By Robbie Butler
In recent days, there has been speculation that Crystal Palace could financially benefit from a final day loss away to Arsenal. The source of this was based on the suggested nature of Eberechi Eze's contract, having joined the Gunners in August 2025 for an initial fee of £60 million. It is believed that £7.5 million in potential add-ons was included as part of a four-year deal with his new club.
Crucially, it is now believed that these add-ons do not include additional income for Crystal Palace if Eze's current club Arsenal win the league. Why? Because Arsenal's final league game of the season is away to Crystal Palace. Such a scenario, even if ignored and not acting as any perverse incentive to perform, would not be a good look for the game.
This begs the question of whether such add-ons should be permitted at all. One can reasonably assume that individual performance metrics, such as goals scored, number of assists, and so on, are reasonable to include. The chances of unintended consequences, while possible, remain limited, as these metrics are player-related only.
The introduction of team performance metrics into the contract of an individual player is a different matter. A player does not, in theory, have to play for team performance bonuses to be met. If a player signs for a new club and the buying club agrees to pay the selling club an additional sum should they win a trophy or qualify for European competition, these targets may be achieved entirely independent of the contribution of the player signed.
Such scenarios could give rise to a range of perverse incentives that alter the pay-offs from winning, or indeed losing, a game. It should never be the case that losing is more financially rewarding than winning.
In recent days, there has been speculation that Crystal Palace could financially benefit from a final day loss away to Arsenal. The source of this was based on the suggested nature of Eberechi Eze's contract, having joined the Gunners in August 2025 for an initial fee of £60 million. It is believed that £7.5 million in potential add-ons was included as part of a four-year deal with his new club.
Crucially, it is now believed that these add-ons do not include additional income for Crystal Palace if Eze's current club Arsenal win the league. Why? Because Arsenal's final league game of the season is away to Crystal Palace. Such a scenario, even if ignored and not acting as any perverse incentive to perform, would not be a good look for the game.
This begs the question of whether such add-ons should be permitted at all. One can reasonably assume that individual performance metrics, such as goals scored, number of assists, and so on, are reasonable to include. The chances of unintended consequences, while possible, remain limited, as these metrics are player-related only.
The introduction of team performance metrics into the contract of an individual player is a different matter. A player does not, in theory, have to play for team performance bonuses to be met. If a player signs for a new club and the buying club agrees to pay the selling club an additional sum should they win a trophy or qualify for European competition, these targets may be achieved entirely independent of the contribution of the player signed.
Such scenarios could give rise to a range of perverse incentives that alter the pay-offs from winning, or indeed losing, a game. It should never be the case that losing is more financially rewarding than winning.
RSS Feed
