|
Post by mehewmagic on Jun 7, 2018 8:42:20 GMT
Perhaps it is a little more straightforward and just good business sense by Stoke; Where a professional player, under the age of 24, has been offered a new contract by his club (subject to certain requirements that the offer must meet set out in Rule 64.3 of the Football League Rules) and he rejects that offer in order to take up the opportunity to sign for another club, compensation will be payable.Not sure it is 100% that simple. Thought it might also depend on whether the club developed the player? Why did we not get compo for Harry Pell when we apparently offered him a new contract (on equal terms or better), which he turned down.
|
|
|
Post by Gastafari on Jun 7, 2018 9:15:53 GMT
Perhaps it is a little more straightforward and just good business sense by Stoke; Where a professional player, under the age of 24, has been offered a new contract by his club (subject to certain requirements that the offer must meet set out in Rule 64.3 of the Football League Rules) and he rejects that offer in order to take up the opportunity to sign for another club, compensation will be payable.Not sure it is 100% that simple. Thought it might also depend on whether the club developed the player? Why did we not get compo for Harry Pell when we apparently offered him a new contract (on equal terms or better), which he turned down. I think it's all to do with how long you've been with a club, and like you said "developed". Harry Pell came through Charlton's youth academy. Pell was only at Rovers barely a season, Telford's been at Stoke 3 years
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jun 7, 2018 11:03:40 GMT
Perhaps it is a little more straightforward and just good business sense by Stoke; Where a professional player, under the age of 24, has been offered a new contract by his club (subject to certain requirements that the offer must meet set out in Rule 64.3 of the Football League Rules) and he rejects that offer in order to take up the opportunity to sign for another club, compensation will be payable.Not sure it is 100% that simple. Thought it might also depend on whether the club developed the player? Why did we not get compo for Harry Pell when we apparently offered him a new contract (on equal terms or better), which he turned down. Didn't Pell leave us for Hereford Utd? Perhaps if his transfer did meet all the criteria we were just too embarrassed to ask them for compo/it wasn't worth the trouble?
|
|
|
Post by Gas_Quarters on Jun 7, 2018 11:29:03 GMT
Perhaps it is a little more straightforward and just good business sense by Stoke; Where a professional player, under the age of 24, has been offered a new contract by his club (subject to certain requirements that the offer must meet set out in Rule 64.3 of the Football League Rules) and he rejects that offer in order to take up the opportunity to sign for another club, compensation will be payable.Not sure it is 100% that simple. Thought it might also depend on whether the club developed the player? Why did we not get compo for Harry Pell when we apparently offered him a new contract (on equal terms or better), which he turned down. How do you know we offered equal or better terms? We got relegated that season and he barely played for us so there’s probably a good chance we offered him reduced terms.
|
|
|
Post by mehewmagic on Jun 8, 2018 15:13:49 GMT
Not sure it is 100% that simple. Thought it might also depend on whether the club developed the player? Why did we not get compo for Harry Pell when we apparently offered him a new contract (on equal terms or better), which he turned down. How do you know we offered equal or better terms? We got relegated that season and he barely played for us so there’s probably a good chance we offered him reduced terms. It was reported as that at the time.
|
|
|
Post by mehewmagic on Jun 8, 2018 15:18:18 GMT
Not sure it is 100% that simple. Thought it might also depend on whether the club developed the player? Why did we not get compo for Harry Pell when we apparently offered him a new contract (on equal terms or better), which he turned down. I think it's all to do with how long you've been with a club, and like you said "developed". Harry Pell came through Charlton's youth academy. Pell was only at Rovers barely a season, Telford's been at Stoke 3 years Yes, that's my point. Neither were developed at either club. Whether that makes a difference for under 24 yr olds is the question. Wondered if anyone has any 100% answer. The EPPP system / recompense when taking young players straight from other clubs' academies is clear (even if it is frighteningly unfair).
|
|