The debate over Nico Williams's signing has pitted Barça against Athletic. Critical voices have been raised from Bilbao. However, few remember that the red-and-white club has been one of the greatest experts at taking advantage of release clauses to strengthen itself without resorting to negotiations.
Athletic, king of the clause
Since the release clause was introduced in Spain, Athletic has found it to be an effective and clean way to strengthen itself.
In the last 20 years, Etxeberria, Urrutia, San José, Roberto Ríos, Ibai Gómez, Williams, Loren, Iñaki Alkiza, Íñigo Martínez, Javi Martínez, Laporte, Robert Navarro, Gorosabel…
Players have arrived at San Mamés by paying what was stipulated in their contracts. There was no negotiation, yes, but with absolute legitimacy.
When Athletic pays a clause, it has a free path and there is no controversy: the law allows it. Barça chose the same formula with Nico Williams. Now in Bilbao, people are tearing their clothes questioning the method
They do not acknowledge their own precedents. Is it a double standard?
Alkorta speaks of "shady signing"
The debate intensified after Aitor Alkorta's statements in Marca. The former sporting director of Athletic described the signing as "shady" and "dirty," insinuating a lack of transparency on Barça's part. However, Alkorta's words do not withstand an analysis without double standards.
Alkorta himself left Athletic to sign for Real Madrid. He wanted to grow as a footballer. Can Nico Williams not do the same?
Athletic attacks the procedure, without admitting that they themselves have successfully applied it in many deals. They criticize the method, without accepting that the letter of Spanish law grants them the same option. All that needs to be done is to respect the firm steps that Barça completed.
Barça model: legal skill
From Camp Nou, they defend that the operation with Nico is being carried out with absolute legal cleanliness. Athletic will be notified, the clause will be paid within the deadline. There is no disrespect or illegality.
Barça, moreover, has also suffered firsthand the impact of the clause. It lost dozens of academy players (such as Piqué or Cesc Fàbregas). It lost stars like Neymar or Dembélé because PSG paid the clause.
Nico's case has inflamed tempers, especially because of the player's sentimental legacy. However, in legal terms, the operation doesn't differ from those that Athletic has carried out dozens of times.
Ethics vs. legality debate
What is being discussed now is more an ethical issue than a legal one. Some believe that there should be negotiations, even though there is no obligation.
Athletic has omitted it. Barça did not give in on that point either, which triggers the debate.
However, both followed the same rules impeccably. It is not acceptable for a club to criticize something that it has used so many times before.
Recently, Patxi Puñal, as Osasuna's technical director, stated: "Osasuna's relationships with Athletic and Real have nothing to do with each other. With Real, the respect is maximum. Athletic enters like an elephant in a china shop, it takes whatever it can and doesn't look back."
The leader of Duncan Dhu, Mikel Erentxun, added, referring to Athletic: "Signing in the middle of the season, 48 hours before the deadline, etc... is not very elegant."
It happens everywhere.