Alex Pearce

[andrew1957]

It seems to me that the biggest downside of being in the PL is the issue of player contracts.

When a side is in the Championship players are delighted to sign say a 3 year contract as they are still trying to get to the Promised Land. As soon as they are there, the club starts to sign players on loads more money (say 40K a week) than they have been on in the Championship (say 10K a week) and they think that they are worth the same. On the other hand the club wants them to prove themselves at PL level first before paying a lot more. You can see this from both sides. You cannot blame a player for wanting to maximise earnings from a short career but equally I would support the club for not paying over the top.

It is probably no coincidence that neither Church nor Pearce have signed new contracts - as they have come through from the youth teams together and probably think they are worth more than the club do. In Pearce's case this might be justified, but I am rather doubtful about Church.

So my take on this is that the club have said "sign a new one or you don't start - it will be bench time only". If so I doubt that Brain even has a say in this as it would be a top down decision by the Chairman and Nicky Hammond.

However, my guess is that Pearce will be back on Sunday as PL survival will now override the financial implications of losing the players on a free next summer. No doubt we will see in due course.

[Isaac Hunt]

I'd find it confusing if Pearce is out of the team for contract reasons.

Doesn't really fit in with Brian's way of "looking after" players. I was only reporting what Ady Williams said last night after the game.

The reason i think that Pearce isn't in the side is that he is noticibly less mobile than most Premier League centre-backs, even ones that are 8-10 years older than him.. and yes, that includes Gorkss.

[Royal Lady]

What happens with player contracts when a team goes up to the PL as we have? Because obviously their money goes up, so it has to be written into the contract - do they have to put a caveat in that saying if we go down again their salary reduces by £x or x%? Just curious to know if anyone knows.

[Rsince67]

fark brendon, more importantly we just shipped 7 at home!!! thats 10 in 2 HOME games. tonight was prob most devastating i can remember (prob since play off). BMD needs to sort it out at the back... where the fark was pearce!!!! NOT HAPPY

We shipped 4 at home (in normal time). Let's not overstate the issue.

oh right, when you put it like that... was it only 4? right yeh ive calmed down and im pleased now. hope they keep the same back four and leave our player of the season out at qpr

[TBM]

What happens with player contracts when a team goes up to the PL as we have? Because obviously their money goes up, so it has to be written into the contract - do they have to put a caveat in that saying if we go down again their salary reduces by £x or x%? Just curious to know if anyone knows.

Yes, that does happen......gives the players an incentive to perform better to avoid getting relegated

[Rsince67]

It seems to me that the biggest downside of being in the PL is the issue of player contracts.

When a side is in the Championship players are delighted to sign say a 3 year contract as they are still trying to get to the Promised Land. As soon as they are there, the club starts to sign players on loads more money (say 40K a week) than they have been on in the Championship (say 10K a week) and they think that they are worth the same. On the other hand the club wants them to prove themselves at PL level first before paying a lot more. You can see this from both sides. You cannot blame a player for wanting to maximise earnings from a short career but equally I would support the club for not paying over the top.

It is probably no coincidence that neither Church nor Pearce have signed new contracts - as they have come through from the youth teams together and probably think they are worth more than the club do. In Pearce's case this might be justified, but I am rather doubtful about Church.

So my take on this is that the club have said "sign a new one or you don't start - it will be bench time only". If so I doubt that Brain even has a say in this as it would be a top down decision by the Chairman and Nicky Hammond.

However, my guess is that Pearce will be back on Sunday as PL survival will now override the financial implications of losing the players on a free next summer. No doubt we will see in due course.

i think benching someone because they arnt happy with the terms you offered is bad management (from who ever chairman/bmd). i think the club needs to sort it out ASAP or this issue is going to resolve itself in may when we go dwn

[Snowball]

Do we know this to be a fact?


What I recall when Pearce was dropped for Marriappa was that we need to try Maps
as we were shipping goals and it was felt Maps-Gorkss would work better than Maps-Pearce
even though, in the eyes of most, Pearce had done little wrong.

Of course if Alex has been tapped up...

[mr_number]

Do we know this to be a fact?

Yup. Someone on here gave Nicky Hammond a blow job to find out, so yes, we can regard it as fact.

[muddyfeet]

I miss him

[Royal Lady]

I miss him

He is ugly though, but I know you do. Big hugs and sorry for your loss. xxx

[RoyalBlue]

Ady Williams suggested that the reason Pearce has been the one to make way between the centre backs might have something to do with not having signed a new agreement. i hope not. the fact that we're not letting Church go out on loan until he's signed a contract extension is very poor, but to do the same with Pearce too???

For what it's worth, i'm not a fan of either player, but if true, it's a shitty way to treat people.

For all the PR about caring, unity etc. RFC has shown it is quite prepared to treat people in a shitty manner when it comes to contractual issues. Quite happy to give commitments and then wriggle out of them when they want to e.g. Salako.

[muddyfeet]

I miss him

He is ugly though, but I know you do. Big hugs and sorry for your loss. xxx

may start to print some Pearce Fan Club t shirts

[Readingfanman]

Reminds me slightly of the situation with Goater a few years ago, frozen out due to money issues. Slightly different situation currently.

[facaldaqui]

So my take on this is that the club have said "sign a new one or you don't start - it will be bench time only". If so I doubt that Brain even has a say in this as it would be a top down decision by the Chairman and Nicky Hammond.

Just because we are going through some strange turmoils, I am not going to start believing that the club has lost all grip on principle. To tell a player that he can't start until he signs a new contract would be a breach of his present contract, by restricting his ability to ply his trade. I cannot see any way Brian would say something like this; he needs to keep his options open, in case of injury at the very least. And it would be a dysfunctional club structure in which the chairman or director of football would tell a player, over his manager's head, that he could not play in the team.

[Isaac Hunt]

To tell a player that he can't start until he signs a new contract would be a breach of his present contract, by restricting his ability to ply his trade. I cannot see any way Brian would say something like this; he needs to keep his options open, in case of injury at the very least.

Sort of looks that way here....Church, not Pearce.

http://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/football/readingfc/s/2121904_simon_church_urged_to_sign_new_deal_at_reading_fc

As i have said twice now, Ady Williams suggested that Pearce's contract could well be the reason...not fact.

[melonhead]

I'd find it confusing if Pearce is out of the team for contract reasons.

Doesn't really fit in with Brian's way of "looking after" players. I was only reporting what Ady Williams said last night after the game.

The reason i think that Pearce isn't in the side is that he is noticibly less mobile than most Premier League centre-backs, even ones that are 8-10 years older than him.. and yes, that includes Gorkss.

i think the only reason hes not come in yet was that gorkss was supposedly more experienced as a defender, and as a leader

[andrew1957]

What happens with player contracts when a team goes up to the PL as we have? Because obviously their money goes up, so it has to be written into the contract - do they have to put a caveat in that saying if we go down again their salary reduces by £x or x%? Just curious to know if anyone knows.

Typically it would be written into the contract that the wage would go up from say 10K a week in the Championship to 15K a week on promotion to the PL. However, we are reputedly paying Pog 40K per week so that is still a huge discrepancy between what a new player might get and what a player on an existing contract such Pearce and Church might be on.

This would only be adjusted when they sign a new contract. My guess is we might be offering Pearce say 20K a week as he is not proven at PL level yet and Church say just 10K a week as he is not even proven at Championship level yet - hence their reluctance to sign.

[andrew1957]

So my take on this is that the club have said "sign a new one or you don't start - it will be bench time only". If so I doubt that Brain even has a say in this as it would be a top down decision by the Chairman and Nicky Hammond.

Just because we are going through some strange turmoils, I am not going to start believing that the club has lost all grip on principle. To tell a player that he can't start until he signs a new contract would be a breach of his present contract, by restricting his ability to ply his trade. I cannot see any way Brian would say something like this; he needs to keep his options open, in case of injury at the very least. And it would be a dysfunctional club structure in which the chairman or director of football would tell a player, over his manager's head, that he could not play in the team.

If the club paid whatever a player asked for I would be more worried that we had lost grasp of "principle". Surely holding firm against high wage demands is the sign of a club trying to keep things on an even keel.

And I am sure no one would say to a player explicitly "you won't be picked til you sign" and if they are picked on the bench they have no grounds for claiming breach of contract - BUT I think the message would soon get through. Brian is also keeping his options open by having the likes of Pearce and Church on the bench. And if you think Brian has 100% say on how the club is run and this has zero impact on what team he picks then I would say that you are being somewhat naive.

[Ian Royal]

I'd find it confusing if Pearce is out of the team for contract reasons.

Doesn't really fit in with Brian's way of "looking after" players. I was only reporting what Ady Williams said last night after the game.

The reason i think that Pearce isn't in the side is that he is noticibly less mobile than most Premier League centre-backs, even ones that are 8-10 years older than him.. and yes, that includes Gorkss.

i think the only reason hes not come in yet was that gorkss was supposedly more experienced as a defender, and as a leader

I'm desperately hoping that's the reason. Originally when Pearce was dropped I could understand that, even if I didn't agree with it. But it's fast becoming farcical that he continues to remain on the sidelines whilst Gorkss, who has been poor all season, and second best to Pearce since about December last year, continues to play badly.

[melonhead]

agreed on all of that
im hoping we see pearce play on sunday, and an end to the talk
the boy is reading frew and frew etc