Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Lord Pityme

New Contracts for Davis & Baird... Now!

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Thats makes so little sense its lol funny.... a two year contract that can be terminated after one..! Ffs whose got one of those..?

again for the umpteenth time you can put whatever you like in a contract.... two years terminate after one (lol), right to kill first born child if not male, UEO for one year...etc.. etc... but it doesnt mean its legally enforceable. Signing a contract doesnt give anyone the right to break, or insist others break the law.

cheers for putting your hands up in being unable to find ONE case of a UEO being enforced in the UK courts. I will help you though, under EU law they can, and have been enforced in the courts. Seems we didnt need Brexit to "get our country back" after all.,

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jan/12/juan-mata-hails-manchester-united-best-confidence-mentality-maraoune-fellaini 

If only someone would tell the biggest football club in the world this contract extension isn't legal... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jan/12/juan-mata-hails-manchester-united-best-confidence-mentality-maraoune-fellaini 

If only someone would tell the biggest football club in the world this contract extension isn't legal... :lol:

Thats lovely, but again, again, again.... it doesn't tell you if it was a UEO or mutual agreement to extend fir another year, and given the feckin wages Fellini is on, even if it was a UEO by the club, he'd be bonkers to challenge it.

again, again, again... you still cannot cite one example of a UEO being enforced in a UK court.... reason being thete isnt ONE..!

Man Utd, Southend Utd, Ayr Utd..... can put whatever they damn well pleasy in a contract, me and you can draw up our vey own contract and sign it.... but if the content isnt legally enforceable it aint worth the paper its written on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, kevo_smfc said:

I had heard that there was some agreement if we were relegated last season he would leave.

Yip quite probably, that would be a "mutually" (this is this detail Basil and other dont get) agreed option that protected both parties.. i.e. Davis isnt tied ti league one football, the club arent tied to paying him over the odds to play in league one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bazil85 said:

You clearly are missing the point several people are making to you. Contracts are complex entities. The wording on contracts often include get out clauses such as if promotion isn't achieved, relegation results, lack of appearances etc. All of which are rules of a competition not legislation, you seem to be unable to grasp the difference between game rules and legislation in player contracts, not surprising giving some of the nonsense you spew about SMISA payments. If you can show me one example where a sports competition rule will impact contract law then that would be great? 

Putting in a clause to terminate a contract after a set length of time is not breaking any law (if it was then why was it legal for us to terminate DVZ contract if he hadn't made X number of appearances?). If it is please show us? Or please show us one example where a contract extension has been triggered by a club and then been challenged successfully by a court of law? 

Again your claim so the burden of proof is on you. There are several examples where contract extensions have been triggered based on terms of a contract being met (for example avoiding relegation with McGinn) feel free to show us evidence that this is legally enforceable but clubs triggering an extension is not? If it's so clear cut you must be able to pull examples and legislation? 

Don't make the mistake of thinking you're the only one that deals with legislative and regulatory matters and has an extensive knowledge of employee law. 

Lets save a rainforest here... the clauses you are highlighting will have been mutually agreed clauses. 

I am sure there are still players with UEO clauses in their contract playing in the UK, but if they have/want to go to court to challenge them they will win. As its a restriction of trade, and freedom of movement.

there are no examples of cases going to court to cite, as the clubs who tried to enforce UEO against aplayers wishs all ended up having to agree a compromise as their lawyers would have advised them to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Thats lovely, but again, again, again.... it doesn't tell you if it was a UEO or mutual agreement to extend fir another year, and given the feckin wages Fellini is on, even if it was a UEO by the club, he'd be bonkers to challenge it.

again, again, again... you still cannot cite one example of a UEO being enforced in a UK court.... reason being thete isnt ONE..!

Man Utd, Southend Utd, Ayr Utd..... can put whatever they damn well pleasy in a contract, me and you can draw up our vey own contract and sign it.... but if the content isnt legally enforceable it aint worth the paper its written on.

That makes zero sense. How does it protect Man U by extending his contract then if it’s just a mutual thing? Ac Milan could still come in and get him for free and challenge it through the courts if they’re not enforceable as you keep saying. I’d say I’ve given you a very clear example where it undoubtedly says ‘Manchester United have taken the option’ no mention at all about it being mutual. You haven’t provided one shred of evidence to your claim. Onto you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Thats lovely, but again, again, again.... it doesn't tell you if it was a UEO or mutual agreement to extend fir another year, and given the feckin wages Fellini is on, even if it was a UEO by the club, he'd be bonkers to challenge it.

again, again, again... you still cannot cite one example of a UEO being enforced in a UK court.... reason being thete isnt ONE..!

Man Utd, Southend Utd, Ayr Utd..... can put whatever they damn well pleasy in a contract, me and you can draw up our vey own contract and sign it.... but if the content isnt legally enforceable it aint worth the paper its written on.

By signing the original contract, the player is effectively agreeing to the condition and therefore it is, technically, by mutual agreement.  The point is that it is at the club's prerogative to exercise the clause in the contract.

 

If you go into a shop that is advertising a BOGOF offer, then the shop is agreeing up front that you can do this, however, it is your prerogative whether or not to take up the offer.  By signing the contract, the player is effectively saying that the club can extend their contract by a year but that the club doesn't have to, if it doesn't want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

... its a restriction of trade, and freedom of movement.

there are no examples of cases going to court to cite, as the clubs who tried to enforce UEO against aplayers wishs all ended up having to agree a compromise as their lawyers would have advised them to.

In that case, any contract is a restriction on trade and freedom of movement if it doesn't allow a player to go to another country and/or play for another club within the period of the contract.

 

Are you saying that you have been asking others to supply evidence that doesn't exist, just to cover up the fact that you have no evidence of your claim?  If none of them have went to court then nobody can be sure if they can be enforced and you are just talking out your arse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

That makes zero sense. How does it protect Man U by extending his contract then if it’s just a mutual thing? Ac Milan could still come in and get him for free and challenge it through the courts if they’re not enforceable as you keep saying. I’d say I’ve given you a very clear example where it undoubtedly says ‘Manchester United have taken the option’ no mention at all about it being mutual. You haven’t provided one shred of evidence to your claim. Onto you.  

 

4 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:

By signing the original contract, the player is effectively agreeing to the condition and therefore it is, technically, by mutual agreement.  The point is that it is at the club's prerogative to exercise the clause in the contract.

 

If you go into a shop that is advertising a BOGOF offer, then the shop is agreeing up front that you can do this, however, it is your prerogative whether or not to take up the offer.  By signing the contract, the player is effectively saying that the club can extend their contract by a year but that the club doesn't have to, if it doesn't want to.

I can only repeat these are not my opinions but facts of UK law. If a player challenges a contract extension in the correct timeframe, even though he signed the contract with that clause in it, should player and club fail to agree the player can go to court and will win his case as he can prove in every instance seen thus far that (lets say in Davis's case if Celtic came in for him) that the original club were restricting his freedom to trade (he could make more, play at a higher level in europe with Celtic).

and that his freedom of movement was being unfairly restricted by the original club effectively insisting he stays, plays and suffers inferior terms to that offered by shellic.

i get the player wilfully signed the contract with an extension clause in it, but if in the last six months of the original term he indicates he wants to leave the club, the extension is in uk courts not enforceable.

if you want to see what real player power looks like feast your eyes on what one of our very own achieved a few years back. "A dark day in scottish football" was what his original club called the verdict.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_ruling

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Thats lovely, but again, again, again.... it doesn't tell you if it was a UEO or mutual agreement to extend fir another year, and given the feckin wages Fellini is on, even if it was a UEO by the club, he'd be bonkers to challenge it.

again, again, again... you still cannot cite one example of a UEO being enforced in a UK court.... reason being thete isnt ONE..!

Man Utd, Southend Utd, Ayr Utd..... can put whatever they damn well pleasy in a contract, me and you can draw up our vey own contract and sign it.... but if the content isnt legally enforceable it aint worth the paper its written on.

Now, I'm not saying there isn't an example of a UEO being enforced (I have little motivation to go searching for one). However, have you ever stopped to think that the reason for the apparent paucity of examples, might be because they are perfectly normal and no one has ever felt the need to challenge one. You know, people just agreeing to honour their contract. Novel thought I know.

Edited by TPAFKA Jersey 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

 

I can only repeat these are not my opinions but facts of UK law. If a player challenges a contract extension in the correct timeframe, even though he signed the contract with that clause in it, should player and club fail to agree the player can go to court and will win his case as he can prove in every instance seen thus far that (lets say in Davis's case if Celtic came in for him) that the original club were restricting his freedom to trade (he could make more, play at a higher level in europe with Celtic).

and that his freedom of movement was being unfairly restricted by the original club effectively insisting he stays, plays and suffers inferior terms to that offered by shellic.

i get the player wilfully signed the contract with an extension clause in it, but if in the last six months of the original term he indicates he wants to leave the club, the extension is in uk courts not enforceable.

if you want to see what real player power looks like feast your eyes on what one of our very own achieved a few years back. "A dark day in scottish football" was what his original club called the verdict.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_ruling

 

Specifically, it states that any player who signed a contract before the age of 28 can buy himself out of the contract three years after the deal was signed. If he is 28 or older the time limit is shortened to two years.[

 

You do realise that Mr Davis's contract is for a period of less than three years? The defence rest's their case m'lord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Desnold said:

Specifically, it states that any player who signed a contract before the age of 28 can buy himself out of the contract three years after the deal was signed. If he is 28 or older the time limit is shortened to two years.[

 

You do realise that Mr Davis's contract is for a period of less than three years? The defence rest's their case m'lord

Aye... but as i clearly stated this was a different example of a player refusing to extend a contract, whose lawyer/agent actually got the termination date wrong, but still won their case.

nice to see you confirm you are on the 'defensive' and still cant show an instance of a player rejecting a signed contract extension, and being made to fulfill it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

Now, I'm not saying there isn't an example of a UEO being enforced (I have little motivation to go searching for one). However, have you ever stopped to think that the reason for the apparent paucity of examples, might be because they are perfectly normal and no one has ever felt the need to challenge one. You know, people just agreeing to honour their contract. Novel thought I know.

Professional footballers and 'Honour'...?

nope ... dont recognise them as an item when money is the motivator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lord Pityme said:

Aye... but as i clearly stated this was a different example of a player refusing to extend a contract, whose lawyer/agent actually got the termination date wrong, but still won their case.

nice to see you confirm you are on the 'defensive' and still cant show an instance of a player rejecting a signed contract extension, and being made to fulfill it.

So not an actual example? I was really looking forward to the actual example and all you have done is use an example which does not fit the criteria under the discussion you started.

Go on, have another go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets turn all this on its head and consider a very real possibility..!

If a 'bigger' (more wages etc) club comes in for Davis, before any extension is signed/enacted do you think the club will be able to insist he stays, or at least picks up a fee if he goes?

or will he simply be able to move to said 'bigger' club..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Desnold said:

So not an actual example? I was really looking forward to the actual example and all you have done is use an example which does not fit the criteria under the discussion you started.

Go on, have another go

For the umpteenth time... there isnt an example to quote. No club (in uk law) has been able to enforce a properly contested contract extension. See the post above, perhaps we might get a first hand look at that come may..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Aye... but as i clearly stated this was a different example of a player refusing to extend a contract, whose lawyer/agent actually got the termination date wrong, but still won their case.

nice to see you confirm you are on the 'defensive' and still cant show an instance of a player rejecting a signed contract extension, and being made to fulfill it.

You've completely screwed your argument, it very much is time to give up I'm afraid Mr Pityme. 

1. The Fellani transfer - You said it doesn't state if it was mutual, it very clearly states Man U took the option. 

2.You saying that Fellani would be mad not to allow it because of his wage. That contradicts your whole argument. Him allowing it does not protect Man U at all if what you say is true. An interested party could simply go through the courts to confirm it wasn't lawful . Lets be honest Man U lawyers are going to know more than you. 

3. Webster law is completely unrelated, it's clear clutching at straws. 

4. If it was categorically illegal in UK law you'd be able to show evidence which you've failed to do. 

Put up or shut up time I'm afraid for yourself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Lets turn all this on its head and consider a very real possibility..!

If a 'bigger' (more wages etc) club comes in for Davis, before any extension is signed/enacted do you think the club will be able to insist he stays, or at least picks up a fee if he goes?

or will he simply be able to move to said 'bigger' club..?

If there's a year extension clause in the contract then yes. See Fellani situation. Man U triggered it to protect their interests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

For the umpteenth time... there isnt an example to quote. No club (in uk law) has been able to enforce a properly contested contract extension. See the post above, perhaps we might get a first hand look at that come may..?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/01/04/manchester-united-extend-contracts-four-players-12-months/ 

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-utd-news-contract-fixtures-14119288

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11685/10883898/west-ham-trigger-option-to-extend-adrians-contract-until-2019

Oh Lordy Lordy Lordy :lol: Some would say a bigger man would hold his hands up to overwhelming evidence he's wrong when said man has provided none. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All great Basil... but where is your silver bullet..?

just one case where a player properly challenged an extension clause in uk law, but lost....

c'mon... just one!

edit: do you know what the procedure is in all the cases you have quoted (and in every case) of clubs extending player contracts..?

if they wish to trigger/enact that clause they have to inform the player, who then has to agree (sign extension) or not...! The power as always drops right back in the players lap. If he's had/gets a better offer what do you think happens then..?

 

Edited by Lord Pityme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

All great Basil... but where is your silver bullet..?

just one case where a player properly challenged an extension clause in uk law, but lost....

c'mon... just one!

edit: do you know what the procedure is in all the cases you have quoted (and in every case) of clubs extending player contracts..?

if they wish to trigger/enact that clause they have to inform the player, who then has to agree (sign extension) or not...! The power as always drops right back in the players lap. If he's had/gets a better offer what do you think happens then..?

 

Well that's nonsense, a couple of those very clearly state the club has decided. One says after deliberation the club have decided to do it. I have now provided several examples where THE CLUB has taken the decision to extend the contract based on a clause in the contract. Not one of those stories says it's mutual agreement. Not one, just one, not one. What you're basically saying is you know better than legal advisers at Man United, West Ham etc and that what they're doing is not legal and wouldn't stand up in court. :lol:

Again I have provided evidence that contract extension triggered by clubs exist. We're all waiting for what must be very clear legislation that this isn't legal... In your own time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×