Mengapa FIFA tidak dapat campur tangan dalam potensi perselisihan antara Atletico Madrid dan Barcelona terkait Julian Alvarez?

Julian Alvarez’s recent comments after Argentina’s victory, in which he admitted that “the best thing is a transfer” because he wants to fulfill his “dream,” have sparked fresh speculation about his future and raised tensions between Atletico Madrid and Barcelona.

The Argentine striker remains under contract with Atléeico until 2030 and has a release clause worth €500 million.

Amid growing rumours, Atletico are considering whether to launch legal action against Barcelona for allegedly approaching the player without permission.

Now, Mundo Deportivo has come out with an extensive report outlining how the situation could unfold.

FIFA has no jurisdiction

If Atletico were to file a complaint with FIFA, they would rely on the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, which prohibit clubs from negotiating with players who are still under contract without first notifying their current club.

Article 18 states that any club wishing to sign a professional player must inform his current club in writing before beginning negotiations. Direct contact with the player is only allowed during the final six months of his contract.

Atletico Madrid are considering legal action against Barcelona. (Photo by Angel Martinez/Getty Images)

However, there is an important limitation: both Atletico Madrid and Barcelona belong to the Spanish Football Federation (RFEF). In such cases, FIFA does not have jurisdiction.

The regulations clearly state that transfers between clubs from the same association are governed by the rules established by that association. Therefore, any dispute would fall under the authority of the RFEF rather than FIFA.

The Griezmann case sets a precedent

There is already a well-known example. In 2019, Atletico Madrid accused Barcelona of negotiating with Antoine Griezmann before informing the club. FIFA never intervened because both clubs belonged to the same federation.

Instead, the RFEF handled the case. Although investigators initially proposed a one-match closure of Camp Nou, the disciplinary committee concluded there was insufficient evidence that Griezmann had signed a contract while still under contract with Atletico.

The committee did determine that Barcelona had negotiated with the French forward without properly notifying Atletico, but considered the offence minor because Griezmann had already informed Atlético of his desire to leave.

Barcelona ultimately received a symbolic fine of just €300.

When FIFA could become involved

FIFA’s role would only become relevant if Julian Alvarez himself were to break his contract without just cause and it could be proven that Barcelona had encouraged him to do so.

Under FIFA rules, any club found guilty of inducing a player to terminate his contract could face severe sanctions, including a transfer ban covering two consecutive registration windows.

FIFA does not have jurisdiction (Photo by Marcos Brindicci/Getty Images)

Alvarez signed for Atletico in the summer of 2024 and now that he is 26 years old, FIFA’s protected period extends for three years, meaning it runs until June 2027.

If the striker were to terminate his contract unilaterally during that period, he could be forced to pay compensation to Atletico for the remaining years of his deal and face a sporting suspension.

That ban would keep him out of action for four months with his new club, although it would not affect his eligibility to play for Argentina.

For that reason, a unilateral contract termination makes little sense from the player’s perspective. Breaking his contract would expose him to significant financial costs and sporting sanctions.

As things stand, any complaint related to alleged contact between Barcelona and Alvarez would be handled domestically by the RFEF, just as happened with Griezmann six years ago.

FIFA would only have grounds to act if the player himself terminated his agreement without legal justification.