Steel - Free transfer

I can understand that situation, but not where a player moves for more/same money. On your example it is compensation to make up the wage difference in the contracts offered. If the new club offers the same/more then the contractual loss has been mitigated. So it all depends what they are offering him, surely they'll at least match his earnings.?

 

You're right, it isn't. It's impossibly difficult to discuss this when we are unsure as to what has happened here with Luke. I was merely confirming what Gordon suggested, based on what happened to a player I know.

 

Probably not that example, but I understand it's the norm to have that kind of clause in your contract. Otherwise why would anyone ever leave a club unless it's in an upward direction. I would imagine that it's just the starting point for negotiations though.

That's why you get situations like Winston Bogarde, happy to sit on his guaranteed £40k per week to not play for Chelsea. He'd have probably wanted such a whack from Chelsea to leave and sign for another club, who almost definitely wouldn't have paid anything like that to him, that Chelsea were basically stuck with him. Or to bring it closer to home, Brian McCord.

 

So a player like Perkins gets paid his contract with Barnsley whilst at the same time drawing a contract from Blackpool? I can understand if a player moves from club A to club B but on a smaller salary and club A pays him the difference up to the original contract with them until the expiration date.

 

According to the press Wayne Rooney is on £300,000 per week and has 5 years left on his contract. That's almost £80 million over the 5 years. If Barcelona came in during the summer and offered Man Utd £50 million for Rooney and they accepted it, they'd lose £30 million on the deal? I'm really struggling with that.

 

My brain hurts !!!!

 

Bit of a move though isn't it? From Barnsley, England, to Athens, Greece?

I really don't know, Rich. Honestly. I was just sharing what I do know regards just one footballer.

For all we know right now, we've sold Luke for a million pounds. But when does a player tell the fans they've left the club before the club announces it? Usually when they've been released, freed, whatever.

 

But it's all negotiation though. If a player is basically being flogged when he doesn't want to go he can dig his heels in and say he's not going unless he gets paid off. The selling club are then stuck with the player they don't want or can't afford. So if the reason for selling is the latter they may as well cut their losses and waive the transfer fee so that the player can maximise his signing on fee and wages.

It was usual practice going back to the pre-Bosman days though, that long serving players (i.e. on bigger wages than the rest of the squad) were 'rewarded' with a free transfer if they were moving down the food chain. Think of all the long serving First Division players at the end of their careers who pitched up at the likes of Swansea, Rotherham and Barnsley on free transfers in the late 70s and early 80s.

 

I would have thought by letting him go on a free he gives up the right to the remainder of his contract and his new club foot the bill.

 

No. The player I know was told by the club (or, his agent was) to find another club. They then do that, and then it's over to the negotiators at each club, and his agent to thrash out the deal that best suits each party.

 

I think the difference here and we might never know is wether Steele has been told he's free to leave or are we selling him?

If he has been told he's free to leave he would quite rightly expect payment of his last years contract - say 200k or equal to a fee being paid of 200k so cost equal on the deal overall for BFC

If he hasn't asked to leave and we are selling him he has 2 choices. Turn down the deal and stay to earn 200k wages or Leave taking whatever wage the new club offer and we the selling club earn 200k and save an extra 200k on wages.... Possibly 400k up

I'd say it's the former of the 2 situations

 

I understand what you're saying. Think your wrong though, except for where they are compensating a loss of salary.

 

I understand why players won't leave for a smaller wage. What I don't understand is why a club would have to pay up the contract of a player if a bigger club came in for them and offered higher wages and that's what you're suggesting clubs have to do. I don't get that.

Take John Stones for example. I don't think he asked to leave, but even if he did let's pretend he didn't. Everton come in and offer us a load of brass. We accept it. Everton offer Stones buckets of cash, which they did. So he takes it and buggers off to Everton. You're suggesting we also have to pay up the remainder of his contract and I'm struggling to come to terms with that. It makes no sense to me.

 

It's all negotiation. We didn't want Perkins and wanted someone cheaper. He could have dug his heels in and said he's not going. We agree to waive the transfer fee if he agrees to go. He then negotiates a nice signing on fee and better wages than Blackpool would have been prepared to pay if they'd had to give us a fee for him, so everybody's happy. With Vaz Te it was slightly different, as he was on next to nothing at Oakwell and we could secure a decent fee for him, even with only six months on his contract, that would far outweigh paying his contract up. We probably took the money from West Ham, paid him up, kept a nice profit and he went on to filthy riches courtesy of Shady Sam. Stones, different again. He may well have waived the money that BFC would have had to pay him because his income was going through the stratosphere with his move.

That's why it makes me laugh when it gets reported that we get x hundred thousand for a player and folk on here therefore think that we now have that same amount to fork out on new players. That's probably because they base their ideas on how things work on Championship Manager and don't factor in things like player's exit fees, agent fees, tax and so forth.

With Jay's example about Rooney, that's where the crazy Premiership wages have screwed everything up. If Barcelona came in for Rooney, they would probably offer him similar wages, so he either takes it or leaves it. He won't sign for Barcelona unless he agrees to the terms, so Man United stand firm and say he can go if he wants to. Man United wouldn't be selling him because they were hard up and Rooney wouldn't be getting asked to take a wage cut to sign for a new club, so Rooney wouldn't have the negotiating power that Kennedy would have with us (now doesn't that sound crazy!). But if Man United suddenly fell skint, they'd be in the same trouble that Leeds got in, whereby they'd be having to broker all kinds of deals to get shut of their players. Portsmouth recently had similar issues.

 

I don't think we do Jay.
The only way we would do that is hes leaving us and isn't that happy with the pay at the new club. So he could ask for the the current club to pay up the difference in wages for the remainder of the contract.

 

Stones did ask to leave, I'm afraid, albeit only after the interest was shown in him. With this case the power was on the other foot though, as it was in his interest to leave, get the better, longer contract, move to a better club, get a nice signing on fee, better sponsorship deals, etc. So we could play hard ball in that respect and say, okay, we'll let you go, but only if you sign this waiver to that aspect of your contract. As it is, he probably wouldn't have negotiated hard in that respect anyway. As I say, it's all negotiations and it all depends upon who's best interest the deal is. Unfortunately, with players like Kennedy we are stuck, as we are with players like Steele, whereby any potential transfer fee would be in line with what he'd be owed in wages.

O'Grady, again, is slightly different, in that we can demand a far higher transfer fee than we're due to pay out in wages. So his decision is based more on whether he can get a big pay hike by leaving us. Charlton clearly didn't offer that (and he has other considerations with that move, such as relocating his family and paying double for houses...and everything else...down there). So as he can expect not to have to take a hit in wages and we know he has ambitions to play higher we have certain things on our side in these negotiations. "We'll accept a fee for you Chris, you go and see if you can get yourself a better deal, if you do, sign this waiver and off you go". We get a fee, he moves on to a better contract at a better club, we're both happy. If we're struggling (positionally and financially) by Christmas, the power shifts towards O'Grady in the January window though...

 

Unless I've misinterpreted what you originally said (apologies if I have), a player automatically gets paid his contract up if he hasn't asked to leave. Which would mean if Luke is now getting a salary exactly the same with his new club, he'll actually double his earnings for the length of his remaining contract with us. I suggested I could understand him being paid the difference by Barnsley if his earnings at his new club were lower than his current one.

 

Automatically having his contract paid up and having the right to automatically have his contract paid up are two different things though! Like I say, it's all negotiations and if a player is under contract he has the option to dig his heels in and demand it, as part of his contract. In many cases this will simply scupper the transfer. If it is in his interest to leave though the negotiations start. If a player hands in a transfer request this cancels that aspect of his contract, hence the managers and clubs that try to force a player's hand by dropping him, making him train with the kids, etc.

With Steele, if he is going to be moving on to a two or three year contract on similar wages (I have absolutely no idea what wages in Greece are like, but I am guessing their not on a par with most of the bigger leagues) he'll have a nice guaranteed wage for a few years, but for all the upheaval, selling houses and everything that goes with such a long distance move I would be surprised if he didn't make some demands of us and the easiest one is for the club to waive the transfer fee so that he can negotiate a bigger signing on fee than they would otherwise have been prepared to pay. But the bottom line with this transfer is simply that we need to get rid far more than he needs to leave. Most of the cards are in his hand. In our favour a move to Greece and potential European football may be a draw to Steele.

 

Me too.

I mean this has never been a feature on football manager either...

 

I'm pretty sure that isn't a written rule of a standard contract. Obviously if a player is leaving for less wages then they will ask their current club for a package, but if a player leaves on a higher or similar wage I don't think they'd get a pay off.