MADRID, 11 Ene. (EUROPA PRESS) –
Deportivo Alavés defended this Thursday that it “does not owe any amount” to the now Real Madrid forward Joselu Mato, after he has claimed compensation from the Basque club for the end of his contract, which was for three consecutive seasons (2019-2022). , according to a statement from the entity.
The now forward of the Madrid team, scorer in the Madrid derby of the Spanish Super Cup semi-final this Wednesday in Saudi Arabia, would have claimed from the 'babazorro' team an amount of around 300,000 euros, at a rate of 12 days per year worked, it is That is, 36 days for the entire duration of the three-year contract that he signed with Alavés.
However, the club insisted that they do not owe the 33-year-old striker “any amount” to Joselu derived from his contract with the club. “The aforementioned compensation claimed is planned for the termination of common temporary contracts,” argued Alavés, who understand that this issue does not comply with the regulations for professional athletes, regulated by a “special labor regime.”
Furthermore, the Basque team understands that the claim should not be such “in cases in which the will of the club is the continuation of the player, proceeding to terminate the relationship by decision of the latter,” he commented on Joselu's departure from Alavés.
From the 'albiazul' entity they explained that Joselu's contract, from 2019 to 2022, “had an automatic extension for an additional season depending on the number of games played”, which “was left without effect, at the request of the player himself “.
“However, Alavés, during the 2021/2022 season, making a great financial effort and taking into account the importance of the player to it, made an important renewal offer for 2 more seasons, which was rejected,” he added. the notice.
In conclusion, the entity reported that “it is defending its rights in the corresponding judicial instances”, recalling that this is the second time, since “more than 11 years ago”, when it returned to professional football, that it is facing a case of claim for the aforementioned compensation, although “with a different casuistry than in the case of Joselu Mato.”