Aaron Lennon to leave

[The Enclosure]

He always gave 100% when selected and wish him all the very best wherever he goes.

[Jakubs Tash]

Not sure about very interesting - possibly quite interesting if it was actually true.
But let’s assume it was true - it would be even more interesting if those players agreed to play in a few pretty meaningless games before they are allowed to sign a contract with a new club in 9 days time and then suffered a serious injury and were then not only unable to sign a new contract with another club but were also left with a contract with Burnley which took them up to the end of July.
Yep that would be very very interesting to see any other player do that for any club who are sat in mid table with little or nothing to play for but more prize money - money which is still not enough to offer that player more than one months contract.

Surely that is the nature of the job, though? The very same players could've been injured playing the last few games in April and May if the season had been regular.

I'm not sure there was much need for a condescending tone to your reply either.

[NewClaret]

This messageboard will soon close then

I meant in specific relation to Aaron. I wasnt being completely unrealistic!

[kaptin1]

Seems wrong to me that players that have been on loan like Glennon aren’t allowed to play. These are exceptional circumstances and with contracts ending at the end of June and players free to leave it would make sense to let clubs draw on their reserves. This would also potentially give some young players experience at a higher level that they might not otherwise have got. Instead, squads will be stretched and that increases the risk of players getting serious injuries, because of the more intense than normal schedule and the fact that they may be under more pressure to play through minor injuries. Surely it’s beneficial all around?

[TVC15]

Surely that is the nature of the job, though? The very same players could've been injured playing the last few games in April and May if the season had been regular.

I'm not sure there was much need for a condescending tone to your reply either.

Yes they could but it’s not April and May now.
It’s 9 days from the end of their contract with Burnley with no acceptable offers on the table to extend their employment. I can’t think of any player who would play if they were in the same position as Burnley players out of contract in a few days time.

Apologies for tone of the reply - I just thought you were having a dig at the players when I don’t think they have done anything wrong

[Jakubclaret]

Not sure about very interesting - possibly quite interesting if it was actually true.
But let’s assume it was true - it would be even more interesting if those players agreed to play in a few pretty meaningless games before they are allowed to sign a contract with a new club in 9 days time and then suffered a serious injury and were then not only unable to sign a new contract with another club but were also left with a contract with Burnley which took them up to the end of July.
Yep that would be very very interesting to see any other player do that for any club who are sat in mid table with little or nothing to play for but more prize money - money which is still not enough to offer that player more than one months contract.

The only way a player will get noticed by any other clubs potentially interested, is by playing maximising the chances to move & also increasing the availability, not playing or even refusing to train will also potentially jeopodise any medical certainly leaving question marks over shortfalls regarding fitness, attributes critical to enable passing a medical. Regarding the likelihood of suffering injury in a few meaningless games the players in question will be aware of this & will greatly mitigate that risk by pulling out of 50/50 & not lunging in too hard, it makes more sense to see the season out, retain the fitness & leave on the best possible terms & potentially get more clubs onboard & competing for the availability when you are not engaged or bound to any contractual obligations.

[IanMcL]

Hope he sticks around until end June and plays his heart out.

If not, best wishes and thanks.

[NickBFC]

Good luck to Aaron, seems a model professional and I hope he gets a season or two of regular football now. Not surprised at the news, and not reading too much into things - we must be confident in signing a replacement as we certainly cannot rely on the fitness of JBG next season. I'd like to see us bring the average age of the squad down, and letting the likes of Lennon and Hart leave helps with that. We must look to the future, and a sustainable one at that.

[TVC15]

The only way a player will get noticed by any other clubs potentially interested, is by playing maximising the chances to move & also increasing the availability, not playing or even refusing to train will also potentially jeopodise any medical certainly leaving question marks over shortfalls regarding fitness, attributes critical to enable passing a medical. Regarding the likelihood of suffering injury in a few meaningless games the players in question will be aware of this & will greatly mitigate that risk by pulling out of 50/50 & not lunging in too hard, it makes more sense to see the season out, retain the fitness & leave on the best possible terms & potentially get more clubs onboard & competing for the availability when you are not engaged or bound to any contractual obligations.

You are making a number of assumptions. Who says they are refusing to play ?
Your original point seemed to suggest that our players who had been paid by the club as per their contract like the rest of the team were wrong to now to refuse to play - even though there is no indication of that and we know these players are not being offered a short term contract beyond the end of June.

Personally my view is that our manager does not think they can be selected under these circumstances as he has the other 6 games to think of and next season to prepare for too. Only possible exception could be putting Hart on the bench for a the next couple of games.

As I said I cannot see any evidence of any of our players doing anything wrong - other than Gibson and he is in contract.

[Jakubclaret]

You are making a number of assumptions. Who says they are refusing to play ?
Your original point seemed to suggest that our players who had been paid by the club as per their contract like the rest of the team were wrong to now to refuse to play - even though there is no indication of that and we know these players are not being offered a short term contract beyond the end of June.

Personally my view is that our manager does not think they can be selected under these circumstances as he has the other 6 games to think of and next season to prepare for too. Only possible exception could be putting Hart on the bench for a the next couple of games.

As I said I cannot see any evidence of any of our players doing anything wrong - other than Gibson and he is in contract.

Gibson was completely different he was a contingency for mees departure which looked likely at 1 point but he ended up staying & BG couldn't displace, that 1 as been done to death on the dedicated thread when he decided to go back up to the north east. The players who aren't extending or not being giving the opportunity to probably don't feature long term anywhere so in some ways as it is now its just prolonging the inevitable, it appears to be we'll see where we are at the end of the season, the squads stale & needs freshening up in the next campaign could be a factor in addition. The assumption was that if there did abort the contractual obligations it'd be a serious breach although there's no suggestion, evidence or likely intention that's the plan, SD wants some players contracts sorted out & MG at this juncture is undecided & unsure what to do at this point.

[TVC15]

Gibson was completely different he was a contingency for mees departure which looked likely at 1 point but he ended up staying & BG couldn't displace, that 1 as been done to death on the dedicated thread when he decided to go back up to the north east. The players who aren't extending or not being giving the opportunity to probably don't feature long term anywhere so in some ways as it is now its just prolonging the inevitable, it appears to be we'll see where we are at the end of the season, the squads stale & needs freshening up in the next campaign could be a factor in addition. The assumption was that if there did abort the contractual obligations it'd be a serious breach although there's no suggestion, evidence or likely intention that's the plan, SD wants some players contracts sorted out & MG at this juncture is undecided & unsure what to do at this point.

I’m not debating whether Gibson was a good signing or not here - as it happens I thought it was.
I am saying that he appears to be the only player in the current squad who has acted in a way he probably should not have done (based on our limited or one sided knowledge of what has happened).
The point I am making is that the players currently coming to the end of their contract in a few days do not appear to have done anything wrong and there is no evidence that they are refusing to play before they leave at the end of June - and even if there was I could understand why they would not.

[claret59]

Jesus wept
Jesus be praised. Christian lives matter.

[Jakubclaret]

I’m not debating whether Gibson was a good signing or not here - as it happens I thought it was.
I am saying that he appears to be the only player in the current squad who has acted in a way he probably should not have done (based on our limited or one sided knowledge of what has happened).
The point I am making is that the players currently coming to the end of their contract in a few days do not appear to have done anything wrong and there is no evidence that they are refusing to play before they leave at the end of June - and even if there was I could understand why they would not.

I'm in danger of digressing here onto Gibson but we don't know the circumstances but in fairness you have acknowledged that we aren't fully aware, I think we can agree it was odd setup, no the players haven't done anything wrong but it is what it is, & I think in due course the situation will become clearer as time progresses, all the contracts should have gone into hibernation mode whilst we was in lockdown & it would have automatically allowed any extensions to naturally follow.

[SouthLondonexile]

I would have preferred for him to remain until this season has concluded. I have no problem with him as person, I just remember his delight on the touchline when Vydra scored that fantastic goal - his first of the season - , suggesting that we had then a fantastic team spirit. I'd like to think this hasn't been lost during this enforced football break.

[rob63]

I'm in danger of digressing here onto Gibson but we don't know the circumstances but in fairness you have acknowledged that we aren't fully aware, I think we can agree it was odd setup, no the players haven't done anything wrong but it is what it is, & I think in due course the situation will become clearer as time progresses, all the contracts should have gone into hibernation mode whilst we was in lockdown & it would have automatically allowed any extensions to naturally follow.

Not sure contracts can be put into hibernation, they're a legally binding document, as are the dates within.

It would leave clubs open to legal action which would only drain club resources dramatically once lawyers get involved.

[nighty]

he will be going to usa i feel , he got a good offer last summer from usa but the wages he was on at burnley were far higher than the usa , so he saw his contract out and he will be going across the pond ......never really shone with us so i dont feel he will be missed

[Jakubclaret]

Not sure contracts can be put into hibernation, they're a legally binding document, as are the dates within.

It would leave clubs open to legal action which would only drain club resources dramatically once lawyers get involved.

The agreement prior drafted, no contracts can't be adjusted & amended, you should always have that flexibility not necessarily stating the amendments would be agreeable proposed.

[rob63]

The agreement prior drafted, no contracts can't be adjusted & amended, you should always have that flexibility not necessarily stating the amendments would be agreeable proposed.

Contracts can only be amended with the agreement of both parties, the club can't just amend it off it's own bat. Isn't that the situation now, the club makes an offer for a fixed period of time & the player can either agree or not?

I don't think players would go for flexible contracts otherwise clubs could find a way for players to make up for games lost in a non-football injury, a la Drinkwater, or in the case say of a unexpected non-football related delay, such as Covid.

[Jakubclaret]

Contracts can only be amended with the agreement of both parties, the club can't just amend it off it's own bat. Isn't that the situation now, the club makes an offer for a fixed period of time & the player can either agree or not?

I don't think players would go for flexible contracts otherwise clubs could find a way for players to make up for games lost in a non-football injury, a la Drinkwater, or in the case say of a unexpected non-football related delay, such as Covid.

Yes I understand that & I realise agreement's needs to be mutually agreed by all parties before being signed off & actioned, any savvy contract drawn up legally by somebody with some nous would have enabled such a circumstance to effectively be on hold despite the unusual occurrence. All contracts should reserve the right to be amendable in such a circumstance, it's actually beneficial to the club & player to temporarily put on hold an existing agreement. All contracts not just at BFC should have ceased whilst the lockdown was in place & the governing bodies should have intervened ensuring this was the case, because this hasn't happened we are now frankly at a bizarre set of affairs where the seasons ending before any extensions have been discussed nevermind agreed to, when BJ initially made the announcement putting the country on lockdown everything from the point onwards should have froze.

[Darnhill Claret]

Especially as there are likely to be increased risks of muscle injuries going off the games played since the Premier League resumption.

[TVC15]

Yes I understand that & I realise agreement's needs to be mutually agreed by all parties before being signed off & actioned, any savvy contract drawn up legally by somebody with some nous would have enabled such a circumstance to effectively be on hold despite the unusual occurrence. All contracts should reserve the right to be amendable in such a circumstance, it's actually beneficial to the club & player to temporarily put on hold an existing agreement. All contracts not just at BFC should have ceased whilst the lockdown was in place & the governing bodies should have intervened ensuring this was the case, because this hasn't happened we are now frankly at a bizarre set of affairs where the seasons ending before any extensions have been discussed nevermind agreed to, when BJ initially made the announcement putting the country on lockdown everything from the point onwards should have froze.

Are you just making this stuff up with hindsight ?
As said above you cannot just change a contract however exceptional the circumstances are without the agreement of both parties.
Contracts cannot be just ceased either - unless they say in the contract that they can be ceased for a specific reason. You could not put something generic in or else nobody would agree to them. Maybe in the future contracts may have something specific in around ceasing for a pandemic - but even then that would not be an easy thing to write into a contract which both parties would agree to.

As for governing bodies intervening - not possible either. The governing bodies nor even the government can intervene and do anything about a legally binding contract - unless both parties agreed they could.

[Quickenthetempo]

Are you just making this stuff up with hindsight ?
As said above you cannot just change a contract however exceptional the circumstances are without the agreement of both parties.
Contracts cannot be just ceased either - unless they say in the contract that they can be ceased for a specific reason. You could not put something generic in or else nobody would agree to them. Maybe in the future contracts may have something specific in around ceasing for a pandemic - but even then that would not be an easy thing to write into a contract which both parties would agree to.

As for governing bodies intervening - not possible either. The governing bodies nor even the government can intervene and do anything about a legally binding contract - unless both parties agreed they could.

The clubs could vote that every contract in the premier league has a clause for a pandemic.

[TVC15]

The clubs could vote that every contract in the premier league has a clause for a pandemic.

They could for the future yep - but not for any existing contracts.

[Devils_Advocate]

I believe this is being drafted up for the clubs to vote on ready for next season. Currently they have 2,374 potential clauses to consider and are debating the need to include something around an alien invasion impacting the season in the future

As ever Jakub shows himself to be a real leading thinker out there with the best minds about

[Jakubclaret]

Are you just making this stuff up with hindsight ?
As said above you cannot just change a contract however exceptional the circumstances are without the agreement of both parties.
Contracts cannot be just ceased either - unless they say in the contract that they can be ceased for a specific reason. You could not put something generic in or else nobody would agree to them. Maybe in the future contracts may have something specific in around ceasing for a pandemic - but even then that would not be an easy thing to write into a contract which both parties would agree to.

As for governing bodies intervening - not possible either. The governing bodies nor even the government can intervene and do anything about a legally binding contract - unless both parties agreed they could.

Please refer to my earlier post, prior means beforehand, all contracts should have entered hibernation mode once the lockdown started, I know it’s impossible because the contracts didn’t include pandemics, I don’t wish to be argumentative but I don’t think you are understanding what I’m posting, had the contracts been watertight to start with & very specific automatic extensions would have followed from 23rd March to 4th July, the period of 3 months, so say for example in this particular scenario happening in winter & a players contract ended in early November it would be on hold until February, the 3 months are frozen or however the lockdown continues for, if it’s 4 months the players contract would then end in March, it’s all irrelevant anyway because nobody really predicted what would happen & more importantly it’s a 1 off freakish occurrence, I hope!

[Wile E Coyote]

when he was in the right frame of mind, top quality, he thrilled me on his rare appearances sometimes. I really liked to see him play.there was something about his determination. It probably was the bigger picture that reduced him. hes a brilliant footballer.

[Brisliam]

I always liked Lennon. He wasn't always effective for us but he always put 100% in. If a suitable and younger player can be recruited for his role, i.e. late sub / back up, this shouldn't be too bad.

[TVC15]

Please refer to my earlier post, prior means beforehand, all contracts should have entered hibernation mode once the lockdown started, I know it’s impossible because the contracts didn’t include pandemics, I don’t wish to be argumentative but I don’t think you are understanding what I’m posting, had the contracts been watertight to start with & very specific automatic extensions would have followed from 23rd March to 4th July, the period of 3 months, so say for example in this particular scenario happening in winter & a players contract ended in early November it would be on hold until February, the 3 months are frozen or however the lockdown continues for, if it’s 4 months the players contract would then end in March, it’s all irrelevant anyway because nobody really predicted what would happen & more importantly it’s a 1 off freakish occurrence, I hope!

Of course I understand what you are saying - if the contracts would have been all written differently to what they were we could have had different outcomes to what we have.
To suggest that if they would have been “watertight” or written by people with a “bit of nous” is just a bit daft though isn’t it ? It’s something you are saying with hindsight and from the sounds of it with little or no legal knowledge as to how this would actually work. Plus not much common sense in remarks like this when you consider how many contracts and lawyers around the world have drawn up these players contracts and none of them included what you suggested - you’d think at least one of these highly paid lawyers had a “bit of nous” !!

Finally I do understand what “prior” means - not sure how the below from your post has got anything to do with “prior” as you were suggesting authorities should have done something to intervene - which again shows your lack of basic understanding as to how legally binding contracts work.


“All contracts not just at BFC should have ceased whilst the lockdown was in place & the governing bodies should have intervened ensuring this was the case”

[Wokingclaret]

“All contracts not just at BFC should have ceased whilst the lockdown was in place & the governing bodies should have intervened ensuring this was the case”
[/quote]

Maybe via the PFA

[TVC15]

“All contracts not just at BFC should have ceased whilst the lockdown was in place & the governing bodies should have intervened ensuring this was the case”

Maybe via the PFA
[/quote]

Mmmm ?
Not sure how much agreement they would get from the players trade unions if they were asked to amend their members contracts in this way...especially the ones who were due to be out of contract as you would have been restricting their freedom to find new clubs.
From an out of contract players point of view remember they are either in the position of the club not offering them a new contract (or an acceptable one) or in the position that they had already decided to leave and started to talk to other clubs.
I could not see the PFA doing anything but look after these members rather than ask them to change or extend their contracts to help their clubs.
For us it looks like a mute point as we have not even offered them short term extensions

[Jakubclaret]

“All contracts not just at BFC should have ceased whilst the lockdown was in place & the governing bodies should have intervened ensuring this was the case”

Maybe via the PFA
[/quote]
The PFA should have insisted upon all contracts entering hibernation mode dismissing any legal ramifications, at end of day what’s the point of having a governing body if they can’t govern & have no teeth, the facts are football was effectively on hold temporarily whilst the lockdown was in place so everything to do with football should have also stopped, the government had the power to do that & did do that In some areas/cases, I don’t see why football an exception, this shouldn’t even be debatable, it could have been automatically & universally nationwide frozen. Breweries & pubs have agreements & contracts it did & as stopped every pub nationwide from operating & selling alcohol on the premises, catering firms have agreements & contracts with suppliers it did & as stopped every cafe/restaurant from operating & stopped people from consuming indoors. If things stop they should stop completely.

[TVC15]

You just don’t get it do you ?
The government intervened to stop football - they did not intervene to cease or suspend or “hibernate” players contracts ?
Do you know why they didn’t ? It’s a pretty simple answer. I’ll give you another clue - because they can’t !

There is a big difference between changing the law and changing legally binding contracts.

Even in your fantasy world introducing a law that said all legally binding contracts were no longer legally binding might run into a bit of trouble
....though they could then introduce a second follow up law which said nobody is allowed to sue the government for compensation / losses resulting from them cancelling legally binding contracts
.....and then another follow up piece of legislation to stop people sueing the government for banning being able to sue the government.

Etc etc