Tribunal compensation for Hirsty, Clare , etc

[theowlsman]

Point out the short-sighted view of not doing all you can to retain these players, and club plants / SWFC boxers, socks, and dressing gown-wearing sorts, appear as if by magic.

 

We’ll end up regretting losing Hirst, as he strides out at Wembley, as England’s no.9, as we did with Vardy. Then the told-you-sos will remind the Danny Wilson Toby Juggers all about it, it’ll be like Megson threads ad infinitum. For that reason alone, get him signed up, and get Monty’s Motors on the blower.

[Musn't Grumble]

I would have thought that if the contract expires then that's it. No sell on compensation offered and no sell on compensation required.

 

This is supposed to help the players get another job, too.

 

The son of an acquaintance of mine came through the youth set up at an established PL club but then was released last summer (I.e. Not offered a new contract). He then had to call around the clubs and eventually, after a trial, was signed by a Championship club who then immediately loaned him out to a lower league club. As far as I know, no transfer fee and no compensation at any stage.

 

Before Bosman, clubs could hold player's registrations but since then, it has been easier for players and clubs - depending upon which side of the fence you are sitting - to complete a contract and either negotiate another contract or move on.

[dowls]

Your mates son was released that’s the difference .. we’re not releasing Hirst and Clare they are choosing not to sign their contracts that’s a big difference. And this is why the tribunal kicks in, because the refusal to sign is based on the fact they have alternatives lined up.

 

If we get anything North of 2 million for Hirst that will be the biggest fee for a Wednesday player since Brunt.. if it’s a “measly” 1.5million that will be the most since Antonio??

[Jeffjohnsonmyhero]

Good luck Hirst and Clare you both epitomize what the modern game is all about , I Hope you both go on to make loads and loads of money , You two are a reason why I am ready for calling it a day . 

[mark77]

3 hours ago, Musn't Grumble said:

I would have thought that if the contract expires then that's it. No sell on compensation offered and no sell on compensation required.

 

This is supposed to help the players get another job, too.

 

The son of an acquaintance of mine came through the youth set up at an established PL club but then was released last summer (I.e. Not offered a new contract). He then had to call around the clubs and eventually, after a trial, was signed by a Championship club who then immediately loaned him out to a lower league club. As far as I know, no transfer fee and no compensation at any stage.

 

Before Bosman, clubs could hold player's registrations but since then, it has been easier for players and clubs - depending upon which side of the fence you are sitting - to complete a contract and either negotiate another contract or move on.

Under a certain age (23 I think) the rules are slightly different.

 

KM spoke about this at the fans forum back in August. She seemed very knowledgeable.

 

Many factors are included in the final fee but the main factor is First Team appearances. Sounds like the Exeter player made quite a few and obviously Clare became a regular for Gillingham and lately for us. Hirst however has made 1 I think (Cambridge League Cup). I would imagine International appearances will bump up the Hirst fee slightly.

 

Don't be surprised if Clare (if he leaves) brings in more than Hirst.

 

 

[room0035]

13 hours ago, Will69 said:

 

Both those players were SOLD by their clubs, in a transfer window, having contracts with their clubs.

 

Hirst and Clare have been free to negotiate contracts elsewhere abroad with selected clubs since January and when their contracts end in a few weeks will walk away. We can’t demand transfer fees for players with expiring contracts, outside a transfer window.

 

It staggers me how many people don’t get this.

What staggers me is how many people don't have a clue about the rules for players under the age of 24. But you continue we will find out in the next 4-6 weeks won't we.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, room0035 said:

What staggers me is how many people don't have a clue about the rules for players under the age of 24. But you continue we will find out in the next 4-6 weeks won't we.

 

I know EXACTLY how it works.

 

As the contract winds down first of all from January onwards a player can speak to clubs abroad about a potential move, but cannot officially sign for a fellow English club. Upon the expiration of the players contract he is free to negotiate away to any club he wishes, in England or elsewhere. The club has literally no control or say in those contract negotiations the player has with other clubs, the owning club cannot sell said player either, outside the transfer window.

 

The player is then free to move to whatever club he wants to, free to play for them before any compensation is paid or any tribunal is held to set that compensation, appearances for the new club bear no part in the decision of the tribunal neither, the compensation is set at the time of the expiration of the players contract. We have no powers at all as a club to stop the player playing for the new club.

 

If the player moves away from the country the FIFA system would be used, which differs from the English system of tribunal, technically players can leave England, spend a short while abroad then come back to England and avoid the English system altogether. If they move to another English club the clubs both send representatives to the tribunal, who will be a panel made up of random officials representing the leagues etc. The former club can make a case for compensation for fees paid to buy the player that has moved on, costs of academic tutoring, coaching, medical support etc and the panel will look at things like the contract offered by the club that was rejected, any transfer offers previously rejected (must be substantiated though), first team appearances, international appearances etc when setting the compensation package.

 

So in the case of a player like Hirst who has made virtually no senior appearances, no senior international appearances, no international U21 appearances etc and who cost us nothing to bring here the fee set won’t be huge. I would expect clauses such as bonuses to be paid to us based on future international and Premier League appearances to be part of the package and a modest sell on clause.

 

But yeah, let’s negotiate with clubs who know full well they can come in and wait for a tribunal to make them pay peanuts... you all know the system better than I do, clearly. Can see clubs like Man United offering us £4m and 30% sell on because Katrien says they must negotiate...

 

Or they will just wait for the panel to insist they pay us £1m and 20% sell on while he bangs the goals in for their reserves and makes appearances for them in the League Cup...

[Guest]

20 hours ago, coopswfc76 said:

 

We do though by presenting a case to the tribunal.

That's if behind the scenes nobody is working on a deal with there new clubs.

 

As i said above...

[room0035]

21 hours ago, Will69 said:

 

As i said above...

I will help you for players under the age of 24 different rules apply as you don't seem to be taking the hint.

 

Fullcontractlaw.co.uk/2016/11/compensation-players-24-mystery look at all the example like the ones that say fee, appearance related bonus and sell on clause and these are tribunal cases for player UNDER 24 that are out of contract.

 

I am sure a lot of what you have said may be correct for players over 24 but both Hirst and Clare are not so different rules apply unless they move outside of the English leagues then we will be lucky to get a few hundred grand if they go to say Celtic.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, room0035 said:

I will help you for players under the age of 24 different rules apply as you don't seem to be taking the hint.

 

Fullcontractlaw.co.uk/2016/11/compensation-players-24-mystery look at all the example like the ones that say fee, appearance related bonus and sell on clause and these are tribunal cases for player UNDER 24 that are out of contract.

 

I am sure a lot of what you have said may be correct for players over 24 but both Hirst and Clare are not so different rules apply unless they move outside of the English leagues then we will be lucky to get a few hundred grand if they go to say Celtic.

 

Everything I said above is 100% accurate.

 

You believe whatever you want to believe mate.

[OWLERTON GHOST]

It really is a bloody minefield this lark isnt it ? 

"Truth will out" ....

 

 

pardon the pun .....

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, OWLERTON GHOST said:

It really is a bloody minefield this lark isnt it ? 

"Truth will out" ....

 

 

pardon the pun .....

 

Not really. What I stated above is exactly how this works. 100%

 

The person banging on about players ages misses the point that there wouldn’t need to be a tribunal at all if the player was over 24. Hence I wouldn’t be talking about how tribunals set compensation if needed, if we were talking about players over age. They are plain wrong.

[OWLERTON GHOST]

Just now, Will69 said:

 

Not really. What I stated above is exactly how this works. 100%

 

The person banging on about players ages misses the point that there wouldn’t need to be a tribunal at all if the player was over 24. Hence I wouldn’t be talking about how tribunals set compensation if needed, if we were talking about players over age. They are plain wrong.

I do not doubt what you have put one bit Will .

I just wish we could have held on to them both ..

But if not,  get back our costs of investment in some way,  even if we could get them back on long term loans from their new employers  without wages would be ideal ?.

That wouldn't be arranged with a tribunal.

That may be with a gentleman's handshake so to speak ?

Wonder if Jos got on well with Herr Kapitan Klopp during his Bundesliga tenures ? 

[pgmetcalf]

Not too interested in "What if" threads

[Swiss Toni]

Of say we got £1 million for Hirst (plus add ons) then I reckon we’d get £500k for Clare (with add ons).

 

Hoping we’d get more, just my gut feeling. That’s the comparison I’d make between the two of them anyway with Hirst being double that of Clare, due to his representation for England at youth level. 

[Spookone]

On 21/04/2018 at 14:13, room0035 said:

What staggers me is how many people don't have a clue about the rules for players under the age of 24. But you continue we will find out in the next 4-6 weeks won't we.

Sorry, I for one (and I'm sure I speak for the majority here), have far more important, interesting and lucrative things to be doing with my time than immerse myself in the murky waters of the FA rule book for players up to the age of 24 

[Hughdowd]

On 21/04/2018 at 11:08, Jeffjohnsonmyhero said:

Good luck Hirst and Clare you both epitomize what the modern game is all about , I Hope you both go on to make loads and loads of money , You two are a reason why I am ready for calling it a day . 

Well said.......a pair of spoilt prima donnas....get them out asap

[Hookowl]

18 hours ago, room0035 said:

I will help you for players under the age of 24 different rules apply as you don't seem to be taking the hint.

 

Fullcontractlaw.co.uk/2016/11/compensation-players-24-mystery look at all the example like the ones that say fee, appearance related bonus and sell on clause and these are tribunal cases for player UNDER 24 that are out of contract.

 

I am sure a lot of what you have said may be correct for players over 24 but both Hirst and Clare are not so different rules apply unless they move outside of the English leagues then we will be lucky to get a few hundred grand if they go to say Celtic.

 

http://fullcontactlaw.co.uk/2016/11/compensation-players-24-mystery/

[room0035]

1 hour ago, Hughdowd said:

Well said.......a pair of spoilt prima donnas....get them out asap

Nah football is a fickle thing these players could get an injury and their career is over - I have no problem with them looking out for themselves.

 

We are very quick to make out this is all one sided. The Club were touting GH at £10,000 a week to League 1 and 2 teams sio thought he was worth it so for the player representative to ask for that sort of money they get called money grabbers. You cannot have it both ways.

 

My worry is Hirst could be another Harry Kane but for the sake of the club lets hope he is another Jordan Bowery.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

Not too fussed. Both players cost us nothing (other than development costs) and if both don't wish to play for Sheffield Wednesday they can go elsewhere, so whatever we receive now and in the future by way of sell on's is a bonus.