From Eversley to Wembley

[Bronco]

For Goalkeepers quite possibly.

 

I have a small amount of knowledge and I know one club who are not bothered about any player except a potential goalkeeper in terms of height.

Fair shout. It does make a difference for keepers. I, myself, know a bit about this. Size is the first thing Brentford look for in any position. QPR look for quality and aren't bothered about the size, the exception being the keeper.

[Big J R]

Sometimes it's about the club.

 

No ccl team should pay £200 for a player.

 

 

Not without informing the tax-man !!

 

[Big J R]

Do Pro clubs ever look at the parents of these youngsters to get a clue what they may look like in the future.

 

 

My dad told me,when you go out with a girl,look at the Mum,because thats what your get in later years.SO TRUE in my case anyway.

 

 

Me too, Smudger. Temperament wise anyway !!

 

(Reaches for tin-hat !!)

[duncs]

nice try Johnno you know damn well we had 3 or 4 players on contract at Cove when you were captain I was on a contract at Ash in the 80's,Chipstead sold a lad called Nunn (might have the wrong name ) to Crystal Palace for 100,000 pounds and i believe the money helped towards all of their ground improvements.

[johnnojudo]

As far as I was aware Duncs, only one player was on contract at Cove. And it was £40 a week. Worked in favour for the player on this occasion as we had 6 weeks without a home game yet he still got paid. Although to be fair to him, he turned down 4 weeks of it.

[Terrence Collina]

I was offered a contract by Sandhurst in my first spell there in 1998 and they would have paid me £2/3 and it was purely for their benefit not mine.  Fortunately for me it didn't get followed up over the summer break and I managed to go up a level at Christmas the following season.

 

Bracknell Town had a guy on a contact last season and he ended up going to Maidenhead.  I don't think much, if any, of a transfer fee was paid, I think it was more that if he left Bracknell they wanted him to go up a level (or 3 in this case) rather than another Hellenic side.

Edited June 5, 2015 by Terrence Collina

[Terrence Collina]

But at the same time do you need to have a contract to keep a player.  I think most of us remember what happened to Dan Whitby a few years ago.

[E&E Rich]

But the contracts that would be offered at our level really wouldn't be enough to stop a higher club offering them money to go elsewhere and they'd be off.

 

All you are really getting in 99/100 cases is a wage bill when they are injured, although it is good to read the story higher up of a player who didn't take four of the six weeks he may have been entitled to.

 

If you put someone on a contract at this level you are telling the player that they are a bit special anyway and when they get their heads turned by say, a Maidenhead to use an example, their £20 / £30 a week will mean nothing to them and they'll be off. No player would agree to a transfer fee clause in their contract unless they were being paid much more than that so it just isn't worth the paper it's written on at this level any more.

[Krooner]

Of course now you also have the issue of minimum wage which has been discussed before.  I would suggest a contract for £2 to £3 per week now would be illegal.

 

Even if you argue travelling to the game is a journey to work yuo would still have to pay say from 1.30 until 5 on a Saturday.  3 1/2 hours @ £6.50 = £19.50.  Add 12.07% to that for holiday pay (A legal entitlement) = £21.85.  That is if they are 21 or over. And that is also if you only insist they play once a week and dont have to go training. 

 

And then of course as they would be classed as an employee which means you would have to run them through payroll and tax them if necessary.

[Chris Clapham]

Of course now you also have the issue of minimum wage which has been discussed before.  I would suggest a contract for £2 to £3 per week now would be illegal.

 

Even if you argue travelling to the game is a journey to work yuo would still have to pay say from 1.30 until 5 on a Saturday.  3 1/2 hours @ £6.50 = £19.50.  Add 12.07% to that for holiday pay (A legal entitlement) = £21.85.  That is if they are 21 or over. And that is also if you only insist they play once a week and dont have to go training. 

 

And then of course as they would be classed as an employee which means you would have to run them through payroll and tax them if necessary.

 

I  make that £22.75! And I believe the minimum wage is more than that now (about £6.81)?

Also, this thread would suggest that many are wide of the mark re contract payments at this level anyway. 

[Krooner]

I  make that £22.75! And I believe the minimum wage is more than that now (about £6.81)?

Also, this thread would suggest that many are wide of the mark re contract payments at this level anyway. 

Yep clearly lost my head Chris.  £22.75 + £2.75 = £25.50 incl holiday pay.

 

Minimum wage is £6.50 and goes up to £6.70 on 1st Oct this year I believe.

[Big J R]

Yep clearly lost my head Chris.  £22.75 + £2.75 = £25.50 incl holiday pay.

 

Minimum wage is £6.50 and goes up to £6.70 on 1st Oct this year I believe.

 

 

You're lucky Lord Alan Sugar isn't around, young Kroons, or you might just hear those two dreaded words !!

 

:bolt|:

Edited June 5, 2015 by Big J R

[Krooner]

You're lucky Lord Alan Sugar isn't around, young Kroons, or you might just hear those two dreaded words !!

 

:bolt|:

Bring it on BJR.  I know aplenty to get a nice pay off.

[Terrence Collina]

But the contracts that would be offered at our level really wouldn't be enough to stop a higher club offering them money to go elsewhere and they'd be off.

 

All you are really getting in 99/100 cases is a wage bill when they are injured, although it is good to read the story higher up of a player who didn't take four of the six weeks he may have been entitled to.

 

If you put someone on a contract at this level you are telling the player that they are a bit special anyway and when they get their heads turned by say, a Maidenhead to use an example, their £20 / £30 a week will mean nothing to them and they'll be off. No player would agree to a transfer fee clause in their contract unless they were being paid much more than that so it just isn't worth the paper it's written on at this level any more.

 

But a contract means you are at the mercy of the club you signed that contract with.  If, as the player, you wanted to leave then tough, until the contract expired or you could negotiate an exit.  Even worse if you were under 24 when even if it expired you could not leave against the club's wishes unless a fee was paid.

Edited June 5, 2015 by Terrence Collina

[E&E Rich]

Seriously TC, we're not still in the eighties here! We are post-Bosman these days.

 

Anyway, I doubt that any club will hang on to a player at this level if they don't want to play for them any more and there is little a club can realistically do in the very rare case that they did want to hold onto them. Everyone negotiates an exit in some form or another and the club get nothing almost every time.

 

Even if they owe money to the club for outstanding fines the club will rarely make a fuss to the Surrey FA, although the clubs are entitled to, and I must admit we did do it once with a degree of success last season!

Edited June 5, 2015 by E&E Rich

[Big J R]

I agree with E & E.

 

If a player doesn't want to play, then why keep him ?  He'll only end up disrupting the squad.

 

If there are fines/money owing the club should contact the club that he wants to go to, and say it's ok for him to leave AS LONG AS the new club commits to paying all outstanding monies.

 

The other problem can be in being able to get back all strip, kit etc.

[Terrence Collina]

If you don't want to disrupt the squad yes you may choose to just let the player go but if a player signs a contract, in my opinion the club has most of the control and the only benefit for a player is the guaranteed wage.

[duncs]

As far as I was aware Duncs, only one player was on contract at Cove. And it was £40 a week. Worked in favour for the player on this occasion as we had 6 weeks without a home game yet he still got paid. Although to be fair to him, he turned down 4 weeks of it.

Alex, Blounty and Fozzy and also I think Ashley,surprised you didn't know. Edited June 5, 2015 by duncs

[johnnojudo]

yes I forgot about Alex of which I was aware of.

But Fozzy and Ashley I wasn't.

 

Still.......my opinion still stands that unless a player has been offered a sizeable amount of money per week to sign a contract, they'd be foolish to tie themselves to a club. 

 

Can you imagine if one of the above players had a step 3 club looking at them but when they find out he's on contract. they'd run a mile unless they were made of money of course. 

[Dave Powell]

One for Chris Clapham - Mario Embalo is on a contract at CWU isn't he?