Players under contract
Players under contract
Has anyone got a definite list of the players under contract for next season v those who expire in the summer?
-
- Posts: 1753
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:42 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
- Location: Stockton-on-Tees
Re: Players under contract
Martin Gray most likely!JE93 wrote:Has anyone got a definite list of the players under contract for next season v those who expire in the summer?
Come on Darlo!
Smoke me a kipper....I'll be back for breakfast!
Smoke me a kipper....I'll be back for breakfast!
-
- Posts: 14122
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Players under contract
What happens if a player has a contract for next season, but we don't have the playing budget to pay it? I presume we would have to release them from their contract?
Re: Players under contract
Well interesting dilemma isn't it. Contracts are bi-lateral commitments so if we couldn't afford then we'd have to pay the contracts up I'd have thought (not sure if there are clauses in them to limit the cost.)Darlo_Pete wrote:What happens if a player has a contract for next season, but we don't have the playing budget to pay it? I presume we would have to release them from their contract?
Interestingly though if we don't get the budget then Martin (plus his team) will walk at least that is the threat. Don't our accounts suggest that the non-playing salaries are circa £80,000 per annum. Now if MG & team terminate their deals are we not entitled to compensation?
Basically the way I see it. We either successfully raise the money to save the current budget, the team and the manager or we don't. In that circumstance the manager and his team walks and actually the difference in the budget plus compo could be equivalent to the playing budget deficit any how (so basically we could keep the team as is).
Last edited by lo36789 on Tue May 02, 2017 7:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 14122
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Players under contract
So our only option is to raise the money for the playing budget!!
- Robbie Painter
- Posts: 2289
- Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:37 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Players under contract
We'd just move players on. Its not like there won't be demand for them.
Robbie Painter - http://twitter.com/RobbiePainter
Re: Players under contract
I don't understand which part of my post made you interpret that?Darlo_Pete wrote:So our only option is to raise the money for the playing budget!!
- theoriginalfatcat
- Posts: 6801
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Players under contract
Some previous Chairman (cast your minds back not too far) have been known to not pay players or force them out. This isn't the scenario here....I just felt like having a little dig.lo36789 wrote:Well interesting dilemma isn't it. Contracts are bi-lateral commitments so if we couldn't afford then we'd have to pay the contracts up I'd have thought
Sad but true.Robbie Painter wrote:We'd just move players on. Its not like there won't be demand for them.
Profile pic
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
-
- Posts: 14122
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Players under contract
If we have to release players from their contracts we may well have to pay them off and the amount needed to do that could be nearly as much as the amount we are trying to raise to protect the plating budget.lo36789 wrote:I don't understand which part of my post made you interpret that?Darlo_Pete wrote:So our only option is to raise the money for the playing budget!!
Re: Players under contract
Think you are missing the point, we basically wouldn't do that as there would be no benefit.Darlo_Pete wrote:If we have to release players from their contracts we may well have to pay them off and the amount needed to do that could be nearly as much as the amount we are trying to raise to protect the plating budget.lo36789 wrote:I don't understand which part of my post made you interpret that?Darlo_Pete wrote:So our only option is to raise the money for the playing budget!!
If we don't raise the money we will (if threats are acted on) lose our management team and our budget won't be in a net position.
layers couldn't follow the management team out the door unless we were paid transfer fees, and they cannot legally be contacted about moving to another club unless we are approached first.
As Robbie says in those circumstances we would sell the player for a transfer fee anyway or if push comes to shove would mutually terminate their contract if they find a new club.
Re: Players under contract
Lo, you said:
I'm not sure if you post with such a superior attitude deliberately or what, but you certainly come across as a "ref" type.
Robbie gave the answer that was needed, not your wordy offering in an attempt to sound clever.
As an aside, I'd love a list of the players still with us. Or maybe just whether the likes of Beck, Thommo, Ferguson, etc are for sure?
To which Pete replied:Basically the way I see it. We either successfully raise the money to save the current budget, the team and the manager or we don't.
Why then, did you ask him after that:So our only option is to raise the money for the playing budget!!
The bit that made him interpret that was the options you gave him?!I don't understand which part of my post made you interpret that?
I'm not sure if you post with such a superior attitude deliberately or what, but you certainly come across as a "ref" type.
Robbie gave the answer that was needed, not your wordy offering in an attempt to sound clever.
As an aside, I'd love a list of the players still with us. Or maybe just whether the likes of Beck, Thommo, Ferguson, etc are for sure?
Re: Players under contract
Spennymoor take them on.Darlo_Pete wrote:What happens if a player has a contract for next season, but we don't have the playing budget to pay it? I presume we would have to release them from their contract?
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.
We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.
Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.
DC
Re: Players under contract
Why? Because it clearly isn't our only option? If we don't raise the boost the budget money we are not lacking in options.
As Robbie says one option is sell them. I was raising that given our circumstances there is a chance that actually all we are doing is not boosting the playing budget we are basically raising an amount almost equivalent to our 'non-playing salaries', and given recent threats that amount of money won't actually be required anymore if we fail to achieve boost the budget and a private investor in the next 10 days.
As Robbie says one option is sell them. I was raising that given our circumstances there is a chance that actually all we are doing is not boosting the playing budget we are basically raising an amount almost equivalent to our 'non-playing salaries', and given recent threats that amount of money won't actually be required anymore if we fail to achieve boost the budget and a private investor in the next 10 days.
-
- Posts: 1005
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:25 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
- Location: Darlington
- Contact:
Re: Players under contract
How odd. Below is an extract from your related post on the 27th.lo36789 wrote:Why? Because it clearly isn't our only option? If we don't raise the boost the budget money we are not lacking in options.
As Robbie says one option is sell them. I was raising that given our circumstances there is a chance that actually all we are doing is not boosting the playing budget we are basically raising an amount almost equivalent to our 'non-playing salaries', and given recent threats that amount of money won't actually be required anymore if we fail to achieve boost the budget and a private investor in the next 10 days.
"Not quite. As things stand we the fans need to raise £192k by December 2017.
The thing with boost the budget is that it is an on going commitment. By December 2017 we will look to have found 500 people prepared to donate £4 per week / £8 per fortnight / £15 per month. If we don't then I suppose strictly speaking the playing budget is cut by the difference."
So is the BTB next 10 days dependent, or on going as you previously asserted?
-
- Posts: 1005
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:25 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
- Location: Darlington
- Contact:
Re: Players under contract
PS TDS is correct about your posting. It seems to me you are the original "Billy"
Re: Players under contract
You obviously missed Martin Gray did an interview on Saturday and said the club had to sort out what we were doing in 14 days. The reason we are doing the boost the budget is because Martin Gray wants his budget.tezza wrote:So is the BTB next 10 days dependent, or on going as you previously asserted?
You also obviously haven't also looked into boost the budget in an awful lot of detail. As whilst the pledges accumulate to be £85,000 they are taken as regular payment either weekly or monthly.
So we don't need to have £85,000 in the bank by December 2017. We need to have inside I think on the official timescales in the next 2 months pledges which cumulatively reach £85,000 over a year. That timescale doesn't however fit with Martin Gray's interview on Saturday as he wants his budget agreed in the next 10 days by the sounds of it.
-
- Posts: 1005
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:25 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
- Location: Darlington
- Contact:
Re: Players under contract
I gave up listening to Martin Gray for the time being, a couple of weeks ago. Following what I would say amounted to a public embarrassment of some of the people who have greatly assisted him to where he is today. What MG want, never mind his budget is to get us off the "laughing stock" peg he placed us upon. How long has it been now, sure you will remind me. Still no substance or a single fact. Similarly I have never listened to you and your "I think" statements which as I and others have said are at best irritating and worst totally boring which probably reflects generally your circumstance.
Re: Players under contract
I take that as I have answered your question sufficiently on the difference of the timescale between what I "previously asserted" and what I called out today.tezza wrote:I gave up listening to Martin Gray for the time being, a couple of weeks ago. Following what I would say amounted to a public embarrassment of some of the people who have greatly assisted him to where he is today. What MG want, never mind his budget is to get us off the "laughing stock" peg he placed us upon. How long has it been now, sure you will remind me. Still no substance or a single fact. Similarly I have never listened to you and your "I think" statements which as I and others have said are at best irritating and worst totally boring which probably reflects generally your circumstance.
-
- Posts: 1005
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:25 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
- Location: Darlington
- Contact:
Re: Players under contract
I take it that the appendage growing out of your forehead has now reached maximum growth. Within minutes you will become un balanced, you will in topsy-turvey fashion succumb, so your arse will become your head, your legs will kick out and wiggle in a valiant attempt to restore balance. There you shall remain until some one decides to upright you. Hopefully not to soon.
Re: Players under contract
That's a yes it was then.
Re: Players under contract
I was thinking that the Players or Management Team, must have had a clause in their contracts that would pay a bonus should the club have been promoted this season just finished? Surely that would have been the case wouldn't it? Given the Ground grading issues, those with such a clause have been denied an opportunity to earn any such bonus. Therefore their contracts have fundamentally been changed without their consent, does that in some way mean the Club (rather than the Players) are "in breach of contract?" I guess what worries me is are the contracts as such still valid, because if they are not, we could lose out on any transfer fees if players move before the end of their contracts. Any thoughts?
Re: Players under contract
Think you are inventing problems to worry about.bga wrote:I was thinking that the Players or Management Team, must have had a clause in their contracts that would pay a bonus should the club have been promoted this season just finished? Surely that would have been the case wouldn't it? Given the Ground grading issues, those with such a clause have been denied an opportunity to earn any such bonus. Therefore their contracts have fundamentally been changed without their consent, does that in some way mean the Club (rather than the Players) are "in breach of contract?" I guess what worries me is are the contracts as such still valid, because if they are not, we could lose out on any transfer fees if players move before the end of their contracts. Any thoughts?
There is no breach of contract here that would allow players to leave for free
- theoriginalfatcat
- Posts: 6801
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Players under contract
bga wrote:I was thinking that the Players or Management Team, must have had a clause in their contracts that would pay a bonus should the club have been promoted this season just finished? Surely that would have been the case wouldn't it? Given the Ground grading issues, those with such a clause have been denied an opportunity to earn any such bonus. Therefore their contracts have fundamentally been changed without their consent, does that in some way mean the Club (rather than the Players) are "in breach of contract?" I guess what worries me is are the contracts as such still valid, because if they are not, we could lose out on any transfer fees if players move before the end of their contracts. Any thoughts?
I think (but don't know) that the clause would have stated a bonus for finishing top 5 or top 1.
See what I mean? Thus negating all sorts of stuff that could possibly go wrong.
I'm sure all the contracts will be watertight.
Profile pic
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Re: Players under contract
Spen I am not "inventing problems," I was questioning where we might stand on a potential issue!spen666 wrote:Think you are inventing problems to worry about.bga wrote:I was thinking that the Players or Management Team, must have had a clause in their contracts that would pay a bonus should the club have been promoted this season just finished? Surely that would have been the case wouldn't it? Given the Ground grading issues, those with such a clause have been denied an opportunity to earn any such bonus. Therefore their contracts have fundamentally been changed without their consent, does that in some way mean the Club (rather than the Players) are "in breach of contract?" I guess what worries me is are the contracts as such still valid, because if they are not, we could lose out on any transfer fees if players move before the end of their contracts. Any thoughts?
There is no breach of contract here that would allow players to leave for free
Re: Players under contract
I sort of get what you mean, but surely a bonus for finishing top 5 as we did, would/could be paid for from the gate receipts from any home semi final?theoriginalfatcat wrote:bga wrote:I was thinking that the Players or Management Team, must have had a clause in their contracts that would pay a bonus should the club have been promoted this season just finished? Surely that would have been the case wouldn't it? Given the Ground grading issues, those with such a clause have been denied an opportunity to earn any such bonus. Therefore their contracts have fundamentally been changed without their consent, does that in some way mean the Club (rather than the Players) are "in breach of contract?" I guess what worries me is are the contracts as such still valid, because if they are not, we could lose out on any transfer fees if players move before the end of their contracts. Any thoughts?
I think (but don't know) that the clause would have stated a bonus for finishing top 5 or top 1.
See what I mean? Thus negating all sorts of stuff that could possibly go wrong.
I'm sure all the contracts will be watertight.
Re: Players under contract
bga wrote:Spen I am not "inventing problems," I was questioning where we might stand on a potential issue!spen666 wrote:Think you are inventing problems to worry about.bga wrote:I was thinking that the Players or Management Team, must have had a clause in their contracts that would pay a bonus should the club have been promoted this season just finished? Surely that would have been the case wouldn't it? Given the Ground grading issues, those with such a clause have been denied an opportunity to earn any such bonus. Therefore their contracts have fundamentally been changed without their consent, does that in some way mean the Club (rather than the Players) are "in breach of contract?" I guess what worries me is are the contracts as such still valid, because if they are not, we could lose out on any transfer fees if players move before the end of their contracts. Any thoughts?
There is no breach of contract here that would allow players to leave for free
Have it your way.
There is only a problem in your mind. You are inventing a problem
Has an player claimed a breach of contract?
Even if they did the remedy would be payment of bonus if anything. They would not be able to repudiate the contract for such a minor breach (even if there were a breach)
Re: Players under contract
How would that work if they had finished 4th or 5th and not had a home semibga wrote:I sort of get what you mean, but surely a bonus for finishing top 5 as we did, would/could be paid for from the gate receipts from any home semi final?theoriginalfatcat wrote:bga wrote:I was thinking that the Players or Management Team, must have had a clause in their contracts that would pay a bonus should the club have been promoted this season just finished? Surely that would have been the case wouldn't it? Given the Ground grading issues, those with such a clause have been denied an opportunity to earn any such bonus. Therefore their contracts have fundamentally been changed without their consent, does that in some way mean the Club (rather than the Players) are "in breach of contract?" I guess what worries me is are the contracts as such still valid, because if they are not, we could lose out on any transfer fees if players move before the end of their contracts. Any thoughts?
I think (but don't know) that the clause would have stated a bonus for finishing top 5 or top 1.
See what I mean? Thus negating all sorts of stuff that could possibly go wrong.
I'm sure all the contracts will be watertight.
-
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:29 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Players under contract
We would have had at least 1 home game as the semis in this league are over 2 legs. Home and away
- theoriginalfatcat
- Posts: 6801
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: Players under contract
The bonus would have been financed by an extra match or possibly two - but in this case I would presume that the players were paid a bonus anyway.bga wrote:I sort of get what you mean, but surely a bonus for finishing top 5 as we did, would/could be paid for from the gate receipts from any home semi final?theoriginalfatcat wrote:bga wrote:I was thinking that the Players or Management Team, must have had a clause in their contracts that would pay a bonus should the club have been promoted this season just finished? Surely that would have been the case wouldn't it? Given the Ground grading issues, those with such a clause have been denied an opportunity to earn any such bonus. Therefore their contracts have fundamentally been changed without their consent, does that in some way mean the Club (rather than the Players) are "in breach of contract?" I guess what worries me is are the contracts as such still valid, because if they are not, we could lose out on any transfer fees if players move before the end of their contracts. Any thoughts?
I think (but don't know) that the clause would have stated a bonus for finishing top 5 or top 1.
See what I mean? Thus negating all sorts of stuff that could possibly go wrong.
I'm sure all the contracts will be watertight.
I certainly hope so, it would be unfair to them to finish top 5 (their goal) then been denied a bonus through no fault of their own. It was bad enough not getting the chance to play for promotion, which could have been achieved - as presently Chorley are still battling away in extra time against Halifax in the final.
Profile pic
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Re: Players under contract
Darlo Since 68 & bga 1 Spen Nil.Darlo Since 68 wrote:We would have had at least 1 home game as the semis in this league are over 2 legs. Home and away