nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Do Rugby Clubs pay transfer fees?

dulpit

Hey all,

I'm just wondering, was reading about various player transfers that are coming up this off-season and it got me thinking - do rugby players ever transfer for a fee? You never hear anything about a transfer fee, it usually happens that players transfer at end of their contracts - but can anyone enlighten me on more than this?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

awec

Very, very rarely.

prawnsambo

No they don't. Usually they transfer out of contract, but occasionally their contract is bought out.

[Deleted User]

It has happened but it's rare. It's only an issue when a player moves while under contract. Which doesn't happen much.

irishbucsfan

Rugby clubs do pay fees. However generally they are very small compared to the astronomical amounts in soccer. The vast majority of transfers involve no fee at all.

One of the reasons is that generally rugby contracts are very short. Even 3 year deals are rare. So there's no point paying a fee to sign a player when there are normally a lot available for free. The contracts are short due to the nature of the sport itself, a lot of injury risk involved.

Isa Nacewa is one of the best signings in Irish history, and Leinster reportedly paid a fee for him to be released from his Super Rugby contract early. But it's nothing like the soccer fees you hear about.

[Deleted User]

dulpit wrote: »

Hey all,

I'm just wondering, was reading about various player transfers that are coming up this off-season and it got me thinking - do rugby players ever transfer for a fee? You never hear anything about a transfer fee, it usually happens that players transfer at end of their contracts - but can anyone enlighten me on more than this?

There isn't a transfer fee when a player moves from club to club as they are usually done when they are out of contract. Ie free agents effectively

The only way there would be a "transfer fee" is if a team wanted a player so badly they were willing buy him out of his contract. And pay the club compensation ( it tends to be the wages for the time they won't be at the club they are leaving) but this is very much not the norm

Herpes Free Since03

It's normally a contract being bought out...it has happened that a player has decided to leave a club, signed for a new club...but then changed his mind and his existing club bought out the contract he had signed with the club he intended leaving for.

coco0981

Think it was reported that Leicester paid half a million transfer fee to sign George Ford

prawnsambo

coco0981 wrote: »

Think it was reported that Leicester paid half a million transfer fee to sign George Ford

Was he still under contract at Bath? Seem to think he might have been.

locum-motion

But what is a transfer fee (in soccer terms) if not "buying out the contract"? Surely it's just another word for the same thing, isn't it?

Squidgy Black

locum-motion wrote: »

But what is a transfer fee (in soccer terms) if not "buying out the contract"? Surely it's just another word for the same thing, isn't it?

Not really, buying out the contract involves paying for the remainder of the value of the contract, so generally the players wages for the remainder of the contract.

With soccer teams it's a little bit different as it's seen that you're buying the player and not his contract. Hence the valuations of several millions etc.

thomond2006

The biggest 'fee' to date must be for Johan Goosen by Montpellier after all the 'retirement' codology. I believe it was EUR 1.5M.

prawnsambo

locum-motion wrote: »

But what is a transfer fee (in soccer terms) if not "buying out the contract"? Surely it's just another word for the same thing, isn't it?

Soccer clubs routinely make profits on players. That wouldn't be the case if it was just their contracts being bought out.

Squatter

How much did the IRFU pay the Dragons to buy out Kidney's contract so he could coach Leinster?

Bonus question: how much did Munster then have to pay Leinster when they 'poached' him back to the badlands?

artanevilla

Football clubs buy the players registration, not their contract.

The contract is between player and club. A club wanting to buy a player is in essence buying their registration, not their contract, how much that is worth is negotiated between the selling and buying club.

locum-motion

locum-motion wrote: »

But what is a transfer fee (in soccer terms) if not "buying out the contract"? Surely it's just another word for the same thing, isn't it?

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Not really, buying out the contract involves paying for the remainder of the value of the contract, so generally the players wages for the remainder of the contract.

With soccer teams it's a little bit different as it's seen that you're buying the player and not his contract. Hence the valuations of several millions etc.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Soccer clubs routinely make profits on players. That wouldn't be the case if it was just their contracts being bought out.

artanevilla wrote: »

Football clubs buy the players registration, not their contract.

The contract is between player and club. A club wanting to buy a player is in essence buying their registration, not their contract, how much that is worth is negotiated between the selling and buying club.

The "contract", the "registration", whatever...

Either way, it is an "asset" that the selling club holds, and the buying club wishes to purchase. The "value" of that asset is just like the value of any asset (an ounce of gold, a barrel of oil, a car, a packet of Chewits...) and it will fluctuate according to supply and demand, and the perceived value of that asset to the seller and purchaser.

Squidgy says that buying out the contract is paying "the players wages for the remainder of the contract." But what if that is a relatively small amount of money, for a player who has (during the existing contract) reached a better level than people thought they might, and so the value of their wages for the remainder of the contract is much less than their future value as a player. In a case like that, the selling club isn't going to release the player from that contract for such a small sum, are they?

Squidgy Black

locum-motion wrote: »

The "contract", the "registration", whatever...

Either way, it is an "asset" that the selling club holds, and the buying club wishes to purchase. The "value" of that asset is just like the value of any asset (an ounce of gold, a barrel of oil, a car, a packet of Chewits...) and it will fluctuate according to supply and demand, and the perceived value of that asset to the seller and purchaser.

Squidgy says that buying out the contract is paying "the players wages for the remainder of the contract." But what if that is a relatively small amount of money, for a player who has (during the existing contract) reached a better level than people thought they might, and so the value of their wages for the remainder of the contract is much less than their future value as a player. In a case like that, the selling club isn't going to release the player from that contract for such a small sum, are they?

No they just wait until the player is out of contract. Generally rugby contracts are only between 1-3 years, unlike soccer contracts which are generally 5 years +. It's not very common for players to be approached by other clubs when they've more than a year left on their contract.

prawnsambo

locum-motion wrote: »

The "contract", the "registration", whatever...

Either way, it is an "asset" that the selling club holds, and the buying club wishes to purchase. The "value" of that asset is just like the value of any asset (an ounce of gold, a barrel of oil, a car, a packet of Chewits...) and it will fluctuate according to supply and demand, and the perceived value of that asset to the seller and purchaser.

Squidgy says that buying out the contract is paying "the players wages for the remainder of the contract." But what if that is a relatively small amount of money, for a player who has (during the existing contract) reached a better level than people thought they might, and so the value of their wages for the remainder of the contract is much less than their future value as a player. In a case like that, the selling club isn't going to release the player from that contract for such a small sum, are they?

Yes. But as pointed out above, it's pretty rare for a rugby player to change clubs mid-contract. Because contracts are short enough, it doesn't make sense. The case of Johan Goosen with Racing 92 is indicative. He'd just signed a 4 year contract with Racing and Montpellier went after him. Rather than wait out his contract and because Racing were absolutely livid and wouldn't entertain the notion, he 'retired' early. He'll be at Montpellier next season after 'coming back from retirement' to play with the Cheetahs this season.

artanevilla

Before the Bosman rule in football, clubs could retain players even when they were out of contract.