|
Don Rogers Shop
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 16:22:57 » |
|
Not if he has a clause that says his wage will be reduced though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
 Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #16 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 16:30:14 » |
|
I think we know there'll be a stampede of players still under contract trying to get out....the only problem is those who don't actually go, because no club want them.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
pauld
Aaron Aardvark
Offline
Posts: 25436
Absolute Calamity!
|
|
« Reply #17 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 16:40:20 » |
|
I think we know there'll be a stampede of players still under contract trying to get out.
It'd be the fastest most of them have moved all fucking year |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reeves4england
Offline
Posts: 16138
We'll never die!
|
|
« Reply #18 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 17:09:58 » |
|
Not if he has a clause that says his wage will be reduced though.
Exactly. And didn't somebody say we had an option to extend his contract a la Douglas? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ginginho
Offline
Posts: 6978
|
|
« Reply #19 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 17:14:47 » |
|
I always read STFU as stuff you, even though I know it means shut the fuck up. Isn't that strange?
Yeah, I do the same too. Same with IIRC (Erk) and IMO. Oh, and if someone mispells "the" as "teh", I read it as teh. I hate internet abbreviations. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Spencer_White
|
|
« Reply #20 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 17:31:15 » |
|
Reality bites.
Do you wish we had shown a bit more fight in home games 6 weeks ago now lads?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reeves4england
Offline
Posts: 16138
We'll never die!
|
|
« Reply #21 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 17:42:23 » |
|
Reality bites.
Do you wish we had shown a bit more fight in home games 6 months ago now lads?
Corrected for you. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #22 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 17:46:26 » |
|
It'd be the fastest most of them have moved all fucking year
Indeed....apparently Wray is going to talk to each player individually (and presumably their agents) and gauge their plans. I suspect we wont be seeing too many of these next season... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
guy66
Offline
Posts: 279
|
|
« Reply #23 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 18:31:20 » |
|
Ok well who was it
I think it as Sheehan's Mrs...only reason I say that is she said to another woman "he has just text to say he is dropped"..he is the only senior player not injured, on the bench, out of contract who fitted the criteria.. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
flammableBen
|
|
« Reply #24 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 19:26:05 » |
|
Exactly. And didn't somebody say we had an option to extend his contract a la Douglas?
I wonder if the option to extend is at his original wages or at post-relegation wage levels. Same as the compensation and contract rules, do we have to offer him one as good as how it ended with clauses taken into account, or do we have to offer him one equal on how it is at the end? Does it take into account clauses or is just on basic wage. What about bonuses? Do these u-24 player compensation rules actually work with the complexity of modern contracts? Does anybody know? I was about to ask if anybody cares, but when he just wanders off in June on a free, then I'm sure the questions will come up. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Don Rogers Shop
|
|
« Reply #25 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 19:35:45 » |
|
Say for example he was on 4k a week last season(oops this season) we can offer him a contract say with a 25% reduction then we have carried out our side of the bargain.My understanding is that if we offer it and he refuses it then we are entitled to some kind of fee.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
flammableBen
|
|
« Reply #26 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 19:49:21 » |
|
Say for example he was on 4k a week last season(oops this season) we can offer him a contract say with a 25% reduction then we have carried out our side of the bargain.My understanding is that if we offer it and he refuses it then we are entitled to some kind of fee.
Oh I thought we had to offer a contract of equal value. Not just offer a contract with whatever. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reeves4england
Offline
Posts: 16138
We'll never die!
|
|
« Reply #27 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 19:58:38 » |
|
Oh I thought we had to offer a contract of equal value. Not just offer a contract with whatever.
I'm only guessing, but it would make most sense if we were required to offer him a deal equal to what he would have been on had his contract lasted another year, that is to say that any relegation wage drop in his current contract should be translated into the requirements for the new offer |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
flammableBen
|
|
« Reply #28 on: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 20:14:59 » |
|
I'm only guessing, but it would make most sense if we were required to offer him a deal equal to what he would have been on had his contract lasted another year, that is to say that any relegation wage drop in his current contract should be translated into the requirements for the new offer
Which I agree makes sense. Which in my mind would make the actual rules likely to be the complete opposite. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Only Me
Offline
Posts: 1202
|
|
« Reply #29 on: Saturday, May 7, 2011, 09:49:41 » |
|
Which I agree makes sense. Which in my mind would make the actual rules likely to be the complete opposite.
The wages will match the lower league status, otherwise the 25% reduction is useless. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
