New Contracts

[Spaceman Spiff]

Quote[/b] (Einstein @ June 22 2005,12:37)]I work for a large accountants firm and if a rival came in and offered me more money I'd most probably be off like a shot. Same as most of us.

Are you on a fixed term contract though?

And if you were on a fixed 2 year contract, would your firm keep you on full pay and full medical benefits if six months into that 2 year contract you became unable to work due to illness?

I thought not!

Its not the same or anything like it!!

 

[Napster]

To be honest, Cody has gone in there and he's got two clients- both of whom are out of contract. From his point of view, he will try and flag interest up- the competition from Bristol Rovers will hopefully get SUFC to increase their existing offer if they want the players enough.

The ball's in Tilly's court, essentially. Dudfield has claimed he wants to stay here, while Jay has been inconspiciously silent on the issue.

Atkins is a stirrer- that's his job- and while there isn't any concrete news, I can't help feeling that nothing is going to happen for a few weeks and if Dudfield did go it will be to Peterborough and Jay will stay here.

I remember talking to Che before the Bristol Rovers LDV game and he was saying how all the players knew what Atkins was like as a manager and how no-one liked him in the game. Food for thought...

Having said all that- Jay's mate Tes has now gone...

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Mad Cyril @ June 22 2005,04:27)]Where have the club shown any loyalty?

They were obliged to pay him. Just because he is a decent player and looks like he may soon be match fit doesn't mean that he owes us any debt of gratitude. Out of contract is out of contract.

By arranging for and paying for his treatment and by treating him as one of the team and ensuring his mental as well as his physical well-being.

Following the contractual rationale, there is every possibility that the player's contract of employment does not impose on the club an obligation on them to ensure that a player's injuries are treated. The club could therefore have got a doctor to assess the injury, been told that it was "6-9 months out on the treatment table", and cut their losses by paying him the rest of his contract up front and letting him go.

Jay would have been cast adrift and would have been required to seek his own medical treatment.

Had that happened, I'm sure plenty of people would consider that the club had acted shabbily. Well, the club didn't. The club showed some loyalty to Jay; and perhaps that ought to be repaid.

This may sound pretty weird coming from a man who spends his career analysing contracts... but sometimes, you cannot simply rely on the black & white. In this case, the club's actions towards Jay appear to have gone over and above the letter of his contract... and I hope that Jay bears that in mind.

Matt

 

[moneypit23]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ June 22 2005,12:55)]

Quote[/b] (Mad Cyril @ June 22 2005,04:27)]Where have the club shown any loyalty?

They were obliged to pay him. Just because he is a decent player and looks like he may soon be match fit doesn't mean that he owes us any debt of gratitude. Out of contract is out of contract.

By arranging for and paying for his treatment and by treating him as one of the team and ensuring his mental as well as his physical well-being.

Firstly, let me say I'd love Jay to stay. I've always thought he was one of the most natural footballers we've got, but (and playing Devil's advocate slightly here), we've had god knows how long to secure his future services. Why didn't we extend his contract earlier? I know we didn't know if we were going up then, but we knew he was getting back to fitness, so the risk was no worse then than it is now.

Sadly I'm a little less emotional than some on here - it's business at the end of the day, pure and simple.