(11-14-2019, 11:17 AM)Pragmatist Wrote: [ -> ]I think it’s very simple. A fair and proper compensation system needs to exist, based on how many years a player has been in the Academy. This needs to apply exactly the same way whether it is bigger clubs poaching kids from our Academy, or us poaching kids from smaller clubs. And introducing proper compensation for poaching by one C1 Academy club from another C1 Academy club is the easiest and most obvious place to start.
But it's not practical.
If a child's parents had to move for work, what would happen if the new club wanted him, but not enough to pay a fee? Or didn't have the budget? Would you be happy to see that kids dream shattered for the principle?
Yes people will lie and game the system, but thats always been the case - you can't stop it.
The only thing I can think of is if you overhaul the transfer system for under 25's so all their youth teams get paid a percentage of the fees up to the age of 25, based on how long and at what age they were there, regardless of where they end up.
(11-14-2019, 11:39 AM)Johnnykayeengland Wrote: [ -> ] (11-14-2019, 11:17 AM)Pragmatist Wrote: [ -> ]I think it’s very simple. A fair and proper compensation system needs to exist, based on how many years a player has been in the Academy. This needs to apply exactly the same way whether it is bigger clubs poaching kids from our Academy, or us poaching kids from smaller clubs. And introducing proper compensation for poaching by one C1 Academy club from another C1 Academy club is the easiest and most obvious place to start.
I think we would all agree with some sort of compensation scheme.
But the question that's begged-cos this has been going on for years - is why hasn't it been discussed (maybe it has) at FA / UEFA level & implented?
It has been discussed, but there are loopholes. Firstly a player who is not yet 17 cannot sign a contract with any club, and there no compensation claim can currently result from another club signing what amounts to a free agent. He may be at our Academy, and we will be insuring him, but contractually he is not “ours”. That’s one loophole. The other loophole, for a player who is ours and who has attained the age of 17, is that why compensation payable is only due if the player moves to another English club. If he moves to say Barcelona (as per Barry), then EU rules only enable 235k Euros to be payable. Brexit may well eradicate that. But even a move to a Scottish club avoids big compensation, and Brexit won’t affect that. It’s why we got a big fee for Rodgers.
It’s going to need the club to make a stink about this and to get the FA to accept that the loopholes simply have to be closed. And they are easy loopholes to close.
(11-14-2019, 12:03 PM)fuzzbox Wrote: [ -> ] (11-14-2019, 11:17 AM)Pragmatist Wrote: [ -> ]I think it’s very simple. A fair and proper compensation system needs to exist, based on how many years a player has been in the Academy. This needs to apply exactly the same way whether it is bigger clubs poaching kids from our Academy, or us poaching kids from smaller clubs. And introducing proper compensation for poaching by one C1 Academy club from another C1 Academy club is the easiest and most obvious place to start.
But it's not practical.
If a child's parents had to move for work, what would happen if the new club wanted him, but not enough to pay a fee? Or didn't have the budget? Would you be happy to see that kids dream shattered for the principle?
Yes people will lie and game the system, but thats always been the case - you can't stop it.
The only thing I can think of is if you overhaul the transfer system for under 25's so all their youth teams get paid a percentage of the fees up to the age of 25, based on how long and at what age they were there, regardless of where they end up.
I accept that in circumstances like that some agreement would need to be reached to address it.
Some sort of sell-on clause provisions up to age 25 would certainly help, but it still doesn’t get around the initial problem that we are legally prevented from signing a player until his 17th birthday, even if he was with us from age 8!
It does in as much as a child can't sign a contract (as you know), so the fee would be payable by the clubs as a condition of membership of the fa - as it does now with arbitration - so the child's age and lack of contract wouldn't come into it.
it's not perfect, obviously, but it would mean we get a percentage if izzy gets sold to the mighty Luton Town....and some more if he progresses to Dunstable the year after.
Given that this story seems to be gathering pace by the day with reports now stating City are set to wrap up a deal in the next few weeks I wonder wether we shouldn't be putting him on the bench against Wednesday.
Similar to the Izzy Brown situation years back. Show the league he's in our immediate plans even though he's not.
It might secure us bigger compo.
He looks physically ready in terms of his build. Give him 5 minute run out and who knows he might see a bigger picture with us?
Long shot
It's really frustrating but not helped by the staffing paralysis and general total lack of direction in that part of the academy at the moment.
(11-15-2019, 08:27 AM)Peachy Wrote: [ -> ]Given that this story seems to be gathering pace by the day with reports now stating City are set to wrap up a deal in the next few weeks I wonder wether we shouldn't be putting him on the bench against Wednesday.
Similar to the Izzy Brown situation years back. Show the league he's in our immediate plans even though he's not.
It might secure us bigger compo.
He looks physically ready in terms of his build. Give him 5 minute run out and who knows he might see a bigger picture with us?
Long shot
It also tells the rest of the youth you only get noticed by the first team by throwing your toys out of the pram. In addition, judging by Izzy's and Thornes comments, they'll see the club asit as cynical and manipulative - which won't help retention. I'm not sure it's worth it to possibly get an extra fiver.
It needs to be sorted but we have never been in this position before. Its been going on for 25 years
It’s frustrating – and I would agree that the loopholes need to be closed, but people calling for the academy to be closed are crazy. The money generated from the sales of Berahino, Roberts, Wood, Rogers equates to over 25 million. I haven’t actually looked at any sums, but surely this means the academy is self sustaining at the very least.
I would imagine we pinch players from other youth systems as well to be fair?
It does beg the question why we even bother having the academy. Maybe we should be the first club to spit it's dummy out and go to the FA and say we are closing it down unless something is done to protect our players from constantly being nicked.
Alternatively they could easily insert clauses that if a player is nicked at 16 that the buying club pays a decent fee upfront and then pays a set fee of £5m, or whatever, the minute he kicks a ball for that 1st team. Oh and a healthy sell on.
It's just all made far too easy for the big clubs. Makes my fucking shit itch that it's still going on after all these years.