Stephen Ward

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

They're only time-limited if they're specifically made that way, and I don't see why Bohs would agree to that. I assumed they'd have a sell-on clause.

---

What I'm saying is that these clauses are usually associated with a time limit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

Doyle was transferred before this solidarity thing came into force, probably explains why Cork would not have known. Even if they had known they would have conspired to make a loss anyway :)
Having a quick read of this page FAI page it looks to me that,
"Training compensation is paid to all clubs who've trained the player from age 12 to 21"
It applies only to cross juridstiction transfers and applies all down the line to all the clubs the player was registered to in Ireland
but "In the event of any subsequent transfer, compensation is only paid to the previous club."
I assume that means the last club the player was with before leaving Ireland.
It could mean the previous club in England, but that doesn't fit.

If it means the last club in Ireland, then that club is entitled to the solidarity payment for "any subsequent transfer".
All imho.

edit
there is also a calculation there at the bottom of the page
Solidarity Contribution - Payment breakdown
for age when at the Irish club and that calculation covers from age 12 to age 23.

---

Doyle moved in 2005, solidarity & comp came into effect in 2001.

Either way, I think you are missing the most important part of that page...

Quote:

---

These regulations deal with the status and eligibility of Players as well as the rules applicable whenever Players move between clubs belonging to different national associations.

---

also...

Quote:

---

Solidarity Payments
If a transfer occurs between different juristictions when a player is in contract, the fee is then negotiable and 5% of this amount is then distributed pro rata to all clubs involved in his training since the season of his 12th birthday.

---

How I interpret that page is that it can only apply in that trans-jurisdictional transfer. What happens after that is subject to negotiation at the time of that transfer....?

IMHO... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

What I'm saying is that these clauses are usually associated with a time limit.

---

How do you know? That sounds most unusual to me.

I don't know for sure but I've been told by a few people who'd know about these sorts of things that this is quite common.

I do not think this suggestion is as unusual as you seem to think it is - time dependent conditions/clauses are pretty common in all contracts, I don't see why it'd be any different in football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

I don't know for sure but I've been told by a few people who'd know about these sorts of things that this is quite common.

I do not think this suggestion is as unusual as you seem to think it is - time dependent conditions/clauses are pretty common in all contracts, I don't see why it'd be any different in football.

---

What's the selling club's incentive though? A sell-on clause is a sell-on clause, I really don't see what's in it for the selling club if it expires. Buying clubs use additional clauses to bring down the initial cash outlay so they're the ones who need to make concession.

We're talking about international caps clause, right? I believe that promotion related clauses are also usually time dependent too...

Sorry, no, I'm still talking about a sell-on clause. But I don't understand why an international caps clause would expire either, unless the player was actually sold before the event. I can see the need for certain clauses expiring with time but I think for a professional football club, there's no reason why clauses would need to be time-specific.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

Doyle moved in 2005, solidarity & comp came into effect in 2001.

---

I see that but I'm not convinced that it was common knowledge or that it was defined. At least I remember that this issue came up up for discussion in my lifetime on this board as if it was a recent development.
Possibly the rule was there in 2001 but was it doing anything?

Quote:

---

Either way, I think you are missing the most important part of that page..

'These regulations deal with the status and eligibility of Players as well as the rules applicable whenever Players move between clubs belonging to different national associations.'

---

That would appear definitive, but this is the FAI page and maybe their wording causes this interpretation to appear definitive.
When there is ambiguity, it's best to go to the horse's mouth and read the FIFA regulations :party:

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affe...sfer2010_e.pdf

There are two schemes, Training compensation and Solidarity payments,
Training compensation (article 20 and annex 4), it appears is only paid when the transfer of a young professional is cross jurisdiction, but does mention subsequent transfers and do those transfers also have to be cross jurisdiction?
Solidarity payment (article 21 and annex 5 page 65) is different and is a payment scheme to clubs who were involved in his training.

Edit, It would appear to be a 100% certainty that both training and solidarity payments only apply to international transfers. Ward would have to be transferred to another jurisdiction in order for Bohs to get the crumbs.
This article highlights this irregularity in the regulations and more than suggests that this is a designed flaw in the system.
http://www.legal-league.com/law/1498.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

Sorry, no, I'm still talking about a sell-on clause. But I don't understand why an international caps clause would expire either, unless the player was actually sold before the event. I can see the need for certain clauses expiring with time but I think for a professional football club, there's no reason why clauses would need to be time-specific.

---

i dont know! These are football clubs we are talking about... hardly the bastions of good decision making!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

I see that but I'm not convinced that it was common knowledge or that it was defined. At least I remember that this issue came up up for discussion in my lifetime on this board as if it was a recent development.
Possibly the rule was there in 2001 but was it doing anything?

---

Id say it was in fairness!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

That would appear definitive, but this is the FAI page and maybe their wording causes this interpretation to appear definitive.
When there is ambiguity, it's best to go to the horse's mouth and read the FIFA regulations :party:

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affe...sfer2010_e.pdf

There are two schemes, Training compensation and Solidarity payments,
Training compensation (article 20 and annex 4), it appears is only paid when the transfer of a young professional is cross jurisdiction, but does mention subsequent transfers and do those transfers also have to be cross jurisdiction?
Solidarity payment (article 21 and annex 5 page 65) is different and is a payment scheme to clubs who were involved in his training.

Edit, It would appear to be a 100% certainty that both training and solidarity payments only apply to international transfers. Ward would have to be transferred to another jurisdiction in order for Bohs to get the crumbs.
This article highlights this irregularity in the regulations and more than suggests that this is a designed flaw in the system.
http://www.legal-league.com/law/1498.html

---

me after reading that... ;)

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/a...0_1043416a.jpg

Sure, I do understand that trying to survive in a constant -20C temperature, would leave a man truly demented.

But I'm not sure that you appreciate that it takes true grit for a man to do the tedious research in order to prove himself wrong, after a lesser mortal tried in vain to convince him :)

It's been between -28 and -48 (with wind chill) for the last couple of days so yes, I'm feeling slightly bonkers.

The only ones who need to do research are those who doubt what they think they know... :D just kidding, good work.

Mick taking his Wolves team to Ipswich including our Stephen it seems!

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...84422511639558

Stephen Ward: Style Connoisseur:rolleyes:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23756018

Nothing wrong with that - if we ever have to resort to using him again, it's good he'll be playing decent football. His technique on the ball was never really in question.

Always saw him as more of a winger/attacking player than a defender.
He's not a good defender really and was turned into a left back by McCarthy to fill a gap.

Apparently he was a cracking stiker underage

Interesting to note that when Andrews and Ward made their debuts for Brighton they got their first win for Oscar Garcia, in what was potentially their hardest game in league and cup thus far.

If we do manage somehow to get to Brazil then his nod back to Doyle against the Kazaks will have proven priceless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grafter

If we do manage somehow to get to Brazil then his nod back to Doyle against the Kazaks will have proven priceless.

---

True, the natural striker coming out in him

It looks like Andrew Lloyd Weber has been so impressed by how Stephen overcame his Euro 2012 disappointment, changed club and got back into the Ireland set up he has written a musical about him.

He looked good last week in the Bournemouth and Brighton game, full of running.