bazil85
-
Posts
10,495 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by bazil85
-
-
38 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
I'm sure I'm not the only one that missed the point in regards to Clubs putting contract extension clauses in player deals being illegal
-
2 hours ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:
Think we are offering Livingstone cash for another one of their players a small-scale ish right winger has impressed me anytime we play them he would be a cracking signing.
Does Flannigan not play right wing as well? Heard that he's back from his loan.
-
12 minutes ago, Drew said:
That may well be true.
It doesn't, however, take anything away from the fact that it remains f**king brutal
I think it's pretty interesting. It's a very curious notion that someone will let their pride get in the way of overwhelming evidence they're talking rubbish
-
13 minutes ago, Drew said:
Jesus wept, this thread has become absolutely f**king brutal
It's amazing the number of comments posted by people that don't want to get involved in the debate. If a thread doesn't interest you don't post. An interesting fact about a discussion form, different people like discussing different things...
-
29 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:
Does the player need to sign anything? It is part of a contract that he has already signed. I would imagine that the club would only have to inform the player in writing that they are exercising their right under the existing contract which the player has already agreed to and signed.
Yep, exactly right.
-
26 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..?
Evidence please.
-
15 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..?
One example where they have challenged and won under these circumstances? Webster ruling was a ruling based on the length of his contract, nothing to do with extension clauses. Go on just one...
-
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.
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.
-
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..?
Oh Lordy Lordy Lordy
Some would say a bigger man would hold his hands up to overwhelming evidence he's wrong when said man has provided none.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
7 minutes ago, kevo_smfc said:
I think he comes highly rated at Celtic from what i've read. Still only 18 and seems to be a standout in their u20s. It could have either been a recommendation from Rodgers to Jack or we have had our eye on him through the development games.
He may not have much first team experience, though you only have to look at Magennis and Morgan stepping up so quickly from the u20s with us, most notable Magennis who barely lost his starting place since his debut.
Let's hope so. Would love to see players like him and that young Gilmour really make it at the top level for Scotland. Obviously along with all of our young M's
-
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.,
If only someone would tell the biggest football club in the world this contract extension isn't legal...
-
5 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.,
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.
-
15 minutes ago, kevo_smfc said:
I vaguely remember the story of Hamilton looking to field a player that young, though never realised it was him.
It seems like his footballing may be ahead of age group.
Could be a good signing, surprised Hamilton wouldn't want him though. Has his development possibly stunted over the last couple of years? Hopefully not another Scotland youth nearly man.
-
47 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
I unlike you and others have been consistent throughout..
i said i couldnt see an official club statement detailing Davis had signed a year contract with a year option. I never once said there definitely wasnt one. Someone was kind enough to highlight the statement i asked if it was out there.
i also said that UEO's are unenforceable in UK law, please if you can show us a case where that isnt fact.
finally regarding Davis's extension option it seems patently clear no one knows if its a mutual, or UEO agreement, save the club and Davis himself....
now please try and keep up, only deal with facts, and stop trying to set saints fans against each other. These are mainly opinions... we all have them, no one dies if they differ.
The burden of proof is on the claimant. Please show us one example or item of legislation that proves they're unenforceable?
As I previously stated contracts are complex and wording is flexible. Contracts can be worded as a stated length with get out clauses at certain stages. For example a two year contract that a club retains the right to terminate after a one year period with no penalty. It's purely another way of saying a one year contract with a second year option controlled by the club. I can guarantee such contracts are enforceable under UK law.
If you require proof of the above, I would point you to the fact promotion/ relegation in a footballing league format are not steeped in legislation or regulation. They are rules of a competition not law/ regulatory (of course we have a regulatory body but in theory they could implement a rule that promotes the bottom team and relegates the top, sports regulation is different from other regulation in that if the members agree and they aren't doing anything illegal they can change any rule of the game) If a contract clause can legally be implemented to allow a relegated/ promoted team to trigger a clause in a contract (either extend or terminate) then there is no legal grounds to say the club can not take such action when relegation/ promotion doesn't occur. To say one is lawful and the other is not is simply wrong.
-
1 hour ago, Lord Pityme said:
Sorry wrong again, quote me one case in UK law where a UEO has been contested by the employee, but the employer won the case.... just one!
and having spent decades working in employment law, i can assure you if a contract is indeed 'unfair/weighted in favour of one party to the detriment of another' especially if the party suffering the unfairness is the employee, then it can be succesfully contested if proven unfair, or illegal, or both.
i could offer someone (over 21) who is desperate for a job a contract to be a steward at SMFc. And given their desperation they are happy to sign the contract of employment (a legal document) accepting £6.50 an hour. Its still a legal document, both parties signed it, but it falls below the minimum wage, therfor it is illeagal.
again, just because you include something in a contract both parties sign doesn't make it legal and binding.
meanwhile back on planet earth no one has been able to confirm if there even is a UEO on Davis's contract.
In what way does offering a year extension agreed by a club unfair on the player or compromise employment law? It doesn’t as long as the wage is above minimum requirements. By your logic a player signing a four year contract that had an amazing first year would be getting treated unfairly in the second year of their contract because they’d be worth more of a wage.
One part of legislation against contract extensions will do it. PCA agreements have nothing to do with contract clauses, it’s last six months of their deal that comes into play.
-
1 hour ago, Lord Pityme said:
Wrong & wrong gents!
the/any club may well insist on a UEO (Unilateral Extension Option) but it has proven whenever tested in UK courts to be unenforceable as it seeks to both 'Restrict Freedom of Movement ' ( Bosman1995) and Restrict Freedom of Trade (stopping an individual making a living). The main reason it is uneforceable is because it is unfairly weighted in favour of one party i.e. The club.
even though a UEO may state the salary payable throughout the full term of the contract, shit happens, and the player could be worth a much better salary than when he originally signed due to performances, Merchandising sales etc.
ffs even PCA's arent enforceable in UK law. Just because you can include something on a legal document i.e. A contract, don't necessarily make it legal.
Just not correct. The way clubs word it is X length of contract but the club can terminate it a year early. All this conversation is just different ways of wording the same thing. For example a two year deal that a club has the right to terminate with no penalty after one year if it chooses. You’d be surprised that what can go into contracts.
As for PCA not been enforceable. Again incorrect. See Brittain transfer between County and St Johnstone few years back. Fee was payable to cancel PCA. Happy for you to provide actual contract law evidence to back up your claim.
-
2 minutes ago, stlucifer said:
No he didn't. A contract is still a contract. If the player signs it knowingly then it stands. The Bosman ruling meant players could move to a new club AT THE END OF THEIR CONTRACT without the old club receiving a fee. It doesn't negate any obligation the player agreed to appertaining to his current contract.
Exactly right, if a player signs a contract agreeing to the club being allowed to extend said contract on the same terms for an extra year then that's perfectly legal.
Player allowed to sign a deal where he can be in full control of extending the contract = legal
Club having the same control = illegal
-
1 minute ago, Lord Pityme said:
Agree with the apprarance option, but you are wrong about McGinn who signed an 18 month contract....
https://www.stmirren.com/news/club/all-news/543-stephen-mcginn-returns-to-the-saints
And again wrong on there being a pure 'Club' option on his contract, Bosman killed that 23 years ago
https://www.stmirren.com/news/club/all-news/875-mcginn-this-is-the-best-spell-of-my-career
Looks like we're both wrong, I thought he could choose but it looks like it was survival dependent. McGinn did sign an 18 month contract with a relegation get out clause. Avoiding relegation is another trigger for increasing a contract as is gaining promotion.
There is 100% a purely club trigger. It's a way in which a club can protect itself. One year contract with an extension option by the club. Why on earth would this be illegal? The player is poor, club get relegated or promoted they have an option to protect themselves by terminating the contract early. Nothing illegal about that, notice how you're the only one saying it?
-
-
2 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:
I think the one year extensions are triggered mutually, in other words it would be illegal to say you are working for us for one year, and then two if we feel like it at the time.
and thats the concern, anyone could, if i have it right re his contract, approach him now with a PCA. There will be several intrested in a player we rehabilitated for months.
edit: cant find info relating to a one year extension trigger option for Davis on official site. Just confirmation he signed a one year deal. All the centre backs, & McGinn etc are out of contract in the summer.
There are different ways a contract extension can be added to a player contract, some examples below:
1, Number of appearances.
2, Player choice.
3. Club choice.
There's nothing illegal about any of them. If Davis has signed a contract with the third option, he's signed a legal document allowing St Mirren football club to extend his contract length at any time (or within an agreed time period) Examples of the other two are:
Appearance, DVZ few years ago.
Player choice, McGinn last season.
As for the official website information, Davis 100% signed a one year contract with a year option. The kind of year option was not communicated.
Hope this helps.
-
11 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:17 minutes ago, bazil85 said:Why would he sign a 35 year old striker when we have Reilly and Smith on top form plus just signed Mullan?
1. We'd have to pay for him with likely no return, the fee would likely be a decent size as he could be the difference between them getting play-off or not.
2. We couldn't guarantee him first team football or we would have to drop one of them possibly impacting their form/ attitude
3. We have back-up strikers on the bench that are decent options.
Also we have two injury prone CBs in the team, one that can't play on artificial pitches. We have Buchanan that hasn't set the world on fire as well. Why would a new CB be a bad choice?I think you may have been whooshed.
think so?
New Contracts for Davis & Baird... Now!
in General St. Mirren Discussion
Posted
That's not even close to what you've been saying lol. You've been saying adding a contract extension clause triggered by the club is illegal. Not that it's legal if such clause is agreed mutually at the time the contract was signed.
What absolute rubbish. haha