within 15 days from the final match of his club's season. Players under 28 can leave after the third year of a four-year contract, players 28 and over can leave after the second year.
What are the implications for the club he is with?
They run the risk of losing him for less than their own valuation of him if they fail to agree terms on a new contract before the final year of his existing deal.
What are the implications for the club he joins?
They could land a bargain. In Andy Webster's case, Wigan might have been expected to pay a fee in the region of £1 million.
How is compensation worked out?
This is a matter of dispute between FIFPro, the world players' union, and FIFA. The residual value of a player's contract and the amount of time developing him, called 'training compensation', are used in the calculations by FIFA.
Pioneer Webster's contract buy-out clears path for hordes to follow
Ewan Murray
Wednesday May 9, 2007
The Guardian
Andy Webster was yesterday hailed as a pioneer by senior players' union officials after he became the first player to successfully invoke article 17 of Fifa's transfer regulations and buy out his contract in moving from Hearts to Wigan Athletic.
In what has become a test case which promises to have ramifications for players across Europe, Webster took advantage of a Fifa ruling which permits players to terminate their contract after a "protected period".
Article continues
That period is three years for players who were under 28 when they signed the contract and two years for others. Webster claims Hearts induced what was technically a breach of contract by freezing him out of the first team while he refused to extend his deal.
The defender served notice to Hearts last May that he intended to leave Tynecastle almost immediately, by cancelling his contract three years into its intended four-year duration.
Yet in setting compensation of £625,000, due jointly from Webster and Wigan, whom the player joined in August, Fifa insisted Webster did not have "just cause" to end his deal prematurely without a payment to Hearts.
Union representatives have hailed confirmation that players can buy out their contracts as a victory for top-level professionals. Hearts will get only 12% of the £5m they had demanded for Webster and the union believes such cases will soon be replicated across Europe. Chelsea's Frank Lampard is among players who will soon be able to buy out their contracts.
"If Andy Webster was not entitled to do as he has done, he would not have been allowed to sign for Wigan," said Fraser Wishart of the Scottish Professional Footballers' Association. "It will have a big impact at the top level and it will bring a bit of sense to the transfer market. Some of the transfer fees are exorbitant but clubs will be easier to deal with now.
"It frustrates players that sometimes they may fancy a change but their club won't allow that. Players at the top level can now afford to take a risk, knowing roughly what they will have to pay."
It is unclear, though, what formula Fifa used to reach the £625,000 figure. FIFPro, the international players' union, believes the maximum compensation should have been the average of Webster's salary at Hearts and Wigan, multiplied by 1.5.
The 25-year-old was paid £150,000 per year in Edinburgh and FIFPro's lawyer, Wil van Megen, said the average wage had been multiplied by a far greater figure.
Fifa has refused to disclose how the final amount was reached but the governing body appears to have taken into account Hearts' role in Webster's development during his five years at the club. "The compensation was far higher than we thought it would be," said Tony Higgins, a FIFPro representative.
Webster did not attend a media conference called yesterday to discuss his case. It is believed Wigan's lawyers did not want the Scot, who has since been loaned to Rangers and is widely tipped to move to Ibrox on a permanent basis this summer, to speak about the case within the 21-day period set aside for appeals.
It is likely that Wigan and Webster will contest the level of compensation payable to Hearts. The Edinburgh club, who stand by their valuation of a player they signed for £70,000 from Arbroath, are sceptical of Webster's conduct. He could not have invoked Article 17 to move within Scotland yet swiftly returned to the SPL after an ill-fated time at the JJB Stadium. Hearts refused to sell Webster directly to Rangers in the summer of 2005.
Webster has been suspended for the opening two games of next season because, according to Fifa, he informed Hearts that he intended to cancel his contract outside a stipulated 15-day period after the conclusion of the season. That matter is likely to be contested by the player at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland.
Webster verdict could 'dramatically' affect transfer market
By Roddy Forsyth
Last Updated: 1:08am BST 09/05/2007
Have your say Read comments
Scottish football fans' forum
When do a massive financial sanction and a suspension also count as a victory for player power and a landmark ruling for greater freedom of movement within professional football - and one which looks likely to mean the end of obscenely high transfer fees for top players? When they concern Andy Webster, it seems.
The central defender's saga began 15 months ago when he declined to extend his contract with Hearts, which would have expired next month. Webster was dropped from the side and, at the behest of the Scottish Professional Footballers' Association, cited Article 17 of the Fifa statutes as justification for quitting the Tynecastle club and subsequently signing for Wigan Athletic.
Fifa sanctioned the player's move to England but last autumn Hearts complained that Webster, who is now on loan to Rangers, had not given them due notice and also demanded to know how much they would receive in compensation, helpfully suggesting that £5 million would do nicely.
Fifa's Dispute Resolution Chamber issued a statement last Friday night saying that Webster had indeed left Hearts without giving appropriate notice - hence the two-game ban which will apply wherever he plays football at the start of next season - and that he should pay his former club £625,000 in compensation for the unexpired portion of his contract.
advertisement
However, at Hampden Park yesterday the SPFA, along with FIFPro, the international association of players' unions, hailed the decision as a breakthrough in the struggle for greater freedom for professional footballers throughout the world. The complexity of the explanation, never mind the original judgement, was such that a 21-panel Power Point presentation was required just to outline how the situation had come about, along with the likely consequences.
Like a Harrier Jump Jet demonstration, it was soon soaring over the heads of the assembled media. They had come in hope of hearing Webster rip the lid off the seething cauldron of Hearts' dressing room politics, only to discover that the player had changed his mind at the last moment and would be keeping schtum 'on legal advice'.
Nevertheless, the ruling - and any subsequent appeal against it by either Webster or Hearts - will be examined throughout the professional game and must already alarm clubs who have signed players for vast fees on contracts of four years or more. Tony Higgins, the FIFPro representative at Hampden yesterday, said: "This decision will be of great interest within the football world and will have to be recognised by all clubs, players, agents, national associations and confederations as an official part of a player's right as set by the world governing body of football, Fifa."
Fifa allowed Webster to walk away from his Hearts contract because he had reached the fourth year of a five-year deal, had passed beyond the three-year compliance period designed to ensure contractual stability, and was moving to a foreign country. They ruled that he had not given statutory notice - within 15 days of the final game of the season - because Webster quit in the aftermath of being left out of the Hearts squad for last year's Scottish Cup final against Gretna.
Fifa ruled that the cup final could not be considered the last game of the Scottish season - although it is - for reasons that have not been made clear but probably hinge on the fact that the last day of the league season is the only date on which all clubs can be sure of playing.
As for the £625,000 compensation Webster - or, in practice, he and Wigan Athletic - must now pay Hearts, Fifa took into account the average of the residual value of the player's outstanding contract at Tynecastle, plus the salary of the first year of his new contract with Wigan, and multiplied this by a factor of 1.5. Again, it is not clear why this factor was chosen.
It is not yet known if Webster or Hearts will appeal against the decision, but with FIFPro and the SPFA unhappy about the size of the compensation - both believe that Hearts induced the breach of contract by freezing the player out of the team - it looks probable that there will be another round of legalistic argument.
The upshot, according to Fraser Wishart, chief executive of the SPFA, will be the reduction of high transfer fees. "This will have an impact at the top level and we will probably see three-year contracts become the norm, with big transfer fees being reduced.
"It is not another Bosman type of judgement, because in Belgium and Portugal there have been recent civil cases in which the rulings have gone even further that this, but this is the first time a dispute over Article 17 has gone this far with Fifa and it sets a precedent.
"A player who is three years into a five-year contract can now say, 'I'm going'. The compensation to the club he leaves will not be measured in terms of supposed transfer value because that is a subjective judgement - it won't matter if the club says it wants £25 million or £50 million.
"Ask a dozen people the transfer value of any player and you will get a dozen answers. Compensation will be worked out according to known factors, such as the length of the player's unexpired contract and his wages.
"I think it will dramatically affect the transfer market. Some people predicted that Bosman would mean the end of professional football as we knew, but everything settled down after a year or two and that is what will happen because of the Andy Webster judgement."
As for Webster's own future, the impact of the judgement is not yet obvious. He has been on loan to Rangers, but has not played since January because of damaged knee ligaments. Rangers want to keep him but their notion of a suitable transfer fee appears to be around £250,000. However, there is the question of how much Wigan will want for a player who made only four appearances for them, especially if they have to meet half or more of the compensation due to Hearts.
And Webster himself might wonder if he would have been financially much better off staying at Tynecastle, even if it meant that he could not play.
Webster appeal 'could be as significant as Bosman'
STEPHEN HALLIDAY
ANDY Webster is preparing an appeal against FIFA's decision to find him guilty of breaking his contract with Hearts last year without just cause in a landmark dispute which world players' union FIFPro believe may prove as significant as the Bosman ruling.
The Scotland defender was due to appear at a FIFPro media conference at Hampden yesterday afternoon, but informed organisers less than an hour before it began that he would not be attending as a result of advice from his lawyers.
It is understood Webster's legal representatives did not want the 25-year-old to say anything which may prejudice an appeal against the FIFA verdict which must be lodged within 21 days of the ruling being issued last Friday.
Webster left Hearts at the end of last season to sign for Wigan Athletic, becoming the first player to cancel his contract under article 17 of FIFA's transfer regulations. FIFA ruled that Hearts are due a compensation payment of £625,000 for the loss of Webster, currently on loan at Rangers, and imposed a two-match ban on the player for failing to serve notice of breaking his contract within 15 days of the last match of the season.
FIFPro, who say Hearts submitted a claim for £5 million compensation, believe the figure should have been closer to £250,000 as the residual value of Webster's contract. The two-match suspension is also being contested as FIFA calculated the 15-day notice period from the last SPL match of the season and not the Scottish Cup final the following week.
Hearts were unavailable for comment last night, but the Tynecastle club also have the right to appeal the FIFA verdict in pursuit of greater compensation for a player they signed from Arbroath for just £75,000 and developed into a full international.
Tony Higgins, the former SPFA secretary who is now a FIFPro executive, said: "A lot of players and agents around the world have been in touch with us for advice on Andy Webster's case. In many ways, it could be as significant as the Bosman ruling in terms of players' employment right
Player power at stake in test case
STEPHEN HALLIDAY
NOT since Jean-Marc Bosman emerged from a Belgian court in December 1995, having established that RFC Liege were acting unlawfully in preventing him from moving to Dunkerque, has the football transfer system faced the kind of seismic change which was outlined at Hampden yesterday.
Just as being signed on a Bosman has become an established part of the footballing vocabulary, so the back pages of newspapers may come to be peppered regularly in the months and years to come with tales of players moving clubs on a Webster.
It was probably the furthest thing from his mind last year when he invoked a then little known FIFA regulation to break his contract with Hearts and sign for Wigan Athletic, but Andy Webster has now become a test case which the world's richest players and opportunist agents are watching intently.
It is not too far fetched to suggest, for instance, that if the 25-year-old Scotland defender emerges favourably from an anticipated appeal against FIFA in the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne this summer that a player such as Frank Lampard will rip up his contract with Chelsea and join Barcelona on a Webster.
Lampard is just one of many luminaries of the sport who would be in a position to follow Webster's lead and invoke article 17 of the FIFA transfer regulations if players decline to agree a new deal with their clubs while they still have a year of their existing contract left.
Where Bosman paved the way for players around the world being free agents at the end of their contracts, Webster's case is set to establish a precedent that those in his profession will move closer to operating under general employment law in having the right to move to a new place of work within a fixed-term contract.
Webster and FIFPro, the world players' union, are set to appeal the £625,000 compensation figure set last Friday by the Dispute Resolution Chamber of FIFA, for which the player and Wigan Athletic are jointly liable, along with the two-match suspension imposed for allegedly failing to terminate his contract with Hearts within 15 days of the final game of last season.
FIFA reached the £625,000 fee by multiplying the average figure from the residual value of Webster's contract with Hearts and the first year of his salary with Wigan by a co-efficient of 1.5. FIFPro claims the Wigan contract should not have been taken into account, as it was signed only after the Hearts contract was cancelled, and that a co-efficient of 1 would have been sufficient as it was Hearts who "induced the breach of contract".
According to Fraser Wishart, the secretary of the Scottish Professional Footballers' Association, however, it is of greater significance that FIFA has established the legitimacy in general terms of a player ripping up his contract when he is effectively frozen out of playing football by his club for failure to sign a new deal, the scenario Webster faced at Hearts after declining contract talks.
"It is important to emphasise that Andy has been vindicated," said Wishart. "The outcome of this ruling is that footballers across the world have increased rights. Clubs still have the greatest control of the situation, because players can only do what Andy did after two or three years with a club. But this will rationalise the transfer market where fees are currently far too high at the top end of the game."
Webster cancelled his scheduled appearance at yesterday's media conference on legal advice that his appeal may be affected. Instead, he provided a short prepared statement.
"When a footballer is stopped from doing what he enjoys most, and that is playing the game, naturally he will seek to have that situation resolved," said Webster. "Now that a decision has been made, I can focus on playing football again.
"I would like to take this opportunity to thank the world players' union FIFPro and Fraser Wishart who have supported and advised me to make this outcome possible. I also hope it will be of benefit to other players who find themselves in a similar situation to the one I found myself in at Hearts."
Webster has been on loan at Rangers since January, having failed to hold down a first team place at Wigan, but any permanent move to Ibrox may depend on the outcome of an appeal.
Q & A
What is Article 17?
Introduced by FIFA in 2001 to rule on compensation due to clubs for players who terminate their contract with a year remaining. The rule headed off an EC threat to scrap the transfer system.
When can a player resign?
He must serve notice within 15 days from the final match of his club's season. Players under 28 can leave after the third year of a four-year contract, players 28 and over can leave after the second year.
What are the implications for the club he is with?
They run the risk of losing him for less than their own valuation of him if they fail to agree terms on a new contract before the final year of his existing deal.
What are the implications for the club he joins?
They could land a bargain. In Andy Webster's case, Wigan might have been expected to pay a fee in the region of £1 million.
How is compensation worked out?
This is a matter of dispute between FIFPro, the world players' union, and FIFA. The residual value of a player's contract and the amount of time developing him, called 'training compensation', are used in the calculations by FIFA.
Comment