Which FIFA Rule could Benefit Alexander Isak amid Transfer Saga at Newcastle?

Alexander Isak has refrained from training with the Newcastle team and has been out of the matchday squad. The Premier League star wants to force a move out of The Magpies after they turned down a 110 million-pound transfer bid from Liverpool. Now, Isak might opt for the move that Lassana Diarra made as per Article 17 of FIFA's Regulations on the Transfer and Status of Players.

Diarra won his case against FIFA at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) last year. He proved that FIFA's rules were too restrictive on players who wanted to move clubs. The CJEU concluded that footballers deserved similar rights to any normal worker who wishes to switch jobs, and FIFA's rules should comply with the laws of the EU. This could prove to be in favour of Alexander Isak.

Isak, via his Instagram, wrote: “Promises were made, and the club has known my position for a long time. To act as if these are only emerging is misleading. When promises are broken and trust is lost, the relationship can't continue.”
In response, Newcastle United stated that they were disappointed with Isak and denied that Isak was informed that he could leave the club in the summer. They also added that the club has “been clear that the conditions of a sale this summer have not transpired.”

What is Article 17 and its implications?

Article 17 took effect 20 years ago when FIFA, under pressure from the European Commission which believed the transfer system restricted the freedom of players to change jobs like ordinary people can, came up with a mechanism to allow them to effectively walk out on clubs. The process would be easy; they had to fulfill certain criteria, and a certain amount of compensation had to be paid. But, the problem was, the conditions were so restrictive and the amount of compensation to be paid so uncertain that very few successfully invoked Article 17.

Diarra's case forced FIFA to rewrite its rules in a short time. FIFA could withhold the player's transfer certificate until the matter was resolved. The club that signed an Article 17 player had to prove they didn't collude with him to cause the breach of contract. All these issues have been removed from the amended Article 17.

How could Isak Benefit from Article 17?

Isak is well-positioned to take advantage of Article 17 and become a free agent in less than 12 months with whatever new club he signs for, having to pay as little as half of what Newcastle turned down from Liverpool. The Article can only be invoked within 15 days of the final match of the season. Only by players who have had a full three years under contract at the club and two if they are 28, which Isak isn't; He's only 25. Once that happens, it is considered a unilateral breach of contract by Isak, which means he's free to sign with any other club as soon as the market reopens on July 1.
Newcastle United would be entitled to compensation, FIFA's rules say the compensation would be calculated based on the “damage suffered” by Newcastle according to the “positive interest” principle. In practical terms, it's a fancy way of saying that the Dispute Resolution chamber of FIFA's Football Tribunal would take into account a combination of factors, such as wages Isak would have earned in his final two seasons and his residual value, and the cost of signing his replacement. The amount wouldn't be more than 50-60 million pounds.