The dispute centres around the fact that Mateta's contract was extended by an option activated by the club, which he claims is not legally binding. Despite this, Mateta remains contracted to Palace and played 63 minutes for the club on Saturday. The fact that he played for Palace suggests that any damage to the relationship between player and club is not irreparable.
BBC Football reports that Palace have attempted to renew Mateta's contract over the past 12 months but to no avail. Employment lawyer Libby Payne said that it is possible to argue that the terms of the option are inherently unfair and therefore void, although the threshold for this is high and such challenges rarely succeed. With just eight days left of the transfer window, Palace are likely to listen to offers for Mateta, who has indicated he views his future away from Selhurst Park.
Mateta is less than 12 months away from a free transfer, which would be more financially lucrative for him than leaving for a fee this month. This means that Palace will have to decide whether to sell Mateta now or risk losing him for nothing in January.