I really don't see what ire is aimed at Rovers, but that's often the case here. Fashionable I suppose..ho hum.
Glad we've signed a player who isn't a midfielder, but I don't see him playing too many games.
Printable View
I really don't see what ire is aimed at Rovers, but that's often the case here. Fashionable I suppose..ho hum.
Glad we've signed a player who isn't a midfielder, but I don't see him playing too many games.
Dundalk have been well and truly stiched up by Fenn unless Dundalk told him they didnt want him back after he had a change of heart. I would have thought that any player that retires mid season wouldnt become a free agent until the following season because if you retire you would come off any list of players who are available to sign .
Did Rovers knew all along that he was going to them ? Are they guilty in aiding the deception of Dundalk ?
If both Rovers and Fenn are gulity of deception then Fenn should be banned for the rest of the season and Rovers given a fine or compo to Dundalk.
If Rovers have tapped him up before he left Dundalk then they are in the wrong if he left Dundalk and then for whatever reason decided he wanted to keep playing and Rovers offered him a contract then they have done nothing wring, simple as...
This whole 'you're only commenting because it's Rovers' thing is getting pretty tiring, just as the sniping at Rovers is.
Definitely there are some posters who always have something to say about Rovers, but there are a few Rovers fans who want to portray EVERYTHING as a vindictive attack on Rovers rather than accept legitimate criticism on certain issues.
The situation is (as I understand it) that a player has told his club he just doesn't have it anymore, and wants to retire. His club, being both decent and seemingly naive, let him retire and release his registration (if that's the right term). The player then realises he won't get his tax back for another six months, decides he does still have it after all, and goes looking for clubs, and is signed just a few days after retiring.
I very much doubt that Rovers had any part to play in getting him to retire. All they did was decide to sign a player who was a free agent. At the moment, we don't know (or at least I don't know) whether he tried to go back to Dundalk, but the fact that they are apparently 'fuming' suggests he didn't.
As I see it, Dundalk are guily of naivete, Rovers haven't done anything wrong really, and Fenn has acted like a complete *****.
From the league's perspective, if the transfer is allowed, it allows this kind of process to become a loophole to get around transfer regulations. That's why it's important for the league in general to know what's going on. Are the FAI going to allow it to happen? If they can't stop the Fenn transfer, are they going to ensure it can't happen again?
I can't believe there isn't a FAI/UEFA clause that protects a club acting in good faith. Were Dundalk happy to get rid of him for financial reasons? I don't hear to many official statements from them, but maybe they are consulting Legals and not commenting but I'd be well angry with Mr Fenn if some of his quotes are true.
There is.
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affe...inhalt2010.pdfQuote:
The following provisions apply if a contract is terminated without just cause:
1. In all cases, the party in breach shall pay compensation. Subject to the
provisions of article 20 and Annexe 4 in relation to training compensation,
and unless otherwise provided for in the contract, compensation for the
breach shall be calculated with due consideration for the law of the country
concerned, the specificity of sport, and any other objective criteria. These
criteria shall include, in particular, the remuneration and other benefits due
to the player under the existing contract and/or the new contract, the time
remaining on the existing contract up to a maximum of five years, the fees
and expenses paid or incurred by the former club (amortised over the term
of the contract) and whether the contractual breach falls within a protected
period.
2. Entitlement to compensation cannot be assigned to a third party. If a
professional is required to pay compensation, the professional and his new
club shall be jointly and severally liable for its payment. The amount may be
stipulated in the contract or agreed between the parties.
3. In addition to the obligation to pay compensation, sporting sanctions shall
also be imposed on any player found to be in breach of contract during the
protected period. This sanction shall be a four-month restriction on playing in
official matches. In the case of aggravating circumstances, the restriction shall
last six months. These sporting sanctions shall take effect immediately once
the player has been notified of the relevant decision. The sporting sanctions
shall remain suspended in the period between the last official match of the
season and the first official match of the next season, in both cases including
national cups and international championships for clubs. This suspension
of the sporting sanctions shall, however, not be applicable if the player is
an established member of the representative team of the association he is
eligible to represent, and the association concerned is participating in the
final competition of an international tournament in the period between the
last match and the first match of the next season. Unilateral breach without
iv. Maintenance of contractual stability between professionals and clubs 17
just cause or sporting just cause after the protected period shall not result in
sporting sanctions. Disciplinary measures may, however, be imposed outside
the protected period for failure to give notice of termination within 15
days of the last official match of the season (including national cups) of the
club with which the player is registered. The protected period starts again
when, while renewing the contract, the duration of the previous contract is
extended.
4. In addition to the obligation to pay compensation, sporting sanctions
shall be imposed on any club found to be in breach of contract or found
to be inducing a breach of contract during the protected period. It shall
be presumed, unless established to the contrary, that any club signing a
professional who has terminated his contract without just cause has induced
that professional to commit a breach. The club shall be banned from registering
any new players, either nationally or internationally, for two registration
periods.
5. Any person subject to the FIFA Statutes and regulations (club officials,
players’ agents, players, etc.) who acts in a manner designed to induce a
breach of contract between a professional and a club in order to facilitate the
transfer of the player shall be sanctioned.
Poor form by Fenn, and by Rovers who also, according to Sean Connor (and we all know he always speaks the truth) tried to take Karl Sheppard from us in a less than ethical way.
That said, if I was a Dundalk fan I'd be worried for how the rest of the season will pan out with Mr Foster in charge. That is Melligan and Fenn gone now, two of their best players, and much like last season at Utd, Foster got his side off to a flying start, only for the wheels to start wobbling as the season progressed, and the players claiming when he left that they didn't like him. Whether or not they fall off altogether by the season is the question. I hope not for Dundalk's sake, but I'm not convinced
Blackie reported that MON went to the GUFC chief executive rather than directly to him, surely a hanging offence that one ... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by WoodquayBoy
Mario
>He tried it with Raf last year too.
Carefully now, players in the final year of the contract are allowed to talk to other clubs before the end of the season.
Did Bohs pay a transfer fee? No! Why? Coz Cretaro was a free agent ...
Mario
Does that rule not only count if there's 6 months or less on his contract? This was at the start of last season, April time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
Me
Well Mario, that is what Connor was on about Mario, the mannerly thing to do Mario would surely to have gone to the manager, Mario, rather than going over his headQuote:
Originally Posted by Mario
seeing as sheppard was probably a free agent at this point, ONeill could have just gone straight to the player
Fenn never had the legs! Hes been the slowest player in the league for years! Hes a genius on his day though. Magical touch and he sees passes other players can't imagine at times.Quote:
Ah he is well past his best. I think he'll do a job for Rovers because we lack creativity in the centre but he doesn't really have the legs anymore.
The facts that Neale Fenn now has no credibility whatsoever, that Dundalk are without a very experienced player they may badly need on the run-in or that Shams. now have a player that might just swing the title race in their favour are probably irrelevant. What is relevant is that the FAI are seen to fully investigate what went on and ensure that Dundalk are fully compensated by whoever is guilty of whatever. If not player contracts and our league will become a joke. If Fenn deliberately ended his contract to get a new club he should be heavily fined and suspended. If Shams. are guilty of tapping up the player then a points deduction must happen. Otherwise there is nothing there to discourage other players and clubs from trying something similar.
Can the Rovers fans (but mainly Sligo) please give their petty rivalry a rest? There's no need to drag every single thread into a píssing contest between the two sets of fans.
There's one simple thing that stops clubs being done like this - holding on to the players registration! Happens all the time, when players decide they've had enough/ going to play gaa/ going travelling etc. And it specifically stops this kind of move and ensures they have first refusal if the player changes their mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldred
People can moan at Fenn and Rovers all they want, demand compo etc but my understanding is if they also released his registration Dundalk don't have a case, whatever about the ethical arguments.
...and maybe shams identified a player they wanted and "encouraged" him to escape his contract to prevent them paying a fee (as was done with Chris Turner).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_SRFC
No doubt the League will investigate this with the same vigour they "investigate" all incidents involving shams :rolleyes:
In fairness, if what's been said before is true, there's no way Rovers could have encouraged Dundalk to give up his registration, so that theory simply doesn't add up.
but they could "encourage" Fenn to seek to have his contract dissolved. They did get Chris Turner to renege on an agreement to rejoin Sligo so there is form for this type of behaviour.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Glass houses there marino, Nutsy is far from clean in this area as he's, eh, had a word, with plenty of players under contract, eh, encouraging them to seek moves.
Without the registration being released, it seems all that's irrelevant. So why go to the bother of encouraging a player to retire when it's the simplest thing for Dundalk to hold ono to his registration and stop him from signing for anyone else for the rest of the season?Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
And the Chris Turner thing wasn't as you put it either, as I understand; Sligo were the ones who reneged on the contract offer, and Rovers capitalised on that. It's not Rovers' fault if other clubs make mistakes.
What Neale Fenn did is absolutely disgusting. He conned his way out of a contract. The PFAI have harped on about clubs honouring players contracts - maybe they should mention that players should honours theirs to. Issues like this really knock the credibility of the league. Neale Fenn ruined his reputation with this, he has only a short time left in his career and when he goes looking for a coaching job when he hangs his boots up, I hope this incident stands to him and that no one will hire someone with such low integrity. Also I firmly believe the transfer dealings of Michael O'Neill need to be looked at. First Chris Turner now Neale Fenn and I'm sure there is plenty of other players he 'tapped'. Contact PFAI at http://www.pfai.ie/contact and tell McGuinness to get off his backside and do something about this, because Neale Fenn and Shamrock Rovers should not get away with this.
The cynic in me would wonder whether it was in Dundalks interest to get him off the payroll, and now they have the perfect cover from their own fans... It certainly appears to suit them that people ignore the registration issue.
Not a chance of this, did you see the size of the Dundalk squad. We already off loaded a couple of players like Synnott and Gregg. Foster was actively trying to get more players in not get rid of them. Dundalk FC acted in good heart (maybe a little naive) and let Fenn go for ''Personal reasons''. It back fired and Fenn deceived the club.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Ah yes, Stu, I was forgetting its NEVER shams fault all everyone elses :D first love and all that.........Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
All managers "tap up" players Dodge always have, always will. Difference here is that player(s) may have been encouraged to escape his contract by a paticular club. I Think that is slightly different scenario.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Seriously mb - how do Rovers encourage Dundalk to release his registration?
There's no point selectively considering the facts that lead to the conclusion you want (i.e. Rovers are nasty, horrible people).
There's absolutely no difference at all between the case I'm talking about. Except the outcome. In the case I'm talking about the player couldn't get out of his contract, and he was transferred to another club. In this case Fenn got out of his contract.
Rovers were in talks with Karl Sheppard over the weekend, he was seen in the Maldron with two suits on Sunday, if a deal had have been reached, Fenn wouldn't have got a call from Rovers and he possibly would have gone to shligo, and would there have been a six page thread on it on here??? Would there balls.
Come on Stu, I said they may have encouraged fenn to seek dissolution of his contract, obviously there was no contact between the clubs - therin lies the problem. Not sure how much clearer I can make it. (please notice the MAY part - unlike rubbish regularly spouted about Bohs "as fact" on here)Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Why wouldnt there be, serious issues have been raised.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGAJD
No. Immediately after Fenn 'retired' Dundalk signed Welsh striker Matthew Tipton as a replacement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Fenn's farewall interview states that he still planned to be ''playing a little bit of football'', reading between the lines thats Inter or Junior football (or if you're REALLY cynical, Shamrock Rovers), so its likely he requested them to release his registration for that reason.
I can't but help feel that the timing of Fenn's out of the blue retirement, a couple of days before the closing of the transfer window, stinks to high heaven.
OK maybe your right they are serious questions reguarding Fenn's departure, but would every second poster be stating that Cooke encouraged Fenn to quit in a big underhand move by your lot if he'd gone out west? I doubt it.Quote:
Originally Posted by redobit
Rovers main target before the window closed was Sheppard, that fell through for whatever reason, so Rovers ask Fenn his situation, he states he's a free agent, Rovers have that (apparantly)confirmed by the pfai and sign him, I don't see what Rovers have done wrong in that respect. Whatever about how Fenn got his contract cancelled is another matter and needs clarifying, but the conspiracy theorists/anti MON heads on here make me laugh with their crackpot theories.
Cut the victimisation ******** out, it's a dispicable act by Fenn and whatever club he joined would be under a cloud of suspicion especially since there is form here with Shamrock RoversQuote:
Originally Posted by GGAJD
Dundalk were quick on the ball there; must have been tapping Tipton up. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by total hoofball
Arse; he was a free transfer. Ruins that joke.
Yes because we know the "model club" would do no wrong :rolleyes: pure coincidence that the two "contract breaking deals (Fenn and Turner) revolve around the same club ?Quote:
Originally Posted by GGAJD
or perhaps, as ever, you believe that no one should question anything at Rovers ?
Again, you ignore that Sligo reneged on Turner's contract and make it all out to be Rovers' fault. In fact, Sligo were the ones investigated after it, as I recall.
Not saying that Rovers are squeaky clean here, but you need to start looking at all the facts.
Dodge, if its the Ndo caseQuote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
- player asked for transfer from club A# to club B#
- club A (holder of registration) put huge price on player, as entitled to.
- club B do not meet price and do not sign player
_club A pay players wages to play for bitterest rivals of club B in petty move.
So if Dundalk announce that they are to continue paying fenn while he sees out the season at Bohs then, yes, the cases will be the same :o
# clubs A and B may or may not be St Pats and Bohs.