Brashy's Boots Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 There's no early termination clause, according to the Courier article, so can everyone pipe doon about that? The agreement could be annulled by 3 way mutual consent but no-one comes out of that favourably. Raith end up with all the wages again, Clyde look even bigger fannies than they did by taking him back, allegedly losing sponsors and winding up the cooncil (who may in turn contribute to the winding up of Clyde FC), and Goodwillie as good as puts himself out the game. I've no idea how this will pan out now, but as my gran used to say, the more you tramp in a shite, the bigger it gets. She was rarely wrong. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broken Algorithms Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 3 minutes ago, Brashy's Boots said: There's no early termination clause, according to the Courier article, so can everyone pipe doon about that? The agreement could be annulled by 3 way mutual consent but no-one comes out of that favourably. Raith end up with all the wages again, Clyde look even bigger fannies than they did by taking him back, allegedly losing sponsors and winding up the cooncil (who may in turn contribute to the winding up of Clyde FC), and Goodwillie as good as puts himself out the game. I've no idea how this will pan out now, but as my gran used to say, the more you tramp in a shite, the bigger it gets. She was rarely wrong. If he can't play for Clyde, I doubt Goodwillie gives a f**k about his wages. If anything I'd speculate he'll probably show more of a willingness to terminate the loan to help out a club who actually wanted him rather than ourselves who presumably said we'd back him before doing a screeching u-turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 This is worse than playing pass the parcel in a 1970's Belfast pub. 16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob1885 Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 Haha nae luck Clyde Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 Just now, Rob1885 said: Haha nae luck Clyde I don't think that you have read the room correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoBNob Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 Think that's very bad news from a Raith Rovers viewpoint, for one they're now in a position where they risk breaking professional ties with Clyde if they refuse their public request to break the loan, on the other they will be financially out of pocket if they take him back. Which then also leads us further down the line, IMO I think Rovers could've agreed a lower settlement in the summer if Goodwillies loan had went well, they could have well made the point that he had a club and salary in place at Clyde etc, now though he'll be fully aware this is his last payday in professional football and will likely hold out for the largest amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virtual Insanity Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 How much do people realistically think Clyde are currently contributing to Goodwillie's wages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John MacLean Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 (edited) Goodwillie is clearly never going to kick a ball in anger in Scotland again. In these circumstances you'd suspect he'll go for whatever option is best financially for him. Either sit and pick up his weekly wage from Raith Rovers or agree some kind of pay off. Either way the problem is firmly back in Raith Rovers' court. No matter what option Goodwillie goes for, if I were a Raith fan what would be crucial for me would be how it is funded. I wouldn't want my season ticket money/gate money/sponsorship going towards it. I'm sorry Raith fans, genuinely sorry, but essentially nothing has changed since your Board sanctioned his signing at the end of January. Regardless of the fact that the Raith Board stated he wouldn't play for or train with their club he remains a Raith Rovers player. Temporarily transfering his registration to Clyde didn't alter that fact. It was little more than an attempt to lessen, for a few months, the financial hit and indeed was facilitating Goodwillie's return to football. Not a good look. They might still be able to lessen the financial hit for a few months as an early termination of a loan requires agreement of all three parties but Raith Rovers are still in one hell of a mess. They really need to pay him off and that pay off needs to be privately funded if they really want a line drawn under this. Edited March 4, 2022 by John MacLean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 I think from a financial viewpoint, the Rovers will clearly ask for all money Clyde committed to paying to be paid - I very much doubt Clyde have given any nice discounts on the initial transfer fee. It was a very expensive mistake for Raith, it’ll be a less expensive mistake for Clyde but they’ll need to pay it.The only option now surely is to find a way of getting rid of him, immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ro Sham Bo Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 17 minutes ago, Paco said: I think from a financial viewpoint, the Rovers will clearly ask for all money Clyde committed to paying to be paid - I very much doubt Clyde have given any nice discounts on the initial transfer fee. It was a very expensive mistake for Raith, it’ll be a less expensive mistake for Clyde but they’ll need to pay it. The only option now surely is to find a way of getting rid of him, immediately. Yeah, if there was any doubt before, then there can be no doubt now that Goodwillie won't be able to play anywhere in this country again. The board now know for certain that the only way to deal with this is getting him off the books pronto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 I wonder how much would have to be paid to get him to leave? The people who are backing this move have already lost a fair chunk of money. If I was one of them I’d be weighing up how much more money I have to lose, all for no gain other than bad publicity and buyer’s regret. The crowds are still holding up okay, so maybe they aren’t keen. Maybe it feels less painful to put him on leave and just pay him his weekly / monthly wages. I’m assuming Goodwillie will have some thoughts on the matter too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Carrigan Posted March 4, 2022 Author Share Posted March 4, 2022 1 hour ago, Virtual Insanity said: How much do people realistically think Clyde are currently contributing to Goodwillie's wages? Surely £0 - given that Raith approached Clyde about taking him back. I assumed the idea was that Raith would find him a place to play his football to keep him sweet and therefore more likely to accept a reduced-terms payoff. I would say that surely Clyde haven't committed to any wages or reduction in owed transfer fees to bring him back, because that would be extremely stupid, but the Clyde board/Phil Caplan/Glasgow branch have proven themselves to be among the stupidest people that have lived, ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 12 hours ago, MC_Lachlan said: I guess it is quite easy to mix up racists and rapists when it comes to Clyde players.... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 10 hours ago, Broken Algorithms said: If he can't play for Clyde, I doubt Goodwillie gives a f**k about his wages. If anything I'd speculate he'll probably show more of a willingness to terminate the loan to help out a club who actually wanted him rather than ourselves who presumably said we'd back him before doing a screeching u-turn. Aye, he seems like a moral and ethical sort of person. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offshore Rover Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 The fact he went out on loan to Clyde suggests to me that he rejected any kind of pay off from us, with neither him nor us happy to settle on a payment/payment plan. It may be even more difficult trying to pay him off now with Clyde not wanting him either. Complete and utter shambles as per usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jilted John Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 1 hour ago, Brian Carrigan said: Surely £0 - given that Raith approached Clyde about taking him back. I assumed the idea was that Raith would find him a place to play his football to keep him sweet and therefore more likely to accept a reduced-terms payoff. I would say that surely Clyde haven't committed to any wages or reduction in owed transfer fees to bring him back, because that would be extremely stupid, but the Clyde board/Phil Caplan/Glasgow branch have proven themselves to be among the stupidest people that have lived, ever. I think if you believe this then you’re massively wrong. Why on earth would Raith want to keep him sweet and pay all his wages? He would have been more likely to accept a reduced pay off if we were blocking him from playing football ever again. He’s contracted with Raith until he’s 35 mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ghost of B A R P Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 Nice of Clyde to take on some of Raith's financial liability for Goodwillie, eh? That's the kind of -- mindblowing, utterly insane -- 'solidarity' that makes the strange and wonderful world of Scottish football go round... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonD Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 16 hours ago, foreverarover said: Hypocritical to say the least, the council were for the last 5 years happy to have him play, train, captain and even play with thier logo splattered over thier shirt. So the woman's team were quite happy to play for Clyde prior to January. The council thought he was a Papist. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airdrie76 Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 I think if you believe this then you’re massively wrong. Why on earth would Raith want to keep him sweet and pay all his wages? He would have been more likely to accept a reduced pay off if we were blocking him from playing football ever again. He’s contracted with Raith until he’s 35 mind. Because legally they can’t get shot of him (without paying him off - which I presume they cant afford) but are in the position of trying to rebuild their completely tarnished reputation and are therefore desperate to be seen doing something. Sending him on loan to Clyde seemed to keep some Raith fans happy for instance. Despite the fact he’d likely have been back at the end of the season.Put it this way, why would Clyde pay a sizeable contribution towards his wage when they know Raith are in the sh1t over this and need to get rid of him someway/anyway? Raith werent in a great bargaining position. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 In the hypothetical world of early lump sum settlements to end a contract, this may prove to be unique in the sense that DG might expect to earn say, £150k over the term of the contract. In a normal situation, a club might offer a player £75k in exchange for the termination of said contract with no restrictions on future earnings no matter where he went. In this case, he might well choose to reject the hypothetical £75k, and choose to take his £150k over the term of the contract…….or, his lawyer/agent might say in respect of termination of the contract, and allowing RR to avoid two further years of negative PR and reputational damage, then how much of a price do RR choose to put on that component? To go early and never be seen again won’t cost RR £75k or even £150k. The price will be £200k, and that allows RR to begin “building bridges” immediately with no elephant in the room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts