You can't disagree with what he has to say on the Bosman rule. Well worth a listen.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/sol/newsid ... w=nb&mp=wm
Holloway's view on Sidwell
-
Biscuit'04
- Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: 24 Dec 2004 10:08
- Location: Luton
-
JimmytheJim
- Member
- Posts: 637
- Joined: 18 Jan 2005 17:20
- Location: Mexico
THE BOSMAN RULING
I can't stand it. I'm resigned to losing Tony Capaldi (on a Bosman) - managers need commitment from their players.
No way should a player be allowed to run out of contract, it's ruining their lives and something should be done about it.
If you go in for a tackle and you break your leg at this time of year, you could be quite literally out of a job and unemployable.
I don't know if they think about it like that and it's disgusting.
It's not fair - unless you're an agent who wants to make a few quid by touting players around in January while the players have to worry about their livelihoods because they don't know where they are until the season finishes.
They are a waste of space for anyone managing them - how can that be right?
I think they should reverse it - has it worked? No it hasn't.
How can anyone tell me a 24-year-old deserves to walk out of a club for nothing? Take Steve Sidwell at Reading.
They've paid £500,000 to have him, why should he be allowed to go for nothing after they have worked, improved and climbed up divisions with him? It doesn't make sense.
I don't want to witness another player going through turmoil, it stops them from being happy, it's awful.
----------------------------------------
Does he not think we've had our money's worth from Sidwell? Arsenal's selling on clause always meant we were never going to achieve market value for him. RFC did the right thing, IMHO, playing him throughout our debut Prem season and letting his contract expire. We could have cashed in and maybe got a couple of million back. We might then have been looking at playing Scunthorpe next season.
Olly makes the point in the radio interview that players like Sidwell are risking their career by possibly picking up a serious injury when playing at the end of a contract. I would imagine that both RFC and Sid have adequate insurance cover in place should something like this happen.
I can't stand it. I'm resigned to losing Tony Capaldi (on a Bosman) - managers need commitment from their players.
No way should a player be allowed to run out of contract, it's ruining their lives and something should be done about it.
If you go in for a tackle and you break your leg at this time of year, you could be quite literally out of a job and unemployable.
I don't know if they think about it like that and it's disgusting.
It's not fair - unless you're an agent who wants to make a few quid by touting players around in January while the players have to worry about their livelihoods because they don't know where they are until the season finishes.
They are a waste of space for anyone managing them - how can that be right?
I think they should reverse it - has it worked? No it hasn't.
How can anyone tell me a 24-year-old deserves to walk out of a club for nothing? Take Steve Sidwell at Reading.
They've paid £500,000 to have him, why should he be allowed to go for nothing after they have worked, improved and climbed up divisions with him? It doesn't make sense.
I don't want to witness another player going through turmoil, it stops them from being happy, it's awful.
----------------------------------------
Does he not think we've had our money's worth from Sidwell? Arsenal's selling on clause always meant we were never going to achieve market value for him. RFC did the right thing, IMHO, playing him throughout our debut Prem season and letting his contract expire. We could have cashed in and maybe got a couple of million back. We might then have been looking at playing Scunthorpe next season.
Olly makes the point in the radio interview that players like Sidwell are risking their career by possibly picking up a serious injury when playing at the end of a contract. I would imagine that both RFC and Sid have adequate insurance cover in place should something like this happen.
-
RoyalBlue
-
Hob Nob Subscriber
- Posts: 11839
- Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:39
- Location: Developed a pathological hatred of snakes on 14/10/19
That Friday Feeling THE BOSMAN RULING
No way should a player be allowed to run out of contract, it's ruining their lives and something should be done about it.
If you go in for a tackle and you break your leg at this time of year, you could be quite literally out of a job and unemployable.
I don't know if they think about it like that and it's disgusting.
It's not fair - unless you're an agent who wants to make a few quid by touting players around in January while the players have to worry about their livelihoods because they don't know where they are until the season finishes.
They are a waste of space for anyone managing them - how can that be right?
----------------------------------------
Olly makes the point in the radio interview that players like Sidwell are risking their career by possibly picking up a serious injury when playing at the end of a contract. I would imagine that both RFC and Sid have adequate insurance cover in place should something like this happen.
I doubt an insurance payout would anywhere near cover potential loss of big time earnings though. Sidwell could get badly injured in one of his last games with us and never earn the 40K+ a week he craves after. Instead he might get an insurance payout based on his present contract with us, which pays comparitively little because he refused the offer of better terms.
-
Forbury Lion
-
Hob Nob Subscriber
- Posts: 9266
- Joined: 14 Apr 2004 08:37
- Location: https://youtu.be/c4sX57ZUhzc
To be fair, We decided to keep Sidwell and not sell him when we could have got a few quid for him.
I think the current system works, a player signs a 5 year contract and the club get a player for 5 years.
The club and player should go into it with their eyes open, It's not like the Bosman ruling is new anymore. It was in place when Sidwell signed.
I think the current system works, a player signs a 5 year contract and the club get a player for 5 years.
The club and player should go into it with their eyes open, It's not like the Bosman ruling is new anymore. It was in place when Sidwell signed.
-
peeping_bernal
- Member
- Posts: 51
- Joined: 12 Jan 2006 21:32
- Location: Amersham
-
Forbury Lion
-
Hob Nob Subscriber
- Posts: 9266
- Joined: 14 Apr 2004 08:37
- Location: https://youtu.be/c4sX57ZUhzc
-
All 5 goals
- Member
- Posts: 35
- Joined: 14 Jun 2004 22:52
-
Z-Head
- Member
- Posts: 125
- Joined: 07 Apr 2005 19:41
- Location: Oh when the red red robin goes bob bob bobing along Shoot the bastard!!!!!!!!
-
From Despair To Where?
- Hob Nob Legend
- Posts: 25175
- Joined: 19 Apr 2004 08:37
- Location: See me in m'pants and ting
-
Z-Head
- Member
- Posts: 125
- Joined: 07 Apr 2005 19:41
- Location: Oh when the red red robin goes bob bob bobing along Shoot the bastard!!!!!!!!
Holloway is a good lad but he's talking bollocks here.
What he proposes is a return to the bad old days where if a player wanted to leave a club he could be retained against his will, after his contract of employment had expired, and forced to rot in the reserves for having the impudence to ask for a move. Much like a certain Jean Marc Bosman, in fact.
Once tested in the European Courts, that structure fell apart like wet paper - there's no way it could ever be reimposed as it's inherently unfair. If a club is able to refuse a player a new contract then the player has to be able to refuse to sign one, it's as simple as that.
If Olly's got a better answer, let's hear it. We've done plenty well out of the Bosman ruling as FDTW says, and we could have sold Siddy in January so there's no point bleating about it now.
What he proposes is a return to the bad old days where if a player wanted to leave a club he could be retained against his will, after his contract of employment had expired, and forced to rot in the reserves for having the impudence to ask for a move. Much like a certain Jean Marc Bosman, in fact.
Once tested in the European Courts, that structure fell apart like wet paper - there's no way it could ever be reimposed as it's inherently unfair. If a club is able to refuse a player a new contract then the player has to be able to refuse to sign one, it's as simple as that.
If Olly's got a better answer, let's hear it. We've done plenty well out of the Bosman ruling as FDTW says, and we could have sold Siddy in January so there's no point bleating about it now.
-
SpaceCruiser
-
Hob Nob Subscriber
- Posts: 5590
- Joined: 14 Apr 2004 14:17
- Location: Desperately seeking to return home
-
Stranded
-
Hob Nob Subscriber
- Posts: 20410
- Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:42
- Location: Propping up the bar in the Nags
Idealpeeping_bernal You only get him for 4 years as he can buy himself out in his final year
I believe that would be 3 years, and buy-out possible in the last two.
It only applies to players in the last two years of a four year plus deal. The player must also be 28 or older and give his club notice 15 days prior to the end of the season that he intends to exercise his right to buy out his contract.
Basically all Premiership players wishing to do so this season must inform their clubs by this Saturday. Frank Lampard is eligible to do this.
It is currently 17 Feb 2025 09:31