Contract extension with Nati coach: Fischer’s exit clause remains a state secret

class=”sc-cffd1e67-0 iQNQmc”>

The day after the announcement of the contract extension until 2026 for Nati coach Patrick Fischer (48) and his assistant Tommy Albelin (59), Swiss ice hockey invited people to a media conference in Kloten ZH. It’s Valentine’s Day and everything is harmonious at the lectern, where next to the two coaches sit chairman Stefan Schärer, CEO Patrick Bloch, Nati boss Lars Weibel and the new media manager Finn Sulzer.

“The path we have developed is the right one,” says Bloch. “It is important to continue working with this competent team in view of the flagship home World Cup in 2026,” says Schärer. Weibel speaks of a “sustainable structure”. Meanwhile, Fischer thanks his superiors for their trust. “Even though it has been a bit windy lately. This confidence motivates me.”

Honest, but performance-oriented

So far so good. But the most exciting point of this media conference would actually be the mutual exit clause, which has been discussed time and time again and the negotiations of which have kept the two sides busy in recent weeks. Unsurprisingly, no one says anything about what this looks like in detail. “It is a fair, performance-oriented contract. But we don’t provide information about the details. The path must be good, that is the criterion. And in any case, the goal is that we follow this path with Fischer and Albelin until 2026,” says Weibel on this subject. The exit clause is and remains a state secret.

Regarding the clause, Fischer talks about a process that is standard in the industry: “Nothing has changed. In recent years I have always had an exit clause in my contract. We know that the coaches fly first, that’s why they have such a clause in their contract – I’m not the only one. It’s not stressful, it’s fair for everyone, so it’s not a problem for me.”

Next World Cup speculation?

But it could become one again in just three months at the World Cup. This is when it is difficult to judge whether the path is the right one based on outside results. Especially because this assessment also includes the strength of the World Cup team based on the number of NHL players as an additional parameter.

Is another defeat in the quarter-finals of the World Cup enough to trigger the exit clause? Or does that also require two or three defeats in the group stage, which is always so successful? Is the direction of the path really no longer correct? Or maybe it is somehow that way – depending on the circumstances? The door is open for possible speculation. But Weibel can deal with this danger: “Somehow there is always speculation. Reviews are always subjective anyway.”

Source : Blick