Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Post Reply
CnBtruntru
Posts: 4135
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:39 pm
Been Liked: 694 times
Has Liked: 602 times
Location: Wexford, Ireland. via Nelson.

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by CnBtruntru » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:12 pm

IndigoLake wrote:I actually had a dream last night that we signed Mahrez. So whatever happens on transfer deadline day, I'll just be disappointed because nothing will compare to that :lol:

Well he is on his way back from the African Nations Cup thingy, so you never know. :D
This user liked this post: IndigoLake

Reecey1987
Posts: 2065
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:21 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 97 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Reecey1987 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:13 pm

Did nobody get a screen shot of the picture ?

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by KRBFC » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:14 pm

I like the way Brady has handled himself in all of this, unlike Snodgrass who threw his toys out of the pram as soon as the window opened.

minnieclaret
Posts: 6842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
Been Liked: 2012 times
Has Liked: 2287 times
Location: lismore co. waterford

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by minnieclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:16 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:As far as I'm aware Brady hasn't even put in a transfer request. I would be putting intense pressure on his agent to make him do so. If Norwich still won't budge then like others have suggested he needs to say he's not playing as is the way these days.

At the moment it's just faffing about
I wouldn't want to sign any player who has refused to play for his lawful employer. F-+K that sh1t.
You can't play football not to get hurt. You get stuck in and if the worst happens live with it.

Pearcey
Posts: 3376
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:59 pm
Been Liked: 1140 times
Has Liked: 1439 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Pearcey » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:18 pm

minnieclaret wrote:I wouldn't want to sign any player who has refused to play for his lawful employer. F-+K that sh1t.
You can't play football not to get hurt. You get stuck in and if the worst happens live with it.
Tarks?

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Tall Paul » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:19 pm

minnieclaret wrote:I wouldn't want to sign any player who has refused to play for his lawful employer. F-+K that sh1t.
You can't play football not to get hurt. You get stuck in and if the worst happens live with it.
Tarkowski though.

minnieclaret
Posts: 6842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
Been Liked: 2012 times
Has Liked: 2287 times
Location: lismore co. waterford

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by minnieclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:20 pm

Tall Paul wrote:Tarkowski though.
Love the guy but he was wrong.

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by KRBFC » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:21 pm

Tarkowski was personal reasons though, family issues.
Not just football/financially motivated
These 2 users liked this post: Silkyskills1 minnieclaret

Goobs
Posts: 4386
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:43 am
Been Liked: 1459 times
Has Liked: 992 times
Location: Burnley

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Goobs » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:28 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:"don't know if this is correct or not but the Van Arnholt to Palace thing suddenly gathered pace once the player put a transfer request in.......sort it out Robbie"


Again, too many people are assuming Brady will be in some kind of hurry to leave Norwich.

Why would he be?
Premier league football?
Increased wages?
Closer to home?

Could all be factors but I see what you are saying. Unless he was seriously unhappy at Norwich then he is unlikely to want to push this too much in case it all falls through ala Peter Odemwingie (sp?)

fidelcastro
Posts: 7236
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
Been Liked: 2195 times
Has Liked: 2179 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by fidelcastro » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:30 pm

Goobs wrote:Premier league football?
Increased wages?
Closer to home?

Could all be factors but I see what you are saying. Unless he was seriously unhappy at Norwich then he is unlikely to want to push this too much in case it all falls through ala Peter Odemwingie (sp?)
But I thought we couldn't afford his wages?

:? ;)
Last edited by fidelcastro on Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: Goobs

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Vegas Claret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:31 pm

minnieclaret wrote:I wouldn't want to sign any player who has refused to play for his lawful employer. F-+K that sh1t.
You can't play football not to get hurt. You get stuck in and if the worst happens live with it.
Yeah but the issue with that is if YOU are under contract in YOUR job and a better offer comes along you can leave (notice or no notice), just because he's a footballer the employment laws don't differ. We've seen a million times that contracts aren't worth jack jones.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Tall Paul » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:35 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:Yeah but the issue with that is if YOU are under contract in YOUR job and a better offer comes along you can leave (notice or no notice), just because he's a footballer the employment laws don't differ. We've seen a million times that contracts aren't worth jack jones.
That's because most employment contracts are 1 month rolling contracts, hence the month's notice to leave.

Footballers contracts are fixed terms for a number of years, they can't just walk out of them when they feel like it.

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by taio » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:42 pm

Footballer employment contracts are entirely different

Silkyskills1
Posts: 5841
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 6:39 pm
Been Liked: 1678 times
Has Liked: 2513 times
Location: Rawtenstall

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Silkyskills1 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:46 pm

KRBFC wrote:Tarkowski was personal reasons though, family issues.
Not just football/financially motivated
Can't see how that is any different to other players that have ' downed tools' but I hasten to add I could,of course, be mistaken.

KefkaClaret
Posts: 1499
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 8:47 pm
Been Liked: 468 times
Has Liked: 190 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by KefkaClaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:56 pm

Isn't Tarkowski's mum very ill?

northeastclaret
Posts: 857
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:32 pm
Been Liked: 307 times
Has Liked: 195 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by northeastclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 4:56 pm

We need to move on to other targets and stop wasting our time on unrealistic players. Yes we can afford £10 m for Snodgrass but the wages he is alleged to be getting are probably twice or even more what we could pay. Brady's agent will know this and because the fee for Brady is more than Snodgrass will raise Brady's wage expectations.

Boden was smug suggesting that it was tactical that we bid for Snodgrass to help force Norwich's hand, its him and Burnley that are starting to look the mugs now.

minnieclaret
Posts: 6842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
Been Liked: 2012 times
Has Liked: 2287 times
Location: lismore co. waterford

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by minnieclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:01 pm

KRBFC wrote:Tarkowski was personal reasons though, family issues.
Not just football/financially motivated
Totally understand his personal situation and skipping training, etc., I have no problem with but if called upon he should have played.

LawsCanalJump
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:59 pm
Been Liked: 119 times
Has Liked: 62 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by LawsCanalJump » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:07 pm

Hopefully we get some deals over the line
If there is any time to invest, it is now!
UTC

Royboyclaret
Posts: 3865
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 1273 times
Has Liked: 680 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Royboyclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:08 pm

"Premier league football?
Increased wages?
Closer to home?

Could all be factors but I see what you are saying. Unless he was seriously unhappy at Norwich then he is unlikely to want to push this too much in case it all falls through ala Peter Odemwingie (sp?)"


Based on the latest financial information available for the two clubs, I'd say it's highly unlikely Brady would be coming here for a higher weekly wage than he's currently earning. That said (as with all our other players) he'd be amply rewarded for avoiding relegation this season.

The latest information shows respective wage bills for the '14/'15 season to be Burnley £29.4m in the PL and Norwich £48.5m in the Championship.

Colburn_Claret
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 3060 times
Has Liked: 5023 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Colburn_Claret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:45 pm

Thank God for parachute payments

LawsCanalJump
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:59 pm
Been Liked: 119 times
Has Liked: 62 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by LawsCanalJump » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:46 pm

Maybe we are waiting to parade the 4 signings around the pitch on Tuesday night

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Spijed » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:48 pm

LawsCanalJump wrote:Maybe we are waiting to parade the 4 signings around the pitch on Tuesday night

A bit like the Swanky Pants Dog Troupe you mean?
These 2 users liked this post: kaptin1 longsidepies

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Vegas Claret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Tall Paul wrote:That's because most employment contracts are 1 month rolling contracts, hence the month's notice to leave.

Footballers contracts are fixed terms for a number of years, they can't just walk out of them when they feel like it.
I have a family member who has the TOP job of business Lawyer at one of the biggest companies in the UK and deals with contracts far more complicated and binding than those of a footballer. He reckons any half competent lawyer could get a footballer out of a contract in no time.

I'll go with the opinion of the person doing the job if that's ok :lol:

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by taio » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:49 pm

Rubbish

kentonclaret
Posts: 6437
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
Been Liked: 969 times
Has Liked: 204 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by kentonclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:51 pm

Sean needs to make sure that he has his mobile fully charged and switched on Tuesday night.


Could the crowd keep the noise down if it rings please. ;)
This user liked this post: IndigoLake

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Rowls » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:52 pm

Can somebody -anybody- confirm whether the speculation on this thread is confirmed speculation or whether it is speculation which has been confirmed?

Thanks in advance

Rowls x

claretspice
Posts: 5660
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 2801 times
Has Liked: 138 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by claretspice » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:55 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:I have a family member who has the TOP job of business Lawyer at one of the biggest companies in the UK and deals with contracts far more complicated and binding than those of a footballer. He reckons any half competent lawyer could get a footballer out of a contract in no time.

I'll go with the opinion of the person doing the job if that's ok :lol:
Its a matter which has been litigated on various occasions, at great cost, so its clearly not that straightforward.

Apart from the fact it is a fixed term contract, which does complicate the matter somewhat, if a player wanted to hand in their notice and go and become a plumber, they might be able to do so. However, if they want to join another football club they need their current club to transfer the right to their registration. That is what a transfer fee is all about - the value placed on the right of one club to hold a player's registration. That principle has been eroded over a century - from the abolition of the old retain and transfer system, through Bosman and then the Webster case - but it is still the fundamental reason why footballers cannot do what the rest of us do.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Vegas Claret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:55 pm

taio wrote:Rubbish
so 30 years experience at the top end of international business law dealing with the worlds largest companies is rubbish, I'll be glad to pass on your opinion and tell him he's been doing it wrong :?

On a side note, I don't think they should be able to get out of contracts etc, but I wish Brady would stick in a transfer request

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by taio » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:58 pm

Ask your family member why transfer fees are not extinct. He's obviously absolutely clueless when it comes to football contracts.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Tall Paul » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:58 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:I have a family member who has the TOP job of business Lawyer at one of the biggest companies in the UK and deals with contracts far more complicated and binding than those of a footballer. He reckons any half competent lawyer could get a footballer out of a contract in no time.

I'll go with the opinion of the person doing the job if that's ok :lol:
Why don't they then?

I'm sure Payet could afford a half decent lawyer to get him out of his West Ham contract, for example, why hasn't he?
Last edited by Tall Paul on Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.

kaptin1
Posts: 1600
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
Been Liked: 460 times
Has Liked: 109 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by kaptin1 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 5:58 pm

Rowls wrote:Can somebody -anybody- confirm whether the speculation on this thread is confirmed speculation or whether it is speculation which has been confirmed?

Thanks in advance

Rowls x
I'll speculate that no-one can confirm whether it is 'confirmed speculation' or 'speculation that has been confirmed' until someone confirms otherwise.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Vegas Claret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:04 pm

Tall Paul wrote:Why don't they then?

I'm sure Payet could afford a half decent lawyer to get him out of his West Ham contract, for example, why hasn't he?
Because 99.99999% of the time these things sort themselves out like Marseille and WHU virtually agreeing a price now. Maybe the cost involved and timescales involved would be well beyond that of a transfer window ? I don't know. I can only give the opinion that I learned from someone who has far greater knowledge on the subject than I would imagine any of us on here have.

It's like the contracts that certain folk have that say "if you leave our company you can't work for a competitor or within a certain radius for 6 months" - not worth anything, it was in a contract I had when I was in the UK and it didn't make a scrap of difference to me, my new employer or my old one.

kaptin1
Posts: 1600
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
Been Liked: 460 times
Has Liked: 109 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by kaptin1 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:04 pm

LawsCanalJump wrote:Maybe we are waiting to parade the 4 signings around the pitch on Tuesday night
Lee Howey, Steve Blatherwick, Mark Winstanley and Michael Williams?
This user liked this post: boatshed bill

Redbeard
Posts: 2869
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:12 am
Been Liked: 1438 times
Has Liked: 2457 times
Location: Aboard ship somewhere on the Med.

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Redbeard » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:05 pm

So can someone confirm when someone has confirmed whether the speculation is confirmed or has in fact been confirmed?

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by taio » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:07 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:Because 99.99999% of the time these things sort themselves out like Marseille and WHU virtually agreeing a price now. Maybe the cost involved and timescales involved would be well beyond that of a transfer window ? I don't know. I can only give the opinion that I learned from someone who has far greater knowledge on the subject than I would imagine any of us on here have.

It's like the contracts that certain folk have that say "if you leave our company you can't work for a competitor or within a certain radius for 6 months" - not worth anything, it was in a contract I had when I was in the UK and it didn't make a scrap of difference to me, my new employer or my old one.
If contracts were as easily exited as you suggest there'd be no such thing as transfer windows never mind fees. Your pal has told you a pile of horseshit

kaptin1
Posts: 1600
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
Been Liked: 460 times
Has Liked: 109 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by kaptin1 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:09 pm

99.9999% means nothing in football where everyone else is giving 110%

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Tall Paul » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:09 pm

They're clearly not as easy to get out of as suggested earlier if the costs and time involved would be well beyond a transfer window.

It'd only take one footballer to win such a case and then they'd all be able to rip up their contracts.
Last edited by Tall Paul on Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:10 pm

The reason they dont want to cancel the contract is they have the remainder of the contract paid to them.
So Snodgrass had 18 months left on his contract. If he was on 30 k a week , Hull have to pay him 2.3 million, now they wont pay that much they will come to a settlement. I have no idea how much it will be. He is then likely to get a signing on fee and wages of maybe 50k at WH.
So players make plenty of money out of a move.
If they put in a transfer request that means the club dont have to pay the remaining contract, I would not be giving that size of money away.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Tall Paul » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:14 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:The reason they dont want to cancel the contract is they have the remainder of the contract paid to them.
So Snodgrass had 18 months left on his contract. If he was on 30 k a week , Hull have to pay him 2.3 million, now they wont pay that much they will come to a settlement. I have no idea how much it will be. He is then likely to get a signing on fee and wages of maybe 50k at WH.
So players make plenty of money out of a move.
If they put in a transfer request that means the club dont have to pay the remaining contract, I would not be giving that size of money away.
I'm not convinced that's right either.

Why would clubs in financial difficulties try and offload players if it means they have to pay up their contracts?

JamesSherbourne
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:49 pm
Been Liked: 300 times
Has Liked: 96 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by JamesSherbourne » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:22 pm

I must have opened this thread 500 times today hoping for positive news on Brady. I hate January, let's face it, non of us have a clue, I've even started using twitter just to keep tabs on the random Irish journalist who apparently knows everything. I'm 39 this year and should really get a non football related hobby :roll:
God I hope it happens though
These 3 users liked this post: FactualFrank Carnsmerry12 Anonymous

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:25 pm

I have spoken to several pro footballers who have confirmed to me thats exactly what happens.

Leeds got into finantial trouble when they sold players and could not afford to pay them out so continued to pay the wages to them.

randomclaret2
Posts: 6880
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
Been Liked: 2742 times
Has Liked: 4314 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by randomclaret2 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:25 pm

If the last few years have taught us anything, it's that 'top' lawyers, 'top' bankers, 'top' economists, 'top' political pundits get things hideously wrong , just like the rest of us.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Tall Paul » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:29 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I have spoken to several pro footballers who have confirmed to me thats exactly what happens.

Leeds got into finantial trouble when they sold players and could not afford to pay them out so continued to pay the wages to them.
Fair enough, doesn't really make sense to me though. Are you sure Leeds weren't just topping up their wages if their new clubs were paying less? That would make more sense.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Paul Waine » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:41 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:Because 99.99999% of the time these things sort themselves out like Marseille and WHU virtually agreeing a price now. Maybe the cost involved and timescales involved would be well beyond that of a transfer window ? I don't know. I can only give the opinion that I learned from someone who has far greater knowledge on the subject than I would imagine any of us on here have.

It's like the contracts that certain folk have that say "if you leave our company you can't work for a competitor or within a certain radius for 6 months" - not worth anything, it was in a contract I had when I was in the UK and it didn't make a scrap of difference to me, my new employer or my old one.
Hi Vegas, just to distract from this transfer window hiatus...

I worked in the London office of a US company some years back. I moved from them to a competitor. I negotiated shortening of my 3 months notice period with the first company so that I could join the second company earlier (they wanted me there earlier).

At the same time a colleague in the US moved from the same company I was with and joined the same new company. BUT, he didn't sort out his departure terms with the first company. The first company sued both the second company and the individual - it was settled by my colleague going on "garden leave" for the period of "non-compete." Yes, US employment law is different to English employment law. As you will know the US companies were both "lawyered up" and ready to meet in court. I learnt about it all because my new employer put me also through a thorough review of all my documentation and paper work. Everyone was happy that I'd done things correctly.

Early last year I left my then employer - again US company in their London office. My non-compete was 6 months. After leaving and setting up my own consulting business I was approached by a major competitor of the first company. In this case their lawyers reviewed my previous employment contract and said I couldn't do anything with them until the 6 months period was complete (which it is now).

I'm sure your UK legal "TOP lawyer" could get a footballer out of his contract - but at what price? Would the footballer be able to transfer his playing rights to a new club? How much would he need to pay his club to terminate his contract? Would he ever get a job in football again?

willsclarets
Posts: 1927
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 10:06 am
Been Liked: 680 times
Has Liked: 133 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by willsclarets » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:41 pm

That simply cannot be true, there's no way a club has to pay up remainder of contract as they sell. There must be a clause that says if you choose to sign for a new club, you forgo wages due on the rest of your contract.
It would cost alot of teams money to sell, or at least they'd make very little on player sales.

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Rowls » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:43 pm

Redbeard wrote:So can someone confirm when someone has confirmed whether the speculation is confirmed or has in fact been confirmed?
I'm willing to take this responsibility myself, pending confirmation.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:52 pm

willsclarets wrote:That simply cannot be true, there's no way a club has to pay up remainder of contract as they sell. There must be a clause that says if you choose to sign for a new club, you forgo wages due on the rest of your contract.
It would cost alot of teams money to sell, or at least they'd make very little on player sales.
Thats how it works, believe it or believe it not, its true.

SirAlec
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 11:14 pm
Been Liked: 37 times
Has Liked: 75 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by SirAlec » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:53 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I have spoken to several pro footballers who have confirmed to me thats exactly what happens.

Leeds got into financial trouble when they sold players and could not afford to pay them out so continued to pay the wages to them.
I was always under the impression clubs only have to pay out the remainder of a contract if they are terminating a contract and releasing the player on a free, not for selling. Leeds probably sold a player they were desperate to get off the wage bill and were willing to pay a % of the players wage because the buying club couldn't afford the stupid wages they used to pay.

willsclarets
Posts: 1927
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 10:06 am
Been Liked: 680 times
Has Liked: 133 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by willsclarets » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:55 pm

I'm utterly amazed at that!

PaintYorkClaretnBlue
Posts: 1796
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 3:42 pm
Been Liked: 660 times
Has Liked: 1219 times

Re: Robbie Brady confirmed (speculation)

Post by PaintYorkClaretnBlue » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:56 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I have spoken to several pro footballers who have confirmed to me thats exactly what happens.

Leeds got into finantial trouble when they sold players and could not afford to pay them out so continued to pay the wages to them.
That's nonsense! If the player doesn't particularly want to go but the club does then the club could give him some financial incentive to go but there's no way that a club has to pay up the contract of a player who wants to go. If that was the case what is the point of releasing somebody on a free transfer if you have to pay their wages anyway??

Post Reply