The Iranian Football Federation (hereinafter: IRIFF) enacted a new directive on June 2024 with the declared objective of maintaining market stability and preventing the excessive increase of players’ salaries.
One of the main factors behind the current increase in player salaries in the Persian Gulf Pro League is Article 15 and its accompanying note in this new regulation.
Regarding Article 15 of the new directive issued by the IRIFF, only contracts officially registered by clubs are considered valid. If a player signs a contract with a club but the contract is not registered, it will be deemed legally void and null! The note appended to this article also sets a strict timeframe for the registration of contracts: 48 hours for submission to the provincial football board and seven working days for registration with the league organization.
While this article was adopted as part of a directive that purportedly aimed to control or even reduce salary levels, in practice, the result has been the exact opposite. During the adoption process of this provision in June 2024, numerous warnings were issued to the Federation regarding its possible consequences and its inconsistency with fundamental legal principles. Unfortunately, these concerns were not heeded.
To illustrate the issue more clearly, consider the following example:
Suppose a player signs a contract worth USD 500,000 with Club A ten days prior to the opening of the registration period. Following the agreement, Club A has no choice but to wait for the transfer window to begin.
Meanwhile, three days after the conclusion of the agreement, the executives of Club B, who are also seeking to sign a player in the same position, approach the same player and offer a contract worth USD 700,000. The player responds by saying that he has already signed with Club A, but Club B informs him that the previous contract is invalid because the 48-hour deadline for registration has passed and the contract was never officially lodged with the relevant authorities.
In such a situation, the player may accept the higher offer. Subsequently, when Club A becomes aware of the development and threatens legal action, the player asserts — relying on the aforementioned article — that the original contract is not legally valid and therefore no claim can be brought. As a result, in order to retain the player or reach a compromise, the contract value may rise significantly — from USD 500,000 to USD 1,000,000 or even more. Should Club C also enter the negotiations, the amount may increase further still.
In the past, under well-established legal principles, a signed contract was considered valid upon signature, even before formal registration. However, the current requirement of a strict registration deadline has paved the way for unhealthy competition, excessive increase of salaries, and ethically questionable conduct. While removing the registration deadline entirely could also introduce certain complications, the current framework has effectively produced results contrary to its stated objectives.
Conclusion
This situation once again underscores the critical importance of adhering to the principles of Good Governance in the decision-making processes of sports federations. Rulemaking without proper evaluation of practical outcomes, without transparency, and without consultation with experts and stakeholders, not only fails to achieve its intended goals, but also risks creating serious market disruptions, legal conflicts, and a loss of trust in the governing body. Good governance is not merely an ideal — it is a fundamental requirement for sustainable, fair, and professional football administration. Ignoring it leads to consequences that extend far beyond the scope of a single regulatory article.