rs_1

As I say, it isn't common knowledge that Willie Smith is under investigation - i didn't know it and a few others ive spoken to didn't either, so I doubt the boy or his father would have known. And to essentially suggest the boy's dad is a bad father is certainly taking things too far. I understand your point about Willie Smith but I think that blame has to be directed towards him solely. Also, your point about Kieran and his father acting in an unethical manner is poor considering that in the 'business model' clubs work in, their practices aren't exactly pointed towards being ethical.

Completely agree - doing the loan deal would create a good image of the club in this particular case. It would suit all parties and if the club didn't do it simply out of what seems like spite they'd be risking it going to court where who knows what could happen. I think if anyone's giving him advice it's probably Willie Smith - I know Kieran is unaware of what seems to be his ulterior motives and therefore, even if you do think the boy has went down the wrong path in terms of the contract, it's not necessarily right to blame him or his father fully.

From what I know (which I just found out today - so that's why I hadn't mentioned it) St Mirren were very ambiguous and awkward towards the situation and the loan deal - I don't believe there was any specific words about a loan other than something along the lines of something would be figured out, which can't be directly interpreted as a loan deal. The only time I know there was very specific mention of a loan deal was when it was too late. If the club don't loan now, even if Kieran agrees, simply out of spite then that would just cause more trouble in terms of legal action etc. Don't you feel it would be better for St Mirren to agree to a loan, even now?

Good point - apologies for that mistake.

Do you have internal connections with the club? You seem to know an awful lot of specific information about what's going on within it in terms of this case. I didn't dispute that fact - I simply wanted to prove that the boy was on a £1 a week contract when he was indeed training and playing, doesn't that make the contract illegal or at the very least questionable in its validity? As far as I know with the loan deal, Kieran was under the impression that St Mirren weren't going to allow a loan deal until it was too late and the article was already about to be published. So, if that's the case maybe a loan could indeed be a solution as I'm sure Kieran would be potentially open to it if the club are. A loan deal could potentially solve the problem temporarily, but at one point St Mirren would either want fees for him moving to a low level club or else the contract would just run out and they'd get no financial gain from him, which seems to be high priority for the Saints. If the latter is the case, then what's the point in holding on to him in the first place? The article said his lawyer was from a firm, which is as far as I know of no relation to Liam O'Donnell.

The proof of when he was training and playing is in this link: http://www.saintmirren.net/pages/?p=20882 It is the report for the youth cup quarter final where he was playing - he also played in the semi final v Dunfermline about a month later and several other games. And that's only u20 games - he played in most, if not all, under 17 matches too. I think this proves that he was training and playing during the £1 a week period from December 2012 to the summer of 2013. It then follows that the contract isn't legal considering it's a professional contract and £1 a week for the hours worked (even if it was only an hour or two a week!) is under minimum wage. I doubt the Willie Smith part is widely known (mainly the investigation). A few people of whom I know well know Willie Smith and haven't mentioned anything of it. I doubt Kieran will know of it either. But yes, still quite ridiculous, especially if none of the stuff you reported is being disclosed. Also, I don't necessary think the conditions are dreadful, it was a parent of a current St Mirren youth player who stated that. I'm under no doubt that the facilities are fantastic. I'd have to assume that by conditions he means mostly hours and wages.

For first team squad members 25 or under would be correct, but not for young players in U20 squads.

My information on the youngster and when he was training is definitely 100% accurate, although I can't say much about Liam O'Donnell. I must admit you do make some good points regarding Willie Smith, especially the investigation part which, if true, is ridiculous on his part. If the contract was drawn up in a lawful manner then I'd agree with you that it should be stuck to, but that clearly isn't the case. I completely appreciate, and I'm sure Kieran does too, that St Mirren want to protect their interests and 'investment'. However, I think you surely must also appreciate how Kieran wants to protect his own interests and continue to play football. The case seems to have a whole other dimension in the way that clubs pay and contract young players. The youngster isn't directly involved in this side of it but it could certainly be the case that clubs will have to answer to minimum wage legislation and their treatment of young players. If that's the pathway then, if this case does go to court, I'm afraid it could be St Mirren learning a lesson. I've also been told that an anonymous parent of another young St Mirren player has thanked Kieran for his story as the conditions and hours are dreadful. Recently, some young players at St Mirren have been paid £65 a week. If it's the case (which it is) that players have been in for even as little as 30 hours per week then that wage is blatantly under minimum.

The 3.5 year contract was actualy signed in December 2012. Kieran had every intention of staying on full time with St Mirren at the time of signing the contract. If signing with another club it would no doubt be one of a low level where he wouldn't have to devote too much time to. After all, his main focus now is presumably university and there's no way he'll play full time football again or even part time with a club in the first or second division, for example, especially when he'll be studying such an intense course for the next 5-6 years.

Actually, I know Kieran relatively well and a lot of this is blatantly inaccurate. Firstly, when he had the £1 a week contract he WAS training and playing with the club. For the 6-7 months when the £1 a week was in place he was training and playing with the under 17 side and also with the under 20 side on many occasions. It's true that he was at school during the period but that doesn't lessen the fact that he was on a professional contract where he should have been paid minimum wage for the hours he worked (not to mention the fact that the £1 a week wasn't even paid). Also, where did you get the quote from his father? I'm almost certain he has not had any connection with Queens Park or Gus McPherson and for you to claim that is pure conjecture based on absolutely no evidence. I absolutely agree that St Mirren supported Kieran for the most part in terms of his education, and I'm sure he would too, but shouldn't that be a given? The reason this dispute is happening is because St Mirren now won't release a contract and let the youngster continue playing football and turning out for even his uni side or an amateur side. So fundamentally I think the problem lies in the fact that a good education and professional football clearly oppose each other. If Kieran was to have chosen full time football over a first rate education, I'm sure he could have continued to get a second rate education somewhere, whether it be part time college or something along those lines. But because he's chosen a first rate education over first rate football, surely he should still be allowed to play second rate football instead of no football at all? A system should be put in place so that both first rate football and a first rate education can go along with each other - after all, if that was the case there wouldn't be a dispute here in the first place and both parties would be much better off.