Ja bi molio jedan primjer iz našeg najvišeg ranga gdje je klub to napravio, maknuo trenera sa strane i plaćao ga tako dugo dok ga netko drugi ne angažira da ne isplaćuje odštetu.

Sta je najgore, cuh iz nekih izvora, da je od svih HNL klubova Hajduk to jedan od boljih, al da je to i dalje srednja zalost. Takodjer navodno postoji inicijativa SDa da se to digne na dosta visu razinu. Prica se i da je Sego doveden unatoc protivljenju tih sluzbi, na izricitu zelju trenera. 
Ja to gledam zapravo pozitivno. 

Dok je situacija u konkurencije takva svaki eur ulozen u to moze ti zakrpat minimalno 100eura razlike u budgetu. Dolazimo do toga da ti jedan Brajkovic ulozen u analitiku moze stvarno puno donit.

Takodjer mi je nejasno kako jos nismo potegli veze sa Benficom za shareanje znanja i koja je prijateljski klub, a poznati su po razvoju mladih.

Kakve veze ima da li je iz naseg, bugarskog ili talijanskog najviseg ranga ? Nogomet je medjunarodni sport i vrijede medjunarodna pravila. Mogla je umjesto vas bit Fiorentina.

Evo ti primjeri:

 

André Villas-Boas and Chelsea (2011–2012)

While at Porto, Chelsea paid around €15 million to buy Villas-Boas out of his contract. Porto didn’t release him until that full clause was paid — he was under contract and could not leave freely even though he wanted to.

• Key Aspect: Coaches under contract can’t leave without triggering a release clause unless the club agrees.

• Porto continued paying Villas-Boas while holding him under contract, preventing him from walking away to Chelsea without Chelsea paying full compensation.

 

 

Ovo je jos bolji primijer sta mu se moze napravit: 

 

Luciano Spalletti – Inter Milan and the 2023 Napoli case

This is a very relevant example.

• After being sacked by Inter, Luciano Spalletti was still being paid by the club due to the terms of his contract.

• In 2022–2023, when Napoli wanted to hire him, Inter still held him under contract and would not release him unless a clause was paid or they agreed to stop paying him (they eventually came to a resolution).

• This kind of "gardening leave" situation is a strategic move: the club pays the coach but keeps him under contract, limiting his ability to work elsewhere unless compensation is made.

 

 

Mozes trazit do sutra....

 

 

Mauricio Pochettino – Tottenham Hotspur (2014–2019)

While this doesn't involve him being blocked from leaving by being paid not to, it’s illustrative of a club protecting its financial interests by holding a manager under contract and demanding compensation if another club wanted to hire him.

• Background: When Real Madrid showed interest in Pochettino in 2018, Daniel Levy (Spurs chairman) had recently extended Pochettino's contract and refused to let him go unless Madrid paid compensation — reportedly around £42 million.

• Key Detail: Pochettino was under a long-term contract and continued to be paid, and his departure without mutual consent would have required him to pay a release clause or be in breach.

• Outcome: Madrid looked elsewhere (eventually hiring Lopetegui). Spurs effectively used his contract to block a move unless compensated, protecting their asset.

A sto treba i crtati ?

Od Stimceve titule do danas najveci uspjeh u vodjenju kluba, uz sve sociologe, magistre i diplomirane pravnike, dr. sc ekonomske magove, drzi covjek sa 3 razreda srednje skole(ako ih je zavrsio) bivsi pekar, sadasnji taksist.
I bez omalovazavanja njegovog formalnog obrazovanja, tesko ce ga skoro netko nadmasiti!

#ljubavanedjir#

 

Meni se čini da je do toga što puca benfici kurac za neki tamo hajduk.

Kakve veze ima da li je iz naseg, bugarskog ili talijanskog najviseg ranga ? Nogomet je medjunarodni sport i vrijede medjunarodna pravila. Mogla je umjesto vas bit Fiorentina.

Evo ti primjeri:

 

André Villas-Boas and Chelsea (2011–2012)

While at Porto, Chelsea paid around €15 million to buy Villas-Boas out of his contract. Porto didn’t release him until that full clause was paid — he was under contract and could not leave freely even though he wanted to.

• Key Aspect: Coaches under contract can’t leave without triggering a release clause unless the club agrees.

• Porto continued paying Villas-Boas while holding him under contract, preventing him from walking away to Chelsea without Chelsea paying full compensation.

 

 

Ovo je jos bolji primijer sta mu se moze napravit: 

 

Luciano Spalletti – Inter Milan and the 2023 Napoli case

This is a very relevant example.

• After being sacked by Inter, Luciano Spalletti was still being paid by the club due to the terms of his contract.

• In 2022–2023, when Napoli wanted to hire him, Inter still held him under contract and would not release him unless a clause was paid or they agreed to stop paying him (they eventually came to a resolution).

• This kind of "gardening leave" situation is a strategic move: the club pays the coach but keeps him under contract, limiting his ability to work elsewhere unless compensation is made.

 

 

Mozes trazit do sutra....

 

 

Mauricio Pochettino – Tottenham Hotspur (2014–2019)

While this doesn't involve him being blocked from leaving by being paid not to, it’s illustrative of a club protecting its financial interests by holding a manager under contract and demanding compensation if another club wanted to hire him.

• Background: When Real Madrid showed interest in Pochettino in 2018, Daniel Levy (Spurs chairman) had recently extended Pochettino's contract and refused to let him go unless Madrid paid compensation — reportedly around £42 million.

• Key Detail: Pochettino was under a long-term contract and continued to be paid, and his departure without mutual consent would have required him to pay a release clause or be in breach.

• Outcome: Madrid looked elsewhere (eventually hiring Lopetegui). Spurs effectively used his contract to block a move unless compensated, protecting their asset.

Kakve veze ima da li je iz naseg, bugarskog ili talijanskog najviseg ranga ? Nogomet je medjunarodni sport i vrijede medjunarodna pravila. Mogla je umjesto vas bit Fiorentina.

Evo ti primjeri:

 

André Villas-Boas and Chelsea (2011–2012)

While at Porto, Chelsea paid around €15 million to buy Villas-Boas out of his contract. Porto didn’t release him until that full clause was paid — he was under contract and could not leave freely even though he wanted to.

• Key Aspect: Coaches under contract can’t leave without triggering a release clause unless the club agrees.

• Porto continued paying Villas-Boas while holding him under contract, preventing him from walking away to Chelsea without Chelsea paying full compensation.

 

 

Ovo je jos bolji primijer sta mu se moze napravit: 

 

Luciano Spalletti – Inter Milan and the 2023 Napoli case

This is a very relevant example.

• After being sacked by Inter, Luciano Spalletti was still being paid by the club due to the terms of his contract.

• In 2022–2023, when Napoli wanted to hire him, Inter still held him under contract and would not release him unless a clause was paid or they agreed to stop paying him (they eventually came to a resolution).

• This kind of "gardening leave" situation is a strategic move: the club pays the coach but keeps him under contract, limiting his ability to work elsewhere unless compensation is made.

 

 

Mozes trazit do sutra....

 

 

Mauricio Pochettino – Tottenham Hotspur (2014–2019)

While this doesn't involve him being blocked from leaving by being paid not to, it’s illustrative of a club protecting its financial interests by holding a manager under contract and demanding compensation if another club wanted to hire him.

• Background: When Real Madrid showed interest in Pochettino in 2018, Daniel Levy (Spurs chairman) had recently extended Pochettino's contract and refused to let him go unless Madrid paid compensation — reportedly around £42 million.

• Key Detail: Pochettino was under a long-term contract and continued to be paid, and his departure without mutual consent would have required him to pay a release clause or be in breach.

• Outcome: Madrid looked elsewhere (eventually hiring Lopetegui). Spurs effectively used his contract to block a move unless compensated, protecting their asset.