Stenhousemuir FC - The Warriors - The 2023/24 Thread

[beaver1]

The statement hardly makes good, what was obviously a big mistake. Suspect/hope it is being hastily rewritten.

Feel sorry for Swann, but we can’t afford to be paying transfer fees so no surprise the deal hasn’t happened.

[Brazilianlex]

3 minutes ago, beaver1 said:

The statement hardly makes good, what was obviously a big mistake. Suspect/hope it is being hastily rewritten.

Feel sorry for Swann, but we can’t afford to be paying transfer fees so no surprise the deal hasn’t happened.

Really, not according to your chairman’s statement 

better financially than last season blah blah blah plus games against hearts and Dundee Utd in Betfred 

the PFA and SFA need to be all over this and Stenny should be fined for a number of  rule breaches.

[CowdenLoyal]

He started about half your league games, and it would have been even less than that if not for Talbot's injury troubles. He was, of course, useful, but the point I'm making is that his squad player status  for a shite team should be reflected in relatively minor compensation being awarded/asked for.
They could have taken it to a tribunal, but then they would have run the risk of the compensation being set at a ridiculous level close to what Cowdenbeath were asking for. 
Again, I'm not saying they aren't. My point is that a development fee for a 21-year-old squad player at a bottom-half League Two club should be a pittance. 
It's a tricky situation for all involved, and it's Cowdenbeath's prerogative to demand whatever they want, but the big loser in all this is the player and it's Cowden who are holding him back.

Rules are rules. Stenny are the ones that have clearly fucked up in that regard. Who's to say it's not a pittance we are after anyway? Perhaps Stenny are in a worse way financially than has been made public?

If there's any sense, Harvey will return to us, sign the contract on offer and put a shift in week in week out. He's a good lad and pretty popular among the support - there would be no grudges held. I'd say that's likely to happen seeing as Talbot is looking at retiring.

[The Minertaur]

He started about half your league games, and it would have been even less than that if not for Talbot's injury troubles. He was, of course, useful, but the point I'm making is that his squad player status  for a shite team should be reflected in relatively minor compensation being awarded/asked for.
They could have taken it to a tribunal, but then they would have run the risk of the compensation being set at a ridiculous level close to what Cowdenbeath were asking for. 
Again, I'm not saying they aren't. My point is that a development fee for a 21-year-old squad player at a bottom-half League Two club should be a pittance. 
It's a tricky situation for all involved, and it's Cowdenbeath's prerogative to demand whatever they want, but the big loser in all this is the player and it's Cowden who are holding him back.

Why should it be a pittance? If we had finished 5th last season then we'd have been justified in asking for more money?

Swann has been an important player for us and we are well within our rights to offer him a contract. Every club in Scotland would do exactly what we've done. It's just unfortunate for us that Stenhousmuir have acted unprofessionally and it's messing Swann up. Not our fault and it would have been irresponsible of our board to have not seeked compensation.

[the_bully_wee]

2 minutes ago, Brazilianlex said:

the PFA and SFA need to be all over this and Stenny should be fined for a number of  rule breaches.

Which rules have they breached, exactly? If anything, the PFA would come down on Cowdenbeath for trying to fence in a player who was his manager's third-choice in his preferred position at times this season. Swann clearly doesn't want to be with you any longer and is being priced out of moving by the club, despite not having agreed to a new contract.

The common-sense outcome all-round would have been for Cowden to seek compensation to the tune of a few thousand pounds, not prohibitively high but also not a freebie either. It would be pretty cheap of Stenhousemuir not to pay a small four-figure sum for his services, which would amount to only a small proportion of their playing budget. Perhaps the clubs could even have come to a gentleman's agreement for Swann not to feature against Cowdenbeath next season, or some such. As it is, the boy's footballing career looks to be being held back by Cowdenbeath's excessive demands for an out-of-contract, bit-part player. Hopefully, for his sake, that won't be the case. 

 

[CowdenLoyal]

Why should it be a pittance? If we had finished 5th last season then we'd have been justified in asking for more money?

Swann has been an important player for us and we are well within our rights to offer him a contract. Every club in Scotland would do exactly what we've done. It's just unfortunate for us that Stenhousmuir have acted unprofessionally and it's messing Swann up. Not our fault and it would have been irresponsible of our board to have not seeked compensation.

The fact the legibility of the signing was brought up on here a good while ago speaks volumes about the whole thing. Some of it was tongue in cheek as well if I remember rightly. Absolutely embarrassing behaviour from the Stenny hierarchy.

[Muzza81]

24 minutes ago, The_Pit_Owns said:

He was our Player Of The Season in the 2017/18 season, scoring 2 goals against Cove to keep us in the League. 

I'd say he's been an important player for the club and that should be reflected in the compensation figure. 

If your team is shite and develop a player from a young age but he goes off to another club you shouldn’t be entitled to anything because your team is shit. Hopefully FIFA introduce this rule from next season. It’s only fair - only the top clubs should receive development fees.

[the_bully_wee]

1 minute ago, The Minertaur said:

Why should it be a pittance? If we had finished 5th last season then we'd have been justified in asking for more money?

Swann has been an important player for us and we are well within our rights to offer him a contract. Every club in Scotland would do exactly what we've done. It's just unfortunate for us that Stenhousmuir have acted unprofessionally and it's messing Swann up. Not our fault and it would have been irresponsible of our board to have not seeked compensation.

You'd be justified in asking for more money if he was demonstrably a first-choice player, rather than a second or third choice in his position within a poor side. I know he's popular among the support, but it's pretty obvious that Bollan doesn't rate him particularly highly, otherwise Blair Malcolm wouldn't be playing out of position to keep him on the bench. He wouldn't have played nearly as much this season if Talbot was fit, and as such any compensation should be minimal. It's a shame to see Cowdenbeath holding the player ransom given the contribution he's made to your club and the squad status he's had to endure. 

[Blue Oktober]

2 hours ago, Christophe said:

Statement on Swann, what an utter balls up. 

Where does the boy go from here though? If no club are willing to pay a “development fee” to Cowdenbeath is he effectively priced out of football until he’s 24? Or forced to remain at a club he doesn’t want to be at, and isn’t contracted to? 

Seems like a ridiculous flaw in the compensation system.

I can't speak for his desire to remain or not  but you really should check the facts in terms of whether under contract or not  champ ;-/

[Muzza81]

3 minutes ago, the_bully_wee said:

Which rules have they breached, exactly? If anything, the PFA would come down on Cowdenbeath for trying to fence in a player who was his manager's third-choice in his preferred position at times this season. Swann clearly doesn't want to be with you any longer and is being priced out of moving by the club, despite not having agreed to a new contract.

The common-sense outcome all-round would have been for Cowden to seek compensation to the tune of a few thousand pounds, not prohibitively high but also not a freebie either. It would be pretty cheap of Stenhousemuir not to pay a small four-figure sum for his services, which would amount to only a small proportion of their playing budget. Perhaps the clubs could even have come to a gentleman's agreement for Swann not to feature against Cowdenbeath next season, or some such. As it is, the boy's footballing career looks to be being held back by Cowdenbeath's excessive demands for an out-of-contract, bit-part player. Hopefully, for his sake, that won't be the case. 

 

Seeing as you have all the answers, and are once again making things up, how much did Cowden ask for? I want a specific figure otherwise you’re to be completely ignored. 

Interested what position Swann was third choice for as well.

[cowdenbeath]

4 minutes ago, the_bully_wee said:

Which rules have they breached, exactly? If anything, the PFA would come down on Cowdenbeath for trying to fence in a player who was his manager's third-choice in his preferred position at times this season. Swann clearly doesn't want to be with you any longer and is being priced out of moving by the club, despite not having agreed to a new contract.

The common-sense outcome all-round would have been for Cowden to seek compensation to the tune of a few thousand pounds, not prohibitively high but also not a freebie either. It would be pretty cheap of Stenhousemuir not to pay a small four-figure sum for his services, which would amount to only a small proportion of their playing budget. Perhaps the clubs could even have come to a gentleman's agreement for Swann not to feature against Cowdenbeath next season, or some such. As it is, the boy's footballing career looks to be being held back by Cowdenbeath's excessive demands for an out-of-contract, bit-part player. Hopefully, for his sake, that won't be the case. 

 

You  don't even know how much Cowden were looking for in compensation so how can you say he's been priced out. 

[Brazilianlex]

3 minutes ago, cowdenbeath said:

You  don't even know how much Cowden were looking for in compensation so how can you say he's been priced out. 

If the compensation request was excessive, why have stenny now taken down the statement from their website ?

i don’t think we would be asking for much,

jamie Sneddon went for a few thousand with add ons for appearances which is entirely reasonable. Stenny don’t want to pay anything and thought they could get away with it.

[Brazilianlex]

12 minutes ago, the_bully_wee said:

Which rules have they breached, exactly? If anything, the PFA would come down on Cowdenbeath for trying to fence in a player who was his manager's third-choice in his preferred position at times this season. Swann clearly doesn't want to be with you any longer and is being priced out of moving by the club, despite not having agreed to a new contract.

The common-sense outcome all-round would have been for Cowden to seek compensation to the tune of a few thousand pounds, not prohibitively high but also not a freebie either. It would be pretty cheap of Stenhousemuir not to pay a small four-figure sum for his services, which would amount to only a small proportion of their playing budget. Perhaps the clubs could even have come to a gentleman's agreement for Swann not to feature against Cowdenbeath next season, or some such. As it is, the boy's footballing career looks to be being held back by Cowdenbeath's excessive demands for an out-of-contract, bit-part player. Hopefully, for his sake, that won't be the case. 

 

You may have a point if you believe the stenny statement , but that has now been removed, why ? 

[the_bully_wee]

1 minute ago, cowdenbeath said:

You  don't even know how much Cowden were looking for in compensation so how can you say he's been priced out. 

I addressed that point in a previous post and, without knowing the figures involved, it's fair to say that this situation constitutes either extreme cheapness from Stenhousemuir (a few thousand equates to about £50/week out of your budget), or piss-taking out-pricing from Cowdenbeath. If it's the case that Stenhousemuir have been tight b*****ds then Cowdenbeath are, of course, entirely blameless here and well within their rights to act how they have.

Hopefully Swann will either be allowed to move on for a sensible sum or be given the opportunity to establish himself as a starter at Cowdenbeath, because it would be a shame if his career was held back by this sorry episode. It's hard to imagine that Bollan will see him as his first choice, even if he does stay, whereas it looked for all the world as though he was McMenamin's main man for the left-back/left-wing-back slot at Stenny. 

[Blue Oktober]

11 minutes ago, cowdenbeath said:

You  don't even know how much Cowden were looking for in compensation so how can you say he's been priced out. 

Andy I'm completely confused here bold statement then taken down quite quickly for reasons I'm not aware of hopefully for all becomes clearer in the near future let's hope.

 

[Blue Oktober]

27 minutes ago, the_bully_wee said:

I addressed that point in a previous post and, without knowing the figures involved, it's fair to say that this situation constitutes either extreme cheapness from Stenhousemuir (a few thousand equates to about £50/week out of your budget), or piss-taking out-pricing from Cowdenbeath. If it's the case that Stenhousemuir have been tight b*****ds then Cowdenbeath are, of course, entirely blameless here and well within their rights to act how they have.

Hopefully Swann will either be allowed to move on for a sensible sum or be given the opportunity to establish himself as a starter at Cowdenbeath, because it would be a shame if his career was held back by this sorry episode. It's hard to imagine that Bollan will see him as his first choice, even if he does stay, whereas it looked for all the world as though he was McMenamin's main man for the left-back/left-wing-back slot at Stenny. 

There is a fairly prescribed easy to understand  route around this of which all clubs are aware and ordinarily moves and payments etc happen within that framework ,  which Cowdenbeath and the rest of the league have operated within.  Not really clear what's happened on this occasion but will wait for the detail to come out before making comment.

Edited June 6, 2019 by Blue Oktober
typo

[The Minertaur]

You'd be justified in asking for more money if he was demonstrably a first-choice player, rather than a second or third choice in his position within a poor side. I know he's popular among the support, but it's pretty obvious that Bollan doesn't rate him particularly highly, otherwise Blair Malcolm wouldn't be playing out of position to keep him on the bench. He wouldn't have played nearly as much this season if Talbot was fit, and as such any compensation should be minimal. It's a shame to see Cowdenbeath holding the player ransom given the contribution he's made to your club and the squad status he's had to endure. 

Asking for compensation that we are entitled to isn't holding the player to ransom. Cowden have done exactly what every other club in the world would do.

It's nice to think that clubs just let their young players leave for nothing to further their career but that's not the reality us small clubs live in. Why should the club not offer him a contract when he's been involved in most league games and we're losing Talbot?

[The Minertaur]

Devestated a View From the Terrace has finished for the summer as would love to hear this get a discussion!

[big al]

What an absolute gang stenny are. 

And their ringleader Neilly, the top cretin has vanished when the heat is on.

Sad it’s come to this, highlights one of the reasons I struggle with Bollan at the helm. It’s down to him this situation has arisen.

[CowdenLoyal]

In his defence, Neilly has rightly criticised his clubs handling of the situation a few posts ago but I agree with you about Bollan. Unfortunately this kind of situation where a manager doesn't fancy a player at a club happens often. I'd really like to see Harvey stay at us but him and Bollan need to sort out their differences for that to happen.