Salah-Eddine is close again—but Olympiacos still need the one confirmation that matters | OneFootball

FIFA World Cup 2026 Quarter Final match between France and Morocco at Boston Stadium on July 09, 2026 in Foxborough, Massachusetts. (Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)

The transfer of Anass Salah-Eddine has become a study in how different sides of a negotiation can produce entirely different versions of the same deal.

On Wednesday, Italian and Greek reporting suggested Olympiacos and Roma had essentially agreed a permanent transfer. Later that evening, Dutch outlet VoetbalPrimeur reported—after speaking with the player’s camp—that Salah-Eddine was not interested in moving to Greece at that stage.

Now Nicolò Schira reports that the 24-year-old is one step away from joining Olympiacos for €7 million plus €1 million in bonuses, with a contract through 2030.

The central question has therefore changed again.

It is no longer whether Olympiacos can agree a price with Roma. The unresolved issue is whether the player has now moved from hesitation to final consent.

What Schira’s report adds

The latest claim provides the clearest proposed contractual framework so far:

That level of detail usually indicates that discussions have progressed beyond exploratory contact. It suggests that the clubs have aligned on valuation and that a proposed player contract has been prepared.

It does not, by itself, prove that Salah-Eddine has signed or even formally accepted.

The absence of travel information, a medical appointment or a primary statement from the player’s agent remains significant.

Why the contradictory briefings may both contain truth

It is possible that neither side’s reporting is entirely wrong.

Roma may have accepted Olympiacos’ financial proposal while Salah-Eddine initially preferred to wait. Olympiacos may then have improved the sporting pitch, clarified his role or secured stronger assurances through his representative.

Alternatively, the Dutch report may have been designed to encourage other clubs to act before the deal closed.

A third possibility is that different intermediaries had different levels of authority. One representative may have negotiated acceptable terms while the player’s broader camp remained unconvinced.

Transfer reporting often compresses those distinctions into simple phrases such as “player agreed” or “player rejected.” The reality can be conditional and fluid.

The contract length signals long-term intent

A deal through 2030 would confirm that Olympiacos view Salah-Eddine as more than a temporary replacement.

The club would be investing in:

At 24, Salah-Eddine is young enough to improve and retain market value while being experienced enough to contribute immediately.

This would also explain why Olympiacos appear willing to spend close to Roma’s original investment rather than seek a short loan.

The tactical rationale remains strong

Salah-Eddine offers a more possession-oriented profile than Francisco Ortega.

He is comfortable receiving under pressure, moving inside from left-back and combining through midfield. Those qualities could help Olympiacos against deep domestic blocks and against European opponents who attempt to press the first phase of buildup.

Mendilibar could use him in several structures:

Traditional overlap: Salah-Eddine provides width while the left winger moves centrally.

Inverted role: He enters midfield, creating an extra passing option beside the holding midfielder.

The difficulty remains defensive transition. Olympiacos’ high press can leave large spaces behind advancing full-backs, meaning Salah-Eddine must adapt quickly to Mendilibar’s positional discipline.

The Ortega decision cannot be separated

The reported investment makes little sense unless Francisco Ortega is expected to leave or Olympiacos have decided to reshape the position.

River Plate’s pursuit of Ortega has been the trigger throughout the process. A permanent Salah-Eddine signing would allow Olympiacos to negotiate Ortega’s sale without appearing desperate for a replacement.

The preferred sequence remains:

Until the first step is verified, Olympiacos should preserve their existing left-back depth.

What would finally settle the story

The transfer now requires concrete evidence rather than another briefing.

The decisive developments would be:

Schira’s report materially increases the probability of completion, but it does not erase the player-camp denial from the previous evening.