The Partick Thistle thread

[North Terrace Gazza]

How exactly can a club sign a contract with a player and then cut the wages by 50% because they’re skint?

[VladimirMooc]

31 minutes ago, North Terrace Gazza said:

How exactly can a club sign a contract with a player and then cut the wages by 50% because they’re skint?

Because the contract the player has signed allows for it? Relegation clauses are standard practice.

[R&Y99]

Anyone who was signed in the summer may have a relegation release clause, especially after last season. Docherty did say that he would still come to us  in a newspaper interview, hopefully a few others stay for a spine of a team.

[JudgeMudge]

Key is that “some of the cuts” will be 40/50%. Would guess that players we want to punt are at the higher end, while those we want to keep will be much less.

[Skyline Drifter]

3 hours ago, JudgeMudge said:

Key is that “some of the cuts” will be 40/50%. Would guess that players we want to punt are at the higher end, while those we want to keep will be much less.

You can only cut it by what the contract says you can cut it by so unless you had the foresight to know which players you would want to keep back when they signed the thing then you wont be able to do that. It will have had a specific wage cut in it for relegation if it had a relegation clause.

[Ad Lib]

22 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

You can only cut it by what the contract says you can cut it by so unless you had the foresight to know which players you would want to keep back when they signed the thing then you wont be able to do that. It will have had a specific wage cut in it for relegation if it had a relegation clause.

Isn’t his point that you could say to certain players you wanted to keep “actually/if you stay we will only cut your wage by 30% not 50%”?

[Skyline Drifter]

24 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

Isn’t his point that you could say to certain players you wanted to keep “actually/if you stay we will only cut your wage by 30% not 50%”?

I'm not following? Are we talking about players under contract or not? If they are out of contract you can offer them what you like and they'll either take it or not.

If they are under contract then you have to abide by the terms of it which means it either stays as it was or it will have a relegation clause which allows for a lower wage on relegation but that clause will define what the wage is. It can't be vague and undefined. There may potentially be clauses that allow for cancellation on relegation too but if they are held to a contract then it will have a finite value of wage in it.

[parsforlife]

I think the suggestion is that some players have a contract that drops their wage by 50% but also as a result of relegation the player is free to to sign elsewhere.  For those players the club are expecting to use their ability to leave but the club want to retain they are effectively negotiating a new contract that won’t allow the player to leave, but as a result they will not experience as big of drop.

[Skyline Drifter]

22 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

I think the suggestion is that some players have a contract that drops their wage by 50% but also as a result of relegation the player is free to to sign elsewhere.  For those players the club are expecting to use their ability to leave but the club want to retain they are effectively negotiating a new contract that won’t allow the player to leave, but as a result they will not experience as big of drop.

Ah, fair enough. That's effectively ripping up the contract and starting again though as if the player was a free agent.

[Ad Lib]

1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:

I'm not following? Are we talking about players under contract or not? If they are out of contract you can offer them what you like and they'll either take it or not.

If they are under contract then you have to abide by the terms of it which means it either stays as it was or it will have a relegation clause which allows for a lower wage on relegation but that clause will define what the wage is. It can't be vague and undefined. There may potentially be clauses that allow for cancellation on relegation too but if they are held to a contract then it will have a finite value of wage in it.

If the contract entitles the Club to cut someone’s wage by 50% that’s not the same as requiring that Club to cut someone’s wage by (as much as) 50%.

[Skyline Drifter]

39 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

If the contract entitles the Club to cut someone’s wage by 50% that’s not the same as requiring that Club to cut someone’s wage by (as much as) 50%.

Indeed it isn't. But an indefinite reduction wouldn't be allowed in a playing contract. A contract requires to be definitive. It states the wage. The wage is £x. It may have a clause saying that in event of "y" happening the wage becomes £z. It cannot have one saying that if "y" happens then the club "might" change the wage or might not, or that the club "can reduce it by up to 50% but might do less." You have to be able to look at the contract and identify the wage exactly at any given time.

Of course there's nothing to stop them having a contract that says there is a 50% wage cut and then mutually agreeing that he'll stay for a somewhat lesser wage cut. A whole new contract or contract variation would be needed for that though and it amounts to the same thing as signing a new player. My point was there won't be contracts that allow you to retain the player whilst allowing for a flexibility of wage reduction at the club's discretion.

[JagsCG]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8342029/Scottish-League-One-Two-JANUARY-SPFL-set-crisis-talks-future.html

[Paisley Ton]

Div get this moved to the 1st division section.

We need more room for Hearts and Raith championship teams.

[D'Jaffo]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8342029/Scottish-League-One-Two-JANUARY-SPFL-set-crisis-talks-future.html

Surely this applies just as much to the Championship as well?

[Thumper]

Scaremongering shite. If lockdown is still happening in october then the furlough period will be extended. The alternative is that thousands of middle-class people start starving to death.

[Rob1885]

Surely this applies just as much to the Championship as well?

And a sizeable portion of the premiership

[JudgeMudge]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8342029/Scottish-League-One-Two-JANUARY-SPFL-set-crisis-talks-future.html

This is grim. If we’re not resuming till 2021, surely it would’ve been to have placed 19/20 season on hold and resumed then?

[RandomGuy.]

23 minutes ago, JudgeMudge said:

This is grim. If we’re not resuming till 2021, surely it would’ve been to have placed 19/20 season on hold and resumed then?

Yes.

Chucking away the TV deal, withholding sponsorship money from some clubs and leaving clubs with no ability to plan for the future would definitely be the best idea.

[bad chad]

24 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Yes.

Chucking away the TV deal, withholding sponsorship money from some clubs and leaving clubs with no ability to plan for the future would definitely be the best idea.

Do you think the new TV deal will get paid if there's nothing to watch? 

[DiegoDiego]

Scaremongering shite. If lockdown is still happening in october then the furlough period will be extended. The alternative is that thousands of middle-class people start starving to death.

If the article is "scaremongering shite" then what on earth is your ridiculous claim that "thousands of middle-class people" will starve to death without furlough?

Firstly, there's been no furlough in Italy and by and large people have managed. Secondly, no middle-class people will starve while banks still operate and interest rates are so low.