Newcastle’s contract conundrums

Of the lessons to be learned by Newcastle United this summer, avoiding another protracted outgoing transfer saga will be top of the list.

Alexander Isak was ultimately able to extract himself from his contract three years into a six-year deal, which has led to questions about the value of such contracts if players can get out of them by behaving badly when they fancy a change.

There has been discussion that it works both ways – that football clubs happily discard unwanted players midway through their contracts when they want to replace them, but this misses the point that clubs are still obliged to pay these players until they leave and sign a contract elsewhere.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of individual situations, this has been a summer in which some players have kicked up a fuss and got their own way, while others have remained professional and been denied their moves. It remains to be seen if this sets a dangerous precedent, but there are real fears in the wake of Isak’s departure that the situation could repeat in the future.

There must be an acceptance of the reality of the situation, which is that every football club on the planet, apart from arguably Real Madrid, are vulnerable to losing their best players to bigger clubs. There is a football food chain and Newcastle have discovered this summer where their place is, both as predator and prey. It would be hypocritical to ignore the fact that the Magpies swooped for the cream of the crop from smaller Premier League clubs this window.

Newcastle possess a number of high-value footballers nearing world class territory – players who already have and will continue to draw admiring glances from richer, more successful clubs. While the Magpies remain restricted compared to these rivals in terms of maximum wages they can pay, there are steps they can take to protect themselves from the vultures.

22-year-old Tino Livramento signed a five-year contract in 2023, coming from a relegated club off the back of a long-term injury. He has developed into an England international and one of the best full backs in the league. Both Manchester City and Liverpool were linked with moves this summer, but his departure never felt like a realistic possibility.

That could be different in 2026 when he will only have two years remaining and will likely have represented his country at the World Cup. Livramento, who has made positive noises recently, will be a due a pay rise now and it would be prudent to get him tied down to a longer deal this season.

Another of the 2023 intake, Sandro Tonali, is also contracted to 2028. He had a challenging start due to his gambling ban, and there is no reason to disbelieve reports that he feels a debt of gratitude to Newcastle for how he was supported through that period. How deep that gratitude runs, however, may be tested in the next 12 months.

Tonali has a skillset and ability that would suit clubs challenging for Europe’s premier prize, and at 25 is entering his peak years. A lot will depend on his personal ambitions and the ability of Newcastle to keep pace with them, but it would be a huge coup if his contract can be extended.

Sven Botman, also 25, has had a difficult two years with injury after an outstanding debut season. The deal he signed in 2022 expires in 2027, so he is also due talks for a new contract. If he can stay fit and return to his best form the Magpies will not want to risk losing him on the cheap.

While the idea of players eyeing the exit door when they are signing new contracts feels uncomfortable, insertion of release clauses (which are actually mandatory in Spain) might be the most effective way to tie players like Livramento and Tonali down while protecting all parties. From Newcastle’s perspective, it would be important that such clauses are only valid for certain clubs (e.g. Champions League clubs or specifically named clubs) and that they expire well before the end of the transfer window to give the club time to plan and source replacements (end of June would seem a logical point).

While it may not be in clubs’ interests to make clauses public, it is widely known that Bruno, for example, had a release clause when he signed an extension in 2023. Thankfully no club triggered it, and he has never been anything but committed and professional while at Newcastle, but if he had moved on to a top European club in 2024 not many fans would have begrudged him at that stage (provided he maintained his standards of professionalism).

Likewise, Isak could have gone with well wishes and legacy intact in summer 2026 (release clause or not) if his conduct had not fallen off a cliff.

Newcastle cannot get themselves into another Swedish saga again, and first on the priority list for the incoming CEO and Director of Football should be to ensure it.