Just think...

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?




Some sort of statement from the club that the cash will get reinvested, with signings coming in before the window closes would not go amiss right now.

Talk about how to destroy all the promise for what was such a promising new season.
 
Alfreton14Blade said:
Some sort of statement from the club that the cash will get reinvested, with signings coming in before the window closes would not go amiss right now.

Talk about how to destroy all the promise for what was such a promising new season.
Click to expand...
Phipps has confirmed that. It pays for the new contract that Collins has earned himself by crying in an interview.
 
Can't blame Murphy, more money, Brighton's a decent place to live etc, but as he was contracted to us until the end of 2017 with an option to keep him for one more year, as much as the adage about only keeping players who want to stay, at what point does the club stand it's ground and tell a player that in signing a contract the obligations contained within said agreement are there to be adhered to by both player and club?

Murphy was contracted to us for another potential two and a half years, couldn't we have told him that he's going nowhere this season and that he would be central in our push to achieve promotion this term? If that wasn't achieved then we keep our word and agree to sell him at the end of this season, which means we would still have the player contracted to us for a further 18 months. If agreements have any value then surely they are there to be enforced. Imagine if a club said, midway through an agreement, that it no longer wished to retain a player and there would be a parting of the ways because we felt like it, regardless of what was signed and for how long?
 
It is happening again.

tumblr_ltp0wmjqYq1qbn6bbo1_500.gif
 
Saying money will be invested in players is one thing but we never spend it. Players should have been lined up first. Remember Lita when we sold Beattie?
 
itsinyerblood said:
Can't blame Murphy, more money, Brighton's a decent place to live etc, but as he was contracted to us until the end of 2017 with an option to keep him for one more year, as much as the adage about only keeping players who want to stay, at what point does the club stand it's ground and tell a player that in signing a contract the obligations contained within said agreement are there to be adhered to by both player and club?

Murphy was contracted to us for another potential two and a half years, couldn't we have told him that he's going nowhere this season and that he would be central in our push to achieve promotion this term? If that wasn't achieved then we keep our word and agree to sell him at the end of this season, which means we would still have the player contracted to us for a further 18 months. If agreements have any value then surely they are there to be enforced. Imagine if a club said, midway through an agreement, that it no longer wished to retain a player and there would be a parting of the ways because we felt like it, regardless of what was signed and for how long?
Click to expand...

I think he's desperate to get into the Scotland squad. I can't see any benefit in keeping an unhappy player here. He's definitely given everything for us and deserves to forward his career.
 
robbiez666 said:
I think he's desperate to get into the Scotland squad. I can't see any benefit in keeping an unhappy player here. He's definitely given everything for us and deserves to forward his career.
Click to expand...
He's only been unhappy since Clough went
 



robbiez666 said:
I think he's desperate to get into the Scotland squad. I can't see any benefit in keeping an unhappy player here. He's definitely given everything for us and deserves to forward his career.
Click to expand...

I understand this robbie, my take is why is it that a player's needs come before the club they voluntarily entered into an agreement with? A player isn't forced into signing, they do so without coercion and with independent legal advice, and having signed, both club and player are faced with the same contractual obligations.

The club exists to offer something to those who support it. For a player to submit a transfer request, with a further two and a half years left on his agreement, it seems to me that the club are in a strong position when it comes to enforcing those contractual terms. Of course, if a player's heart is no longer 100% with the club then at some point he should be allowed to leave, but not before the club have attempted another promotion push. Failing that, then he goes with no bad feeling, and with a further 18 months left on said agreement which enables the club to negotiate the player's release from a position of strength.
 
WalthamstowBlade said:
...two years after our "Game changing investment" we're getting stripped of players by fucking Brighton.

I'm off to get pissed.
Click to expand...

Just a small point, but it's "player" not "players" which puts a slightly different slant on it.
 
itsinyerblood said:
I understand this robbie, my take is why is it that a player's needs come before the club they voluntarily entered into an agreement with? A player isn't forced into signing, they do so without coercion and with independent legal advice, and having signed, both club and player are faced with the same contractual obligations.

The club exists to offer something to those who support it. For a player to submit a transfer request, with a further two and a half years left on his agreement, it seems to me that the club are in a strong position when it comes to enforcing those contractual terms. Of course, if a player's heart is no longer 100% with the club then at some point he should be allowed to leave, but not before the club have attempted another promotion push. Failing that, then he goes with no bad feeling, and with a further 18 months left on said agreement which enables the club to negotiate the player's release from a position of strength.
Click to expand...
But you can't force him to be committed. The only case I can ever think off where a player gave his all despite being refused a move was Gareth Barry at Villa, who got his move the season after, in the way you've suggested.
If he doesn't want to play for us, the best we can do is maximise our fee for him. No-one wants to see him playing for us and just going through the motions.
 
BushBlade said:
But you can't force him to be committed. The only case I can ever think off where a player gave his all despite being refused a move was Gareth Barry at Villa, who got his move the season after, in the way you've suggested.
If he doesn't want to play for us, the best we can do is maximise our fee for him. No-one wants to see him playing for us and just going through the motions.
Click to expand...

Again, I do understand how you view this BB, but there must now be a middle ground, in which employee and employer recognise what is legally binding and which respects both parties. The issues here aren't just about a specific player, it's reaches beyond this case and sends out ripples to every other player employed by SUFC. If a player sees that we are firm yet fair in our contractual dealings then it may well serve us well in future cases if a player feels he wants to leave when it suits him.

We had time on our side, Murphy agreed to this when he signed, so we were in a position where we could tell the player that we expect one more season and should that prove unsuccessful for the club then the player would leave with our blessing. It's the lax manner in which players and their agents have been allowed to beat clubs up that I disagree with, plus the fact that agreements are entered into by both player and club with exactly the same awareness of what's involved.

Should it matter that a player says he's unhappy? Especially when it wasn't that long ago that he entered into an extended agreement? Of course a club must be receptive to what a player wants or has concerns about, but that works both ways. It's called mutuality, and we were in an ideal position to enforce this agreement. I suppose it all depends on whether the club wish to play hardball, but it would send a clear signal to our other employees that they should think twice before considering submitting a transfer request.
 
robbiez666 said:
I think he's desperate to get into the Scotland squad. I can't see any benefit in keeping an unhappy player here. He's definitely given everything for us and deserves to forward his career.
Click to expand...

Scotland !, the Accrington Stanley of international football.
 
WalthamstowBlade said:
...two years after our "Game changing investment" we're getting stripped of players by fucking Brighton.

I'm off to get pissed.
Click to expand...

Serves us right after all that pre-emptive fucking gloating after Adkins came in.

If there' one thing I really hate it's gloating before anything has actually been achieved. Football is rife with it. (see also those recently bumped thread from before Evans was sent down).
 
BushBlade said:
But you can't force him to be committed. The only case I can ever think off where a player gave his all despite being refused a move was Gareth Barry at Villa
Click to expand...

Ever? Are you serious? I've followed football for over fifty years and there have been countless examples in that time of players in this situation who have been told to get on with it and have done just that.
 
WalthamstowBlade said:
...two years after our "Game changing investment" we're getting stripped of players by fucking Brighton.

I'm off to get pissed.
Click to expand...

Its whoever has the money to pay what SUFC want for the players going rate .In this case its brighton .

Also it depends how much they are paying cash up front . If SUFC have been astute for once , it could be the majority of the transfer fee , and only a small amount on a agreed repayment period. Having cash in hand gives you more pulling power , when trying to sign players.

Short term may be not good , but long term it will pay dividends . Adkins remit now is to build a squad to gain promotion. We have to go with his judgement , whoever he sells ( if it is him selling and not the board ) .

It just opens up more cash for good recrutment , for areas most in need . At least he had the sense to buy before we sold ( aquisition of Billy )

UTB
 
itsinyerblood said:
Again, I do understand how you view this BB, but there must now be a middle ground, in which employee and employer recognise what is legally binding and which respects both parties. The issues here aren't just about a specific player, it's reaches beyond this case and sends out ripples to every other player employed by SUFC. If a player sees that we are firm yet fair in our contractual dealings then it may well serve us well in future cases if a player feels he wants to leave when it suits him.

We had time on our side, Murphy agreed to this when he signed, so we were in a position where we could tell the player that we expect one more season and should that prove unsuccessful for the club then the player would leave with our blessing. It's the lax manner in which players and their agents have been allowed to beat clubs up that I disagree with, plus the fact that agreements are entered into by both player and club with exactly the same awareness of what's involved.

Should it matter that a player says he's unhappy? Especially when it wasn't that long ago that he entered into an extended agreement? Of course a club must be receptive to what a player wants or has concerns about, but that works both ways. It's called mutuality, and we were in an ideal position to enforce this agreement. I suppose it all depends on whether the club wish to play hardball, but it would send a clear signal to our other employees that they should think twice before considering submitting a transfer request.
Click to expand...
And it also sends a message to young players considering joining us. That we'll hold back their careers.
Players rarely submit requests in the modern game, they just agitate for a move because if they submit a written request they lose out on part of their signing on fee (which is usually paid in installments over the term of the contract).
If he's done that then he's serious and asking him to play nicely probably won't work.
Jim has made it clear in his statement that they tried hard to keep him.
 
SwissBlade said:
He's only been unhappy since Clough went
Click to expand...

Your spot on, a player doesn't sign a new contract then want to leave 6 months later. We had interest in Murphy last January but he still signed, it wasn't as though we were guaranteed promotion back in February so what's changed? Why not request a transfer in May when we knew which division we'd be playing in.
 
Shalalalafenoughty said:
Ever? Are you serious? I've followed football for over fifty years and there have been countless examples in that time of players in this situation who have been told to get on with it and have done just that.
Click to expand...
Post-Bosman?
 



Shalalalafenoughty said:
...and our response to getting hammered by the mighty Gillingham is, prior to the next game, selling our best player.
Click to expand...

You weren't at Gillingham were you? I'd have taken £20 after that performance. Didn't seem interested, no commitment or any showing he wanted to be there. We now know why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
I had a chat with Gemini and we're not making the playoffs.
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
tyke1889
tyke1889
Maurice Maurice
Nowt to do with Flu
Replies
20
Views
2K
Bobby b
Bobby b
jono_t2000
Just can't get enthused
4 5 6
Replies
161
Views
9K
Dkc
Dkc
Champagneblade
Simply enjoying the matches
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
jt64
jt64
M
Professional athletes
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
LBA_Blade
LBA_Blade

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom