Alexander Isak refused to play for Newcastle at the start of the Premier League season in an apparent move to force a British record £125 million transfer to Liverpool. The refusal occurred while he remained under contract and continued to receive wages. Refusing to fulfil contractual obligations drew criticism as improper and damaging to football's image. Contractual agreements are described as obligations that should be honoured even amid transfer negotiations. The sequence produced a messy, summer-long situation that disappointed supporters and left a negative impression, despite the transfer ultimately completing with Isak joining Liverpool.
I didn't like how it got to the end. I don't think it's ever right that a player should go on strike and refuse to play for a club whilst you're being paid and have a contract. I understand it from the other way around, when a club wants to get rid of you they do, but they're still paying your wages. When you sign a contract, you're obliged to fulfil it.
We can thank him for what he did at Newcastle, but it's been a messy situation all summer. I don't think it's done anyone any good. It's been a really bad look for football and for the fans because they're the paying public, the ones that make this great game of ours. It's not a good look at all when you're being paid by a club and refuse to play.
Collection
[
|
...
]