Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Then you should simply change your antiquated model to the one used by every other club of your size in the country, instead of whinging about the SFA not protecting your particular interests for the umpteenth time. 
Our antiquated model is producing a terrific standard of youth player, year after year. All we want is a level playing field to operate in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, an86 said:

This, in my view, is the most important season in our 152 year history.

Whatever side of the fence we come from on the forthcoming debate surely nobody (trolls aside) can disagree with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Our antiquated model is producing a terrific standard of youth player, year after year. All we want is a level playing field to operate in.

 

Give your players contracts and you’ll have a level playing field and the same rights to compensation; if you don’t want to then you aren’t entitled to compensation when they leave. It’s that straightforward and entirely your club’s choice.

 

What you really want here is not ‘fairness’ but rather to have your cake and eat it because you’re so special; the SFA have, rightly, dismissed this for the nonsense that it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Give your players contracts and you’ll have a level playing field and the same rights to compensation; if you don’t want to then you aren’t entitled to compensation when they leave. It’s that straightforward and entirely your club’s choice.
 
What you really want here is not ‘fairness’ but rather to have your cake and eat it because you’re so special; the SFA have, rightly, dismissed this for the nonsense that it is.
Nah. You haven't quite got this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hampden Diehard said:

I sought out the man with the gen on the whole compensation scenario. We are not now entitled to compensation once youth players reach a certain age unless we offer them paid footballing employment.

 

There are UEFA (FIFA?) rules on this but they are delegated to individual football associations to interpret them. The SFA have interpreted them such that amateur contracts, and hence the years that lads gave been trained under those contracts, are not worth the paper they're written on; considerably less. The upshot is, we train Michael Ruth for 8 years and Aberdeen swoop in and do not have to pay us a penny.

 

My understanding is that a similar situation in other countries would result in compensation whatever contract the lad was on. This is an SFA decision. Again, we are shafted by this useless and self-serving mob.

 

Four lads have joined top flight Scottish clubs from our youth system this year and we are entitled to zero. If any of them joined a non-Scottish club, we would receive compensation.

 

The club has a youth system this punches well above its weight, largely through the dedication of the unpaid coaching staff. A change in interpretation of the UEFA rules would have a considerable amount of income coming to the club for us to invest in future talent. But what club is going to push for a change when it might cost them a couple of thousand pounds? None in this bloody country.

 

Ragin'

 

 

As I said earlier HD, would they all have been approached if there was money to be paid? When the pro-youth league was set up by SPL teams a decade+ ago the going rate was £3k per year. That would have been £24k for Ruth (maybe a bit less - U13 is where it would kick in). Might make some predators think again. If not, ka-ching!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Hampden Diehard said:

Nah. You haven't quite got this.

That's exactly what it is, in your own words:

Quote

We are not now entitled to compensation once youth players reach a certain age unless we offer them paid footballing employment.

So your choice is to either fulfil that simple obligation towards a player or accept that they can walk out for nothing. Do the former and you're on exactly the same, 'level playing field' as any other football club in the country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, virginton said:

That's exactly what it is, in your own words:

So your choice is to either fulfil that simple obligation towards a player or accept that they can walk out for nothing. Do the former and you're on exactly the same, 'level playing field' as any other football club in the country.  

No, I can only assume you are choosing not to get the point. The situation isn't about QP's obligation to a player. All they can offer at present is training, development and opportunity. The point above is that the SFA have decided to interpret the rules such that our youth system gets minimum recognition, and this does seem to lessen the benefit to all to some degree at least, and may be an important part of the club's decision making going forward.

Your suggestion that the solution is simply to change the club's constitution and offer contracts may have to be considered, but misses the point.

Or maybe you were just too pleased with your 'cake and eat it' idea to notice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

56 minutes ago, Velvet Donkey said:

No, I can only assume you are choosing not to get the point. The situation isn't about QP's obligation to a player. All they can offer at present is training, development and opportunity.

So... not the same basic contract rights that every club up and down the country offers to players and so you shouldn't qualify for compensation when they leave then. 

Quote

The point above is that the SFA have decided to interpret the rules such that our youth system gets minimum recognition and this does seem to lessen the benefit to all to some degree at least, and may be an important part of the club's decision making going forward.

No, that's just special pleading; the SFA have simply implemented a justifiable distinction between (semi) professional and amateur status for young footballers. If you want to get compensation for any player when they leave then they should be tied to a contract; there's no reason why this should be any different for Queen's Park than it is for Stenhousemuir or Elgin, who take on extra costs and responsibilities for doing so.  

The 'interpretation' complaint has been made in reference to as yet unnamed leagues - it wouldn't surprise me if such leagues where like Spain or France, where even tier 3 and 4 are a mix of clubs from full-time to amateur, glorified Sunday league outfits.  Scottish football in 2019, on the other hand, consists almost exclusively of professional and semi-professional clubs all the way down to tier 6 and beyond in some regions; that is therefore quite rightly the benchmark that the SFA will use when determining compensation here. 

If you genuinely want a 'level playing field' then adopt the same structure as your peers; or you can continue doing it your way and you will get receive neither the rewards nor the liabilities that come with maintaining a semi-professional business model. That's your club's free choice and is an absolutely fair distinction for Scottish football as a whole. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, strachan186772 said:

Any one able to attend the match today?? 

Wasn't there, but a 2-0 win for Queen's according to Hurlford's Twitter. Missed two penalties as well. No scorers or team news, I'm sure someone who was there can fill in the blanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't there myself but i am told it was a comfortable 2-0 win despite missing 2 second half penalties. Galt scored a free kick and the second was from corner but not sure who got the goal.     Starting line up was

Muir 

Little Gibson Jamieson

Mortimer Block Mcgrory Clark

Agyemang Galt

Moore

Block played well in the middle and the new defenders were very strong in the air. Kouider Aissa had both pens saved.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tommy Block was absolutely brilliant. The type of midfielder we’ve been missing for a long time. Aggressive, strong and very good on the ball. Goal scorers were Galt and Cammy Clark 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, qpfc said:

Tommy Block was absolutely brilliant. The type of midfielder we’ve been missing for a long time. Aggressive, strong and very good on the ball. Goal scorers were Galt and Cammy Clark 

Did Reagan get on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, The man with no name said:

Did Reagan get on?

Yeah he came on midway through the second half, didn’t have much to do but really looking forward to seeing him play in the league once he turns 16

Only downside from the game was Gibson getting injured within the first couple of minutes and by the way he was walking, I’d imagine he’ll be a doubt for next week. One of the subs picked up a pretty bad injury as he won the second penalty. No idea who he was 

Edited by qpfc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Number 4 (Jamieson?) was a standout for me, also 15 (Reagan?) - good control, and 11 (Alfie) - held the ball up well and looks like a goal scorer. Good to see Foy back in the team too. Hope Gibson's injury isn't too bad, but he wasn't walking very easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Number 4 (Jamieson?) was a standout for me, also 15 (Reagan?) - good control, and 11 (Alfie) - held the ball up well and looks like a goal scorer. Good to see Foy back in the team too. Hope Gibson's injury isn't too bad, but he wasn't walking very easily.
Maybe not Foy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...