Confirmed! CSD maintains Olmo and Pau Victor’s licenses

The Higher Sports Council (CSD) has made a final decision on the resource presented by FC Barcelona on January 7, 2025, confirming that the licenses of the players Dani Olmo and Pau Victor are valid. This failure, which was issued on April 3, 2025, puts a final point to a process that started when LaLiga and the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) decided to unregister both players. They argued that FC Barcelona did not comply with the necessary time and economic requirements for registration, in accordance with the rules of economic control and rule 130.2 of the regulations of the RFEF, which prohibits the registration of a player twice in the same club during the same season.

The situation was further complicated because FC Barcelona argued that the disinscription was not a club decision, but a unilateral action by LaLiga, and that they had submitted all the necessary documentation within the established deadline (31 December 2024). This led the CSD to grant a precautionary measure on January 8, 2025, allowing Olmo and Victor to play while the matter was resolved. Now, with this final resolution, the CSD has reaffirmed its initial position, keeping the players’ licenses.

Situation analysis

1. Conflict Chronology:
   • Initial Registration: LaLiga and the RFEF described Dani Olmo and Pau Victor on January 4, 2025, arguing that the FC Barcelona did not comply with the rules of economic control and that players could not be re-registered in the same season after having been previously discharged.
   • FC Barcelona resource: On 7 January, the club filed a 52-page appeal, accompanied by more than 60 documents, requesting an urgent precautionary measure to suspend the withdrawal.
   • CSD Cautelar Measure: On January 8, the CSD decided to grant a precautionary measure that allowed players to continue to compete while the substance of the matter was clarified. This decision was based on the “public interest” and the right of the players to continue their sporting career, especially considering that Olmo is a Spanish international and that FC Barcelona was in full participation in the Spanish Super Cup.
   • Pressures and Reactions: LaLiga and the RFEF, together with clubs like Las Palmas and Athletic Club, showed their disagreement with the precautionary measure, arguing that the CSD acted with “unusual beer” and without giving them the opportunity to present claims. LaLiga even appealed to the Administrative Contentious to annul the precautionary measure.
   • Final resolution: On April 3, 2025, the CSD resolved in favor of the FC Barcelona, maintaining the licenses of Olmo and Victor, with the argument that the RFEF-LaLiga Convention Follow-up Commission did not have competition to unregister the players.
2. Impact on FC Barcelona:
   • Sports: The resolution ensures that Dani Olmo and Pau Victor continue to play with FC Barcelona until the end of the season, something that is fundamental to the team of Hansi Flick, especially in tournaments such as LaLiga and the Champions League. However, it is important to mention that Dani Olmo is currently injured (since March 27, 2025, after a party against Osasuna), which restricts his participation in the short term.
   • E Economic and Social: The decision prevents a “grave economic and sports damage” for the club, as indicated by the CSD in its precautionary measure. The fall of the players would have impacted the sports planning and reputation of the club, as well as causing possible economic losses by not having two fundamental players.
   • Legal and Priority: This case could mark a before and after in Spanish football, as the CSD has questioned the authority of the RFEF-LaLiga Monitoring Commission to decide on the licenses. This could give rise to a review of the existing regulations, especially article 130.2, which FC Barcelona has pointed out as an outdated one.
3. Reactions and Controversy:
   • Support to FC Barcelona: The club and its followers are partying for the decision, which supports their belief that they fulfilled the deadlines and that the disinscription was an unfair measure by LaLiga. Joan Laporta, the president of FC Barcelona, was unable to hide his joy and demonstrated it with public gestures after the precautionary measure, even making a cut of sleeves that was captured by the cameras.
   • LaLiga and Other Club Reviews: LaLiga, the RFEF, and teams like Las Palmas and Athletic Club have expressed their disagreement with the decision of the CSD, arguing that it jeopardizes the rules of economic control and fairness in the competition. LaLiga highlighted that the transaction of 100 million euros for the sale of VIP sticks in Spotify Camp Nou was not approved as an income for 2024 by the new Barça auditor, which, according to them, complicated the registration of players under the rule of 1:1 of the fair play financial.
   • Posture of the RFEF: The RFEF, though critical, has adopted a more conciliatory tone, indicating that it will work with LaLiga to analyze the context and make decisions, but maintaining that they had complied with the regulations.

Reasons for CSD Supporting FC Barcelona

The CSD has supported the FC Barcelona in this process for several legal, sports and public interest reasons, which are described below:

1. Incompetence of the Follow-up Commission:
   • The CSD has determined that the RFEF-LaLiga Convention Monitoring Commission does not have the authority to refuse federative licenses or to disregister players. In its final resolution, the CSD emphasized that the Commission “did not confirm, ratify, or enforce the agreements that had been adopted by LaLiga or by the RFEF, but decided clearly ‘not to grant the prior visa or the final license requested by the FC Barcelona'”. This could be considered a “full-right invalidity,” as the Commission shifted from its functions, which only covered the interpretation and supervision of the RFEF-LaLiga Convention, without being able to make executive decisions on licences.
2. FC Barcelona compliance with deadlines:
   • According to the CSD, the FC Barcelona presented all the necessary documentation to comply with the rules of economic control by 31 December 2024. LaLiga informed the club about the organ agreement that validates the budgets on January 3, 2025, but the CSD maintains that the club acted on time. This aspect goes against what LaLiga and RFEF argued, who said the documentation was delivered late.
3. Right to Work of Players:
   • The CSD made its decision on the basis of article 27 of the Sports Act, which assures professional athletes the right “to a sports career according to their abilities” with all guarantees and certainties. Olmo and Víctor’s disinscription could have generated “immediate and hard-to-repair prejudices,” affecting their legal security and ability to compete, especially given that Dani Olmo is an international Spanish player and that their lack could have influenced the Spanish National Team.
4. Public Interest and Damage to Spanish Football:
   • The CSD argued that not adopting the precautionary measure (and maintaining the licenses) would have caused a “grave economic and sports damage” both to the FC Barcelona and its players. In addition, this would have harmed the interests of the Spanish National Team and national competitions, such as the Spanish Super Cup. The participation of FC Barcelona in high visibility events, such as the Supercopa, was also a key factor in the decision, as the CSD considered that the exclusion of players could have damaged the image of Spanish football worldwide.
5. Lack of Transparency in the LaLiga and RFEF Process:
   • The CSD expressed its concern at the lack of transparency in the disinscription process. The precautionary resolution was taken without LaLiga and RFEF having the opportunity to present their arguments, which caused criticism from these organizations. Despite this, the CSD defended that the decisions of the Follow-up Commission did not have a solid legal backing, and in its final resolution it did not address the economic control of LaLiga, making it clear that this responsibility rests with the LaLiga Budget Validation Body and, secondly, its Economic Control Committee.
6. Closure of the Ticket Market:
   • A fundamental aspect that influenced the CSD decision was the closure of the winter market on February 3, 2025. If the CSD had made a negative decision after that date, Olmo and Victor would have been left without a federative contract and could not have been registered by any club until the next tab window. This would have been against the principles of the precautionary measure and could have caused irreparable damage to their careers.

Critical Perspective: Is the CSD Decision Just?

Although the CSD has backed FC Barcelona, the decision is not free of controversy. From a critical point of view:

• A Favor of FC Barcelona:
  • The decision protects the rights of players, ensuring that they do not have to bear the consequences of an administrative conflict between the club and LaLiga. Dani Olmo and Pau Víctor are not directly responsible for the economic management of FC Barcelona, and their disinscription would have been an excessive sanction.
  • The CSD has acted with a focus on the “interest of the athlete”, as noted in its communiqués, which could set a positive precedent for future similar cases.
  • The 100 million euro operation for the sale of VIP sticks from Spotify Camp Nou, although questioned by LaLiga, was filed within the deadline, and the CSD validated that the club met the formal requirements.
• Contra del FC Barcelona:
  • LaLiga and other clubs argue that the CSD decision undermines the rules of economic control that guarantee the financial sustainability of Spanish football. Allowing FC Barcelona to enroll players without fully validating the revenues of the operation of VIP sticks could set a dangerous precedent, giving advantage to clubs that do not comply strictly with the rules.
  • The “unusual beer” with which the CSD acted in the precautionary measure, without hearing LaLiga or the RFEF, has been criticized as a possible lack of impartiality. This fuels the perception that the CSD, dependent on the Government of Pedro Sánchez, could have favored FC Barcelona for political reasons or public interest, to the detriment of competitive equity.
  • Clubs like Las Palmas and Athletic Club have pointed out that this decision generates “uncertainty” about the future of Spanish professional football, as it contradicts the principles of an economic control system that has been “internationally admired” for saving historical clubs from ruin.

Conclusion

The CSD has supported the FC Barcelona in the Dani Olmo and Pau Victor issue, prioritizing the right of players to work and questioning the authority of the RFEF-LaLiga Tracking Commission to unregister them. This decision is based on solid legal arguments, such as the possible nullity of the Commission’s actions and the compliance of the club’s deadlines, in addition to considering the public interest, such as the impact on the Spanish National Team and national competitions.

However, this resolution does not solve the underlying tensions between FC Barcelona, LaLiga and the RFEF, and could have long-term implications for Spanish football regulations. While FC Barcelona celebrates this victory, other clubs and LaLiga see in this decision a precedent that could weaken economic control and equity in competition. The case of Olmo and Víctor has not only been an administrative figure, but also a reflection of the complex dynamics of power in Spanish football, where sports, economic and political interests often clash.