Sons' sorrow

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

I agree with Mr X this type of signing should be stamped out of our game. Clubs are entitled to compensation and if we are going to encourage clubs to grow their own youngsters then this must be adhered to by all clubs. SFA should take action against clubs that break this rule imo and that includes my own club.

Dumbarton don't appear to have broken the rules but that doesn't mean it was morally correct (anyone who thinks lawful = moral is a tad simple).

I don't think it's unreasonable that a club that has nurtured a players' talent should be due money for doing so. If it weren't for such a rule then bigger clubs would be able to poach young players from wee teams even more so than they currently do. The whole idea of signing someone on an amateur contract (and often paying them ridiculous expenses to make up for it) to get around this makes a mockery of the rule and sets a dangerous precedent.

Annan have nurtured no one here. He suckled from the breast of Carlisle and pretty much walked straight into Annan's first team when they signed him.

[Kitty_Boy]

Interesting stuff from yer man in the Reporter.

SPFL Rules:

F13 - If, in the opinion of the Board, a Contract of Service has been agreed or amended with the purpose or effect, in whole or in part, of avoiding or evading the payment of Compensation in accordance with the intent of the provisions of these Rules, the Board shall require the Club concerned to pay to the Club entitled to Compensation
the amount of Compensation which a Compensation Tribunal considers ought to be paid.

Main issue: does the above rule apply in this circumstance and have Dumbarton broken it?

Secondary issues are: a) should compensation really be payable in these circumstances (and there is an issue about restricting a players movement - this has occurred at Ayr with a number of players) and;

b) should clubs be allowed to sign players as amateurs to avoid compensation payable under the current rules.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

I just hope this lad Todd turns out to be worth all these column inches.....

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

I just hope this lad Todd turns out to be worth all these column inches.....

My thoughts exactly.

[RandomGuy.]

6 hours ago, itzdrk said:

I struggle to be comfortable with the rule on the basis in this instance that Annan actually signed him one summer from another teams academy, played him and then offered him a new deal the next. Considering it is 'training compensation' then (IMO) that isn't really what the rule is intended for (the purpose of it is recompense for developing your own players.  Not signing players who didn't make it at a bigger clubs ones and then trying to chain them until they are 23.)

The wording is wrong if it allows for that. Annan should not be able to cash in on work done by Carlisle United as if it were their own. 

This, he spent his entire childhood being trained by Carlisle, before leaving for nothing at the age of 20 to join Annan where he played for two season. He then decided he wasn't going to improve anymore at such a low level so asked them to leave, they put a ridiculous price tag on his head and then offered a contract simply so they could an unrealistic compensation figure nobody can pay, either forcing him onto the scrapheap, or forcing him back to their club. As it is he's now ended up with a contract which means he won't get a wage and can't for 30 months. No idea why folk are seeing Annan as some poor sod who'd been really hard done by as they clearly don't give a f**k about the player.

Situations like this are why the whole "training compensation" needs a rehaul. 

[cameron2000]

Interesting stuff from yer man in the Reporter.

SPFL Rules:

F13 - If, in the opinion of the Board, a Contract of Service has been agreed or amended with the purpose or effect, in whole or in part, of avoiding or evading the payment of Compensation in accordance with the intent of the provisions of these Rules, the Board shall require the Club concerned to pay to the Club entitled to Compensation

the amount of Compensation which a Compensation Tribunal considers ought to be paid.

Main issue: does the above rule apply in this circumstance and have Dumbarton broken it?

Secondary issues are: a) should compensation really be payable in these circumstances (and there is an issue about restricting a players movement - this has occurred at Ayr with a number of players) and;

b) should clubs be allowed to sign players as amateurs to avoid compensation payable under the current rules.

That doesn't sound as simple for us as I thought it would. Tbh it sounds like we are on the borderline of breaking that rule. If Annan were to win the right to compensation then could we just cancel his deal to avoid paying the money even though he's came on as a sub in 1 game? It's slightly unfair Imo that this has happened to us because when its the other way around our board are very easy to deal with.

[Skyline Drifter]

25 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

This, he spent his entire childhood being trained by Carlisle, before leaving for nothing.

1 - No he didnt. He started in the QoS Club Academy setup before moving to Carlisle when he was 15 or something.

2 - How do you know he left for nothing? It has already been suggested that Carlisle retained the right to percentages of future fees. If so thats not the same as being released.

[RandomGuy.]

Just now, Skyline Drifter said:

1 - No he didnt. He started in the QoS Club Academy setup before moving to Carlisle when he was 15 or something.

2 - How do you know he left for nothing? It has already been suggested that Carlisle retained the right to percentages of future fees. If so thats not the same as being released.

Did Carlisle pay you anything? Did Annan pay Carlisle five years of training compensation?

Carlisle get a percentage of any fee paid for him (I think until hes 24, although it might be the full career) based purely on the fact he was trained there. Imagine you'll also get a percentage, and I imagine Annan do too.

[Skyline Drifter]

I know what the rules are. Carlisle unfortunately were not required to pay us anything. You cant demand a fee for a youth out of registration.

Carlisle may have allowed him to move on to develop his career whilst retaining rights to future percentages. Its not the same as releasing him. You are presuming their only rights are those they have in law under the rules. What's being suggested is different, that they allowed him to move on for no fee at the time whilst contracting for a share of future fees. That's reasonably common and we've done it ourselves with young players who have wanted to move on whilst we'd have preferred to keep them.

Edited July 19, 2016 by Skyline Drifter

[Jan Vojáček]

The thing is if we get stung for him, and therefore have to cancel the deal, then all it's going to do is leave him out of the game for a season - because there's no chance he's going back to Annan after this. Quite how anyone can think that's a fair outcome is beyond me.

[Homer Thompson]

1 hour ago, Kitty_Boy said:

Interesting stuff from yer man in the Reporter.

SPFL Rules:

F13 - If, in the opinion of the Board, a Contract of Service has been agreed or amended with the purpose or effect, in whole or in part, of avoiding or evading the payment of Compensation in accordance with the intent of the provisions of these Rules, the Board shall require the Club concerned to pay to the Club entitled to Compensation
the amount of Compensation which a Compensation Tribunal considers ought to be paid.

Main issue: does the above rule apply in this circumstance and have Dumbarton broken it?

Secondary issues are: a) should compensation really be payable in these circumstances (and there is an issue about restricting a players movement - this has occurred at Ayr with a number of players) and;

b) should clubs be allowed to sign players as amateurs to avoid compensation payable under the current rules.

 

 

 

a) clearly is a separate argument. For what its worth, I dont think Annan should really be entitled to very much. 

The answer to b) has to be no

56 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

This, he spent his entire childhood being trained by Carlisle, before leaving for nothing at the age of 20 to join Annan where he played for two season. He then decided he wasn't going to improve anymore at such a low level so asked them to leave, they put a ridiculous price tag on his head and then offered a contract simply so they could an unrealistic compensation figure nobody can pay, either forcing him onto the scrapheap, or forcing him back to their club. As it is he's now ended up with a contract which means he won't get a wage and can't for 30 months. No idea why folk are seeing Annan as some poor sod who'd been really hard done by as they clearly don't give a f**k about the player.

Situations like this are why the whole "training compensation" needs a rehaul. 

This simply isnt true though. Annan clearly have a figure in mind but its not up to them to dictate the compensation figure. If the figure they have is so unrealistic then Dumbarton, or any other club, could take it to a tribunal.

20 minutes ago, Sonsteam of 08 said:

The thing is if we get stung for him, and therefore have to cancel the deal, then all it's going to do is leave him out of the game for a season - because there's no chance he's going back to Annan after this. Quite how anyone can think that's a fair outcome is beyond me.

He is the one whos put himself into this situation though. The current arrangement isnt "fair" on Annan who've done nothing wrong

[Jan Vojáček]

Just now, Mr X said:

He is the one whos put himself into this situation though. The current arrangement isnt "fair" on Annan who've done nothing wrong

Partially true in that he could conceivably have stayed on at a level that was beneath him for a year and waited it out, but if he's looking to progress his career then spending a less successful year there/getting injured could see him drop off the radar of the bigger clubs.

It isn't fair on Annan, no. But then what would be more fair? Forcing him to stay at a club he didn't want to be at/take a year out of football which is his main career, or they don't get however much they want for a player who didn't even come through their youth system?

The thing is we can't afford to pay a single penny in compensation for him, so if they take it to a tribunal we'll have to cancel his registration and free him.

Personally I think the way round this is by only giving compensation for players who have came through the club's youth team (eg they have to have been at the club for 2 years prior to their 18th birthday for example) That way the club have clearly spent money developing a player.

[The Moonster]

I get the feeling our media loving manager's comments along with the agent's comments could come back and bite us on the arse, if the above rule is as clear as that. Both have publicly stated that we've done this as we couldn't afford compensation.

[Homer Thompson]

6 minutes ago, Sonsteam of 08 said:

Partially true in that he could conceivably have stayed on at a level that was beneath him for a year and waited it out, but if he's looking to progress his career then spending a less successful year there/getting injured could see him drop off the radar of the bigger clubs.

It isn't fair on Annan, no. But then what would be more fair? Forcing him to stay at a club he didn't want to be at/take a year out of football which is his main career, or they don't get however much they want for a player who didn't even come through their youth system?

The thing is we can't afford to pay a single penny in compensation for him, so if they take it to a tribunal we'll have to cancel his registration and free him.

Personally I think the way round this is by only giving compensation for players who have came through the club's youth team (eg they have to have been at the club for 2 years prior to their 18th birthday for example) That way the club have clearly spent money developing a player.

Dont get me wrong, Im not defending the current system, however, it is what it is. 

Todd would have known when he signed for Annan that this was a likely scenario and that he might have to stay with them for another year if no-one came in and paid compensation for him.

[Sweet Pete]

FREE THE ANNAN ONE!!

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

Dumbarton FC - victims of the system

[Skyline Drifter]

19 minutes ago, Sonsteam of 08 said:

The thing is we can't afford to pay a single penny in compensation for him, so if they take it to a tribunal we'll have to cancel his registration and free him.

Personally I think the way round this is by only giving compensation for players who have came through the club's youth team (eg they have to have been at the club for 2 years prior to their 18th birthday for example) That way the club have clearly spent money developing a player.

I don't think cancelling his registration will achieve anything. If it gets as far as a tribunal and you lose then you'll have to pay up anyway. Freeing him after the event will achieve nothing. The tribunal isn't going to say "right we judge you should have paid £xx to register him but if you release him now we'll say no more about it". He has already been registered and played competitively for you.

The idea that a player's "development" stops when he turns 18 is equally silly though. At the end of the day, the top minds in football spent years coming up with the rules in their present form, which is that development applies between the ages of 12 and 21 and can be claimed for up to the age of 23. Annan clearly have spent money developing Todd, albeit only for one full season since he was too old for the second one. I actually think it's unlikely a tribunal would value him particularly highly to be honest, given a year of part time football (and possibly the half season before that, though he was only on loan to Annan at that stage).

Edited July 19, 2016 by Skyline Drifter

[Sweet Pete]

As Scotland's original champions (2 in a row!) and an established "big team" (Victorian era ftw) I fully anticipate and expect that the SPFL board will rule in Sons' favour. These southern upstarts need to learn their place. Come back when you've won the top flight and the Scottish Cup. That applies to Queen of the South as well.

[Jan Vojáček]

I don't think cancelling his registration will achieve anything. If it gets as far as a tribunal and you lose then you'll have to pay up anyway. Freeing him after the event will achieve nothing. The tribunal isn't going to say "right we judge you should have paid £xx to register him but if you release him now we'll say no more about it".

The idea that a player's "development" stops when he turns 18 is equally silly though. At the end of the day, the top minds in football spent years coming up with the rules in their present form, which is that development applies between the ages of 12 and 21 and can be claimed for up to the age of 23. Annan clearly have spent money developing Todd, albeit only for one full season since he was too old for the second one. I actually think it's unlikely a tribunal would value him particularly highly to be honest, given a year of part time football (and possibly the half season before that, though he was only on loan to Annan at that stage).

Of course the development of a player doesn't stop at 18, Jim Lister developed more as a player with us when he was 31 than at any other club where he'd been an average jobber.

Here's the thing, and I genuinely have no idea what would happen here, but what if thw tribunal values him at (just a complete guess) 5k, and we can't pay that? Certainly not in one whack for a player we're almost certainly going to lose next season for free.

Where does that leave him? Registered to us but unable to play?

[Sweet Pete]

There's always the chance that a tribunal could rate him much higher. It happened when some faceless jobber left Falkirk for some English lower league non-entity. The English side ended up having to pay something like £125k.

Seems to me, that the already piss thin Sons squad will need another new striker...