the_bully_wee Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 (edited) It's not very clear from the SFA's published Registration Procedures (or if it's provided for, I've missed it), but my understanding of it is that no compensation - or very little - would have been due if Swann rejected the contract Cowdenbeath had offered him and allowed his present deal to expire, and he would then have been free to sign for Stenhousemuir as a free agent without the need for compensation. It seems to me (though I could be wrong, and would be happily corrected) that it was the 'pre-contract' nature of the approach which means that compensation - either on terms agreed mutually by the clubs or, failing that, a tribunal - was due, as it is when a player under 24 is offered a new contract on the same (or better) terms by his parent club. ETA: it's a terrible oversight from Stenhousemuir, but given Swann's lack of appearances over the past two seasons it's hard to imagine that a tribunal would rule in favour of awarding Cowdenbeath a large fee for a player who isn't exactly a young pup. Perhaps Stenny just don't feel it's worth the risk. Edited June 6, 2019 by the_bully_wee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilly Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 I mean the news is bad enough but the way we have worded as though Cowden have moved the goal posts is just utterly embarrassing. Let's own it a bit more and have some humility. Tinpot stuff and WE should be admitting so. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdenbeath Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 1 minute ago, cowden boy said: Embarrassing from stenny Its Harvey I feel sorry for guy would have been thinking he's joining a club in good faith and now left in limbo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christophe Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 3 minutes ago, cowdenbeath said: As he is still 22 years old we are entitled to a fee for development as a player since he has been with us since he was 12 I think. I would imagine if it had been the other way round the Warriors would have been rightly looking for a fee. Ok, so what part of that doesn’t make it a ridiculous flaw that the boy is now effectively out of the game? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christophe Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 3 minutes ago, the_bully_wee said: It's not very clear from the SFA's published Registration Procedures (or if it's provided for, I've missed it), but my understanding of it is that no compensation - or very little - would have been due if Swann rejected the contract Cowdenbeath had offered him and allowed his present deal to expire, and he would then have been free to sign for Stenhousemuir as a free agent without the need for compensation. It seems to me (though I could be wrong, and would be happily corrected) that it was the 'pre-contract' nature of the approach which means that compensation - either on terms agreed mutually by the clubs or, failing that, a tribunal - was due, as it is when a player under 24 is offered a new contract on the same (or better) terms by his parent club. If this is the case then it really is an absolute shambles from us, as Neilly says, the club are trying to palm this off as Cowden being unreasonable when someone at the club has made an utter arse of it by approaching the player too early, to not know what process that would then entail is utter amateurism. Embarrassing situation, pathetic statement (and way too late when everyone knew this was flying about for around a week) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdenbeath Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Christophe said: Ok, so what part of that doesn’t make it a ridiculous flaw that the boy is now effectively out of the game? If I had anything to do with signing players at a football club and they were 22 year old I would have been checking about development fees before announcing any signing Cowden were obviously standing their ground looking for what they were entitled to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christophe Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, cowdenbeath said: If I had anything to do with signing players at a football club and they were 22 year old I would have been checking about development fees before announcing any signing Cowden were obviously standing their ground looking for what they were entitled to. Yeah think you’re failing to grasp the difference in concept between what you are entitled to do and what is a flaw in said entitlement. No complaints form me over the former. @the_bully_wee has already managed to grasp the flaw issue and had already addressed it fully while you’re scrambling about getting all indignant so that’s enough from you, thicko Edited June 6, 2019 by Christophe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdenbeath Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, Christophe said: Yeah think you’re failing to grasp the difference in concept between what you are entitled to do and what is a flaw in said entitlement. No complaints form me over the former. @the_bully_wee has already managed to grasp the flaw issue and had already addressed it fully while you’re scrambling about getting all indignant so that’s enough from you, thicko I think the only flaw is Stenny failed to check out the development fee situation before they announced the signing. The fact you have to resort to being personal calling posters thicko says your not worth debating with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christophe Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 5 minutes ago, cowdenbeath said: I think the only flaw is Stenny failed to check out the development fee situation before they announced the signing. The fact you have to resort to being personal calling posters thicko says your not worth debating with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Am Featha Taigh Nan Clach Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 I feel sorry for Swann. Stuck in limbo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzza81 Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 Shite for Swann. Shite from Stenny. I can’t imagine we would have been asking for obscene amounts of money here - wonder if there was any sort of negotiation on this? Blaming us because some muppet on your board doesn’t know the rules of football isn’t very wise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Pit_Owns Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 1 hour ago, the_bully_wee said: ETA: it's a terrible oversight from Stenhousemuir, but given Swann's lack of appearances over the past two seasons it's hard to imagine that a tribunal would rule in favour of awarding Cowdenbeath a large fee for a player who isn't exactly a young pup. Perhaps Stenny just don't feel it's worth the risk. Swann played 28 games last season. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brazilianlex Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 1 hour ago, cowdenbeath said: Its Harvey I feel sorry for guy would have been thinking he's joining a club in good faith and now left in limbo. Surely the PFA will take up his case, the boy has been shafted by Stenny. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_bully_wee Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 3 minutes ago, The_Pit_Owns said: Swann played 28 games last season. 29 league starts in two full first-team seasons for a bottom-half side isn't a huge amount. In any case, it's not as if he was a key player for Cowdenbeath or even particularly highly thought of by the manager, so that should figure in limiting the amount of compensation due. It's a shite situation for Swann, who will either now have to remain a player underneath a dino who doesn't rate him or continue elsewhere as an unpaid amateur through no fault of his own. He'd no doubt have been Stenhousemuir's first-choice and utilised in a manner which suited his strengths. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_bully_wee Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Brazilianlex said: Surely the PFA will take up his case, the boy has been shafted by Stenny. If he's been shafted by anyone then it's Cowdenbeath, who have ostensibly offered him another contract solely to ensure that they are entitled to compensation should he move elsewhere, and then demanded an amount of it which Stenny deemed excessive. It's not a particularly good look for the club, and is the sort of thing which might make young players think twice before signing for you. Of course, this all depends on just how much Cowden demanded, but I can't imagine Stenny will have jettisoned the whole deal for the sake of a few grand. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzza81 Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 7 minutes ago, the_bully_wee said: If he's been shafted by anyone then it's Cowdenbeath, who have ostensibly offered him another contract solely to ensure that they are entitled to compensation should he move elsewhere, and then demanded an amount of it which Stenny deemed excessive. It's not a particularly good look for the club, and is the sort of thing which might make young players think twice before signing for you. Of course, this all depends on just how much Cowden demanded, but I can't imagine Stenny will have jettisoned the whole deal for the sake of a few grand. You’re talking rubbish. Swann is a left sided player who was involved 28 times last season for us, that’s not a handful and shows he has use to us. I’m sure we would be delighted if he stayed on to provide balance and cover, he has opted to move on though, for whatever reason. If Stenny felt our ‘demands’ were unreasonable they could take it to a tribunal, no? Or are they concerned that what we asked for was fair they just didn’t want to pay anything. Your previous post stating ‘for a bottom half team’ was really insightful though. Are bottom half teams not allowed to rotate youth players? You just keep bashing on with all your conjecture and speculation to try and make a point though. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_bully_wee Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 5 minutes ago, Muzza81 said: You’re talking rubbish. Swann is a left sided player who was involved 28 times last season for us, that’s not a handful and shows he has use to us. I’m sure we would be delighted if he stayed on to provide balance and cover, he has opted to move on though, for whatever reason. If Stenny felt our ‘demands’ were unreasonable they could take it to a tribunal, no? Or are they concerned that what we asked for was fair they just didn’t want to pay anything. Your previous post stating ‘for a bottom half team’ was really insightful though. Are bottom half teams not allowed to rotate youth players? You just keep bashing on with all your conjecture and speculation to try and make a point though. 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brazilianlex Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 Swann statement removed from stenny website. Bullshit perhaps ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Pit_Owns Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 46 minutes ago, the_bully_wee said: 29 league starts in two full first-team seasons for a bottom-half side isn't a huge amount. In any case, it's not as if he was a key player for Cowdenbeath or even particularly highly thought of by the manager, so that should figure in limiting the amount of compensation due. 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. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brazilianlex Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 1 minute 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. I think the fact that the statement has been removed from the stenny website would suggest that it was shite and an effort to deflect blame. stenny need to man up and tell the truth that they fucked up and thought they could get him for nothing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.