&w=3840&q=100)
Mohun Bagan refuses player release, calls for better AIFF player welfare
Player Welfare Concerns: Club Calls for AIFF Accountability
A Mohun Bagan official raised concerns over AIFF's approach to injuries involving released players. They pointed to captain Subhasish Bose, who remains sidelined following an injury during an Asian Cup qualifier back in March. The official lamented, 'We've heard nothing from the federation… not even a check-in', calling the AIFF negligent toward player health and support.
What the AIFF Says? Mixed Signals on Player Release
Balancing Act: Clubs Must Support National Team While Managing Player Fatigue
Clubs play a pivotal role in the success of both domestic competitions and international commitments. The Caretaker clash underscores broader concerns around player workload and calendar congestion, a challenge echoed globally. Notably, Chelsea manager Thomas Tuchel advocated for moderation in international windows, citing the physical toll on players forced to balance overlapping club and national duties.
A recent study on the Africa Cup of Nations found that players' club workloads decline significantly after international tournaments, underscoring the long-term impact on performance and health.
Mohun Bagan's stance reflects a growing concern among clubs about player welfare, contractual rights, and fixture congestion. While releasing players can benefit the national team, it also raises risks of injury and fatigue, especially when compensation or support is unclear outside FIFA windows. A collaborative dialogue between clubs and the AIFF, with shared planning around player release, medical coordination, and fixture scheduling, is vital to ensure sustainability and performance at all levels.
Mohun Bagan's refusal to release players for national duty spotlights the delicate balance between club obligations and national priorities, emphasizing the need for structured player welfare measures and calendar cooperation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
AIFF clarifies backtracking from mentioning ISL case before Supreme Court: 'Based on advice received that...'
The All India Football Federation had set Monday, 18 August as the date for apprising the Supreme Court on the crisis that the Indian Super League currently finds itself in, only to make a last-minute change to their plans. The Kalyan Chaubey-led AIFF will be bringing the Indian Super League case before the Supreme Court of India at a later date. PTI Faced with criticism over its apparent flip-flop, the All India Football Federation (AIFF) on Monday clarified that it had intended to first apprise the Supreme Court about the passage of the National Sports Governance Bill before raising the issue of the Indian Super League (ISL) crisis. On August 14, the AIFF had said it will mention before the SC this week the concerns of the ISL clubs pertaining to the delay in the commencement of the 2025-26 season of the top-tier league and the hardship faced by the players and other stakeholders. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD On Sunday afternoon, it was notified that the AIFF will mention the matter before the Court on Monday at 10:30am. But by late evening, the federation changed its decision and notified that it will not mention the matter on Monday. More from Football Late Sunday night, Amicus Curiae Gopal Sankaranarayanan informed that he will be mentioning the case along with other Amicus Curiae Samar Bansal on Monday at 10:30am. 'Based on advice received that the National Sports Governance Bill 2025 had passed both the houses of Parliament, the AIFF's Senior Counsel advised during a briefing meeting on Sunday late evening that this is the first aspect that needs to be brought to the attention of the Hon'ble Supreme Court,' the AIFF said in a statement. 'While a decision on the date of mentioning was being contemplated, the Amicus Curiae himself sent a communication stating that he would be mentioning the AIFF matter, and thus the hearing proceeded in Hon'ble Supreme Court this morning.' The AIFF said its senior counsel appeared before the SC – which has reserved its judgment on the draft constitution case – on Monday and made oral submissions on certain matters. 'The Hon'ble Supreme Court has requested written submissions from the parties prior to the next hearing on Friday August 22. 'The AIFF intends to use this opportunity to represent to the Hon'ble Supreme Court the urgent need for commercial continuity and to determine the future structure of its top-tier league, in the interests of players, clubs and other parties all of whose livelihoods are at stake due to the current impasse.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Hundreds of Indian and foreign footballers are living in uncertainty as the Masters Rights Agreement (MRA) between Indian Super League organisers Football Sports Development Limited (FSDL) and AIFF is yet to be renewed. Eleven ISL clubs have warned the AIFF that they 'face the real possibility of shutting down entirely' if the ongoing impasse regarding the future of the top-tier domestic competition is not resolved soon. The clubs said that the crisis arising out of the non-renewal of the MRA has 'paralysed professional football in India'. The crisis surfaced after FSDL put the 2025-26 ISL season 'on hold' on July 11 due to uncertainty over the renewal of the MRA, prompting at least three clubs to either pause first-team operations or suspend player and staff salaries.
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Lassana Diarra Asks 65 Million Euros From FIFA, Belgian FA As 'Compensation For Damage Caused'
Last Updated: Ex-France player Lassana Diarra seeks €65M from FIFA and Belgian FA over transfer rules deemed against EU law by CJEU. His lawyer expects a decision in 12-15 months. Former France international Lassana Diarra is seeking 65 million euros ($76 million) from FIFA and the Belgian football association as part of a long-standing legal dispute, announced his lawyer on Monday. Diarra's challenge to FIFA led the world football's governing body to revise its transfer rules following a landmark legal ruling last year, but he has yet to reach a settlement. His lawyer, Martin Hissel, stated the claim seeks 'compensation for damage caused by FIFA rules" on transfers, which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) deemed contrary to European law last October. 'Following a ruling by the CJEU, in the absence of an amicable solution, it is natural to return to the national courts so that they can implement the CJEU ruling," Hissel said in a statement. 'That is what we are doing today, on the basis of a very clear ruling by the CJEU, which has settled all the essential legal points. The Belgian courts should deliver their decisions within 12 to 15 months." The CJEU found in October that FIFA rules hinder the free movement of players by 'imposing considerable legal risks, unforeseeable and potentially very high financial risks, as well as major sporting risks on those players and clubs wishing to employ them," thereby disrupting the transfer system. At the Belgian courts' request, the Luxembourg-based CJEU examined Diarra's case, who contested the conditions of his departure from Russian club Lokomotiv Moscow ten years ago. In August 2014, Lokomotiv Moscow terminated Diarra's contract, citing contractual breaches by the player. The Russian club also sought 20 million euros compensation from him. Diarra refused and demanded Lokomotiv pay him compensation, but the now 40-year-old was eventually ordered by FIFA to pay his former club 10 million euros, a fine upheld by the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Diarra also received a backdated 15-month suspension. As a result, Belgian club Charleroi ultimately decided not to sign the midfielder, fearing the obligation to pay part of these penalties, in line with FIFA regulations examined by the CJEU. Following the CJEU ruling, FIFA announced last December it had adopted an 'interim regulatory framework" regarding player transfers. 'I waited a few months before restarting the national proceedings in Belgium, thinking that, particularly following the efforts of FIFPRO Europe (the European players' union), FIFA and the Belgian football association would at least have the decency to contact me to propose an amicable settlement of the dispute (this was, in fact, the tone of the messages I received from FIFA)," said Diarra in a statement. 'This was not the case. It is their right, but it reflects a persistent culture of contempt for the rule of law and for players, despite the very clear message sent by the CJEU. 'To my great regret, we will therefore once again have to go before the judges, as I have no other choice." Capped 34 times by France, Diarra also played for Chelsea, Arsenal, Portsmouth, and Real Madrid before ending his career at Paris Saint-Germain in 2019. Click here to add News18 as your preferred news source on Google. News18 Sports brings you the latest updates, live commentary, and highlights from cricket, football, tennis, badmintion, wwe and more. Catch breaking news, live scores, and in-depth coverage. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : FIFA football Lassana Diarra view comments Location : Paris, France First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Loading comments...
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Supreme Court steps in: ISL clubs, AIFF and FSDL face decisive showdown
The Supreme Court has fixed August 22 to hear the dispute between the All India Football Federation (AIFF) and Football Sports Development Limited (FSDL) over the renewal of Indian Super League (ISL) contracts. The impasse has left 11 clubs of the league in uncertainty, with the upcoming season hanging in the balance until clarity is case reached the top court after ISL clubs raised alarm in a letter to the AIFF, warning that without renewal of the agreement, the league 'cannot take place' and their operations faced an existential crisis. The clubs also criticised the federation for leaving them out of discussions with FSDL, arguing that player contracts, sponsorships and commercial deals were already under and the AIFF U-turnInitially, AIFF president Kalyan Chaubey suggested that the federation could continue to run the ISL on its own if the deal with FSDL lapsed. But that stance quickly unravelled in court. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the clubs, reminded the bench that the AIFF constitution itself barred the federation from unilaterally running a commercial league. 'The AIFF constitution makes it clear that it cannot itself run the ISL or any league without the involvement of an authorised entity. Any attempt to do so would be a violation of its statutes,' Sankaranarayanan submission highlighted that Article 19 of the AIFF's statutes requires executive committee approval and alignment with FIFA and AFC rules before sanctioning any competition. Under pressure, the AIFF was forced to retract its earlier position, acknowledging it could not bypass its contractual is at stake for Indian football?For the clubs, the outcome of this standoff could decide not only their financial stability but also the careers of hundreds of Indian players. With training camps delayed and sponsorships in limbo, uncertainty has already seeped into the domestic football standoff also risks harming India's reputation within Asian football circles at a time when the national team's development has been under scrutiny. As the Supreme Court steps in, the verdict will carry consequences far beyond the ISL, potentially shaping the governance and commercial future of Indian football itself.- Ends
