Steel - Free transfer

They wouldn't - folk are generalising on transfers based on ones where players move to a club on a lower contract. It wouldn't happen in the case.

 

When you end a contract, you have to pay loss of earnings suffered by the other party. The side suffering the loss cannot claim where a loss of earnings hasn't arisen.

If Steele is earning £5k a week, with 50 weeks left on his contract, he is owed £250k.

If he hands in a transfer request, he is looking to end his contract, therefore BFC do not owe him for any loss of earnings.

If BFC accept an offer and he hasn't handed in a transfer request, then we are looking to end his contract. But the compensation paid should be the margin between his wages at Barnsley and his wages at the new club.

Therefore if in Greece, Steele is earning more than £5k per week or greater, there is no loss of earnings. Steele would not be able to claim compensation as he has suffered no loss in the early ending of his contract. If he is earning 3k per week, then we would have to pay up the difference.

We would only pay up the 250k if we were to release him to no other club.

 

You cant be right with this surely. If a player is sold against his wishes then I get that in order to get him to sign tben the selling club might need to pay him something but i dont believe that it is standard if a player is happy to leave then you have to pay all his wages anyway. It makes no sense for any party

 

I'm pretty certain he's wrong.

 

Might explain why shackell was apparently a bad egg and was moved around a few times.

Love to see his bank account from all his moves

 

That's pretty much how I thought it worked.

 

I never suggested it was, Al. All contracts differ. But he didn't ask for a package. He didn't need to. It was included in his original contract, that if at any point he was deemed surplus by the club and was to be transferred, he'd be entitled to a compensatory payment factoring in his residential situation, his future earnings and length of time remaining on his current contract. It didn't amount to the full wage he'd have received had he stayed another 3 years, but it was over 60% of that. Add that to the signing on fee at his new club, the 4 years of wages on reduced money (minus agents fees etc) and he's come out of it all better off financially.

I did admit that I've no idea if Luke Steele's situation lent itself to this same thing. I was merely agreeing with Gordon who put the possibility of it out there. I have to say I find some of what Gordon has said quite difficult to believe but then, I only know what I know and can't state for certain that he's wrong or right. But I am certain that the situation I've described is correct. Whether it's different for players who leave for more money or bigger clubs I do not know.

Interesting stuff though.

 

Certain players have no morals whitey. All thats wrong with football

 

In regards to what, pal?

 

Really really wanting to leave a club but instead of actually asking to leave he instead engineers a situation where the club sell him. The only reason? So he could pocket more money by getging them to trigger a clause.

Its what is killing football.

 

This is right. There's also tax advantages of terminating contracts early to make things advantageous for all parties. Particularly the case for players on lower salaries as he tax break stops at 30k

The principle is, if a player is under a contract (nearly always fixed term) then the club is obligated to pay that up no matter what the circumstances. However depending on how desperate the player is to leave, he may waive the remainder of his contract when he transfers. It just depends who is n the driving seat in the negotiations.

Clauses are however often inserted into contract s stipulating the maximum amount it would cost to terminate a contract, ie instead of having the pay the remainder of a fixed term it can be set at 6 months pay etc.

 

No, they told his agent to find him another club, they couldn't guarantee him games, etc etc. Obviously, he was happy to leave. He wasn't wanted and he wanted to play football. It's nothing like you've guessed.

As for what's killing football, I'd suggest it's clubs like the one he left who wouldn't pay a proper fee for him in the first place, but bigged him up regardless. Got him cheap at a tribunal. Then ignored him, told him to do one, and signed a boat load of foreigners and are now relegated and getting big old parachute payments for that failure.

If you actually believe the footballers are the problem, that they're killing the game, I'd have to disagree.

But football's about opinions. Each to their own etc.

 

and half of any fee would be owed to West Brom. Actually selling him may have ended up costing us money (unless it was for silly bucks), so a free is probably best all round. I for one wish him well, and thank him for his time here.

 

According to Wikipedia, the average wage for last season was 300K Euro at Panathinaikos. That would be roughly what he was earning here. Not sure on the tax situation or other benefits from working in Greece though.