2025/26 Ins & Outs Discussion

[grizzlyg]

2 hours ago, weeyin said:

Not sure what else we could have done with Johnston. He rejected our offers because he wanted to leave.

 

I just meant we should have got him a contract extension before he went out on loan before returning to us and having a great 6 months 

[weeyin]

12 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

Think the issue was that we didn't have him tied to a longer contract with us

Same question though is how do you do that?

Talented players and their agents are aware of the interest months (or years) in advance, and just refuse contract extensions because they don't want to risk a transfer fee getting in the way of a move.

Miller's plan was more first team games, so it made sense for him to extend when he did.

Johnston's plan was to leave as soon as he could, so did not make sense for him or his career plans.

 

 

[dennyc]

1 minute ago, wellgirl said:

This is just a question but how do you know Johnsons plan was to leave us as soon as he could? I get the fact that Miller got more first team games than Johnson but maybe if Johnson had been started more regularly with Motherwell he might have stayed longer? 

For Motherwell to have received compensation .....£350k.....from Sturm Graz, Johnston had to have rejected an offer from Motherwell before his contract expired. Otherwise no compensation due. Thems the rules. So he had a choice and opted to turn down our offer. 

The only real question is whether Motherwell could have persuaded him to extend earlier, perhaps when he returned from Cove? But lets be honest. He did ok on loan at QOS and Cove but it was only when he featured regularly in our first team that his performances took off. By then any team in Europe with a decent scouting system would be keeping an eye on him given his media coverage in Scotland as a possible young player of the year.. And no doubt quietly sounding out his Agent/Dad.

IMHO, the Club could have done little more and I believe he had already made his mind up to go overseas well before his contract expired. If I recall correctly nobody was surprised that he moved to Austria. Rumours were rife well before he left.

As WeeYin says, how on earth do you make a any player sign a new contract if they don't want to? And if you convince them to sign by offering daft money/length of contract  then you could be stuck with someone who fails to make the grade or regresses. We have been caught out that way before and possibly even now. It's certainly an issue that Clubs with a limited budget have to manage.

Also, in comparison to Johnston, Miller spent much more of his early years at Motherwell. Johnstone (I think) only joined us at age 12 and had no previous links to us. So perhaps LM felt a greater loyalty to us, received different advice from his father and so found it easier to extend. 

[Stuwell2]

15 minutes ago, weeyin said:

Miller's plan was more first team games, so it made sense for him to extend when he did.

Johnston's plan was to leave as soon as he could, so did not make sense for him or his career plans.

 

 

I think that’s it in a nutshell, Millers career path has been set for awhile now and it doesn’t include another season at FP. If there had been the possibility he might stay another season then his last contract extension would have included an option for a further year. The fact that it didn’t say to me that Motherwell were told one more year then he’s off. 

[dennyc]

14 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

I thought we got compensation for Johnson because of his age - not because he turned down a new contract. Because he was under 23 we were due a fee under training development 

A quick Google search will confirm that's why we got compensation for Max 

Nothing to do with him being offered a contract and turning it down 

 

My understanding is that,  to qualify for compensation, a contract has got to have been offered by the 'losing' club. Otherwise that Club is seen to be just releasing a player at contract end. Like happens to so many younger players.

Otherwise every player that is let go under a certain age would entitle clubs to compensation. Basically to qualify for compensation you have to demonstrate that you wanted to keep a player. For that reason a contract offer has to be made before a player's existing contract expires.

If you like you can check it all out by doing a search along the lines of ' Training and Solidarity Compensation payments in football'. Two different schemes.  Details age requirements, cross border requirements and contract basis amongst lots of other detail . Pages of it though so a glass of wine (white) might help! Happy reading.

[0Neils40yarder]

Dennyc is correct 

[dennyc]

10 hours ago, wellgirl said:

You may be right so I absolutely will look at that - but that isn't what comes up when you do a search  online.- it just says we were due the money because he came through the ranks at Motherwell and was under 23

I'll have a look tomorrow - thanks for that info. Appreciated 

Just to add to the complications and confusion. It really is a minefield. 

Clubs who are losing a youngster (despite offering a new contract) very often do a deal with the new Club that bypasses the compensation rules that apply to cross border only movement. Like I believe we did with McKinstry to Leeds. Maybe building  in a larger up front fee with a lower sell on %. Or the other way round. That may suit both Clubs depending upon their financial situation at the time. 

For internal transfers the compensation rules usually do not apply. Like with Hastie to Rangers. (Individual Associations can adopt the International rules if they like, but Scotland don’t). So we did a deal with Rangers rather than go to a dodgy tribunal whose decision is final and a one off payment. Sometimes with no add on %. So you can get screwed. I understand we got £350k for Hastie plus decent add on had he moved on for big money. A Tribunal might not have been so generous. We will never know. 

Best recent example of a tribunal outcome is Lewis Ferguson to Aberdeen. Accies got £250k and a small add on %, the level of which was not disclosed. No appeal allowed despite Accies going public that they felt hard done to. Compare that to our Hastie deal. Aberdeen certainly scored when he moved to Italy. Accies may have still been due further training compensation if Ferguson had then left  Italy before a certain age….. but I’m not 100% sure on that. It is debatable and not specifically covered in the rules I read. 

I think Motherwell have actually done pretty well over the years, often successfully negotiating with the new Club. Bailey Rice a recent example.  Certainly for youngsters not fully established in our first team. We were unable to negotiate a better deal for MJ though as Graz were happy to go with the set compensation arrangements. No discussion. The ball was in their court as Max had decided to move on. No bad feeling from me on that one as he did what he thought best for himself. And he had only joined us age 12 and appeared in under 20 games for our first team. So very different from Miller.
We also lost out initially  on Cadden as the US were not in the International arrangement. And when they signed up under pressure from the ruling bodies, they were regarded as a lower tier country where lower amounts were due. 

History wise. After the Bosman ruling that players could just leave at Contract end with no compensation due (in line with other occupations) Clubs from several countries approached UEFA and FIFA asking them to set up a scheme  that rewarded Clubs for developing youngsters. Until they came up with the current scheme Clubs were due nothing. That was seen as a barrier to youth development. So why bother developing kids? The present arrangement is something that helps. Covers cross border only though which is a flaw in the system imo. Like many countries, Scotland opted to go to a tribunal for internal transfers if Clubs do not agree a deal. At least that recognises the need for some reward for youth development I guess. But it is not perfect. 
 

That’s my take on things anyway. Others may know differently. Told you it was a nightmare.😀

 

 

[Kmcalpin]

Kofi Balmer being touted about? Maybe a good move for all parties concerned?

[dennyc]

17 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Kofi Balmer being touted about? Maybe a good move for all parties concerned?

Yes please. And it suggests JBA has replacements in mind.

Quite honestly I think we don't have any central defenders ....by trade or makeshift...that merit a first team place. So I'm hoping we see more than one depart. To be replaced by at least two that are comfortable playing out as the Manager expects. Might save me a few 'moments'. 

[Throughthelaces]

Can we sign these new CBS already got the dead for Saturday with our central defence

[weeyin]

40 minutes ago, dennyc said:

Yes please. And it suggests JBA has replacements in mind.

Quite honestly I think we don't have any central defenders ....by trade or makeshift...that merit a first team place. So I'm hoping we see more than one depart. To be replaced by at least two that are comfortable playing out as the Manager expects. Might save me a few 'moments'. 

I really hope so. We have been crying out for decent central defenders since Hartley & Aldred left us.

[Mccus28]

1 hour ago, Kmcalpin said:

Kofi Balmer being touted about? Maybe a good move for all parties concerned?

I pray this is true

I do, to be fair, like Gordon as a centre half and with a decent footballer beside him, it would maje for a good partnership imo

[weeyin]

I'm not sure Gordon is equipped to play out from the back, but I'm OK with him if he can.

[stv]

Gordon is solid,he just had shite around him last year.

[weeyin]

1 minute ago, stv said:

Gordon is solid,he just had shite around him last year.

But do you trust him to put his foot on the ball and pass to a team mate? 

He's been a bit hit or miss in that department so far this season (e.g. his underhit pass that led to the pen against Hertha), but hopfeully that will improve.

[stv]

9 minutes ago, weeyin said:

But do you trust him to put his foot on the ball and pass to a team mate? 

He's been a bit hit or miss in that department so far this season (e.g. his underhit pass that led to the pen against Hertha), but hopfeully that will improve.

First phase of last season he was doing just that, strolled thru the games. Then the SK shite ball got to him. 

[grizzlyg]

I like Balmer as a person and always someone that has taken the club to heart. However if we can get money for him then I would definitely take it but we MUST get 2 centre halves in

[dennyc]

29 minutes ago, weeyin said:

But do you trust him to put his foot on the ball and pass to a team mate? 

He's been a bit hit or miss in that department so far this season (e.g. his underhit pass that led to the pen against Hertha), but hopfeully that will improve.

I agree 100%. He looks uncomfortable playing out with too many passes playing our midfielders into trouble or being intercepted. His punts upfield have been closer to me than our strikers. He also seems to think whatever goalie we play has the ball skills of Leo Messi. He did fine for St J playing as an out and out stopper CB but that limited role does not suit our brave new world. He needs to show he can adapt or I think JBA will look elsewhere. Time is running out for him to prove himself. Saturday would be a good start.

[AllyMax]

5 hours ago, dennyc said:

Just to add to the complications and confusion. It really is a minefield. 

Clubs who are losing a youngster (despite offering a new contract) very often do a deal with the new Club that bypasses the compensation rules that apply to cross border only movement. Like I believe we did with McKinstry to Leeds. Maybe building  in a larger up front fee with a lower sell on %. Or the other way round. That may suit both Clubs depending upon their financial situation at the time. 

For internal transfers the compensation rules usually do not apply. Like with Hastie to Rangers. (Individual Associations can adopt the International rules if they like, but Scotland don’t). So we did a deal with Rangers rather than go to a dodgy tribunal whose decision is final and a one off payment. Sometimes with no add on %. So you can get screwed. I understand we got £350k for Hastie plus decent add on had he moved on for big money. A Tribunal might not have been so generous. We will never know. 

Best recent example of a tribunal outcome is Lewis Ferguson to Aberdeen. Accies got £250k and a small add on %, the level of which was not disclosed. No appeal allowed despite Accies going public that they felt hard done to. Compare that to our Hastie deal. Aberdeen certainly scored when he moved to Italy. Accies may have still been due further training compensation if Ferguson had then left  Italy before a certain age….. but I’m not 100% sure on that. It is debatable and not specifically covered in the rules I read. 

I think Motherwell have actually done pretty well over the years, often successfully negotiating with the new Club. Bailey Rice a recent example.  Certainly for youngsters not fully established in our first team. We were unable to negotiate a better deal for MJ though as Graz were happy to go with the set compensation arrangements. No discussion. The ball was in their court as Max had decided to move on. No bad feeling from me on that one as he did what he thought best for himself. And he had only joined us age 12 and appeared in under 20 games for our first team. So very different from Miller.
We also lost out initially  on Cadden as the US were not in the International arrangement. And when they signed up under pressure from the ruling bodies, they were regarded as a lower tier country where lower amounts were due. 

History wise. After the Bosman ruling that players could just leave at Contract end with no compensation due (in line with other occupations) Clubs from several countries approached UEFA and FIFA asking them to set up a scheme  that rewarded Clubs for developing youngsters. Until they came up with the current scheme Clubs were due nothing. That was seen as a barrier to youth development. So why bother developing kids? The present arrangement is something that helps. Covers cross border only though which is a flaw in the system imo. Like many countries, Scotland opted to go to a tribunal for internal transfers if Clubs do not agree a deal. At least that recognises the need for some reward for youth development I guess. But it is not perfect. 
 

That’s my take on things anyway. Others may know differently. Told you it was a nightmare.😀

 

 

100% spot on. The only thing is now that the governing bodies should be updating these arrangements to take account of current transfer market trends. There were no £160 MILLION transfers when these development fees were introduced. Current dev fees should reflect current transfer market fees.

[dennyc]

1 hour ago, AllyMax said:

100% spot on. The only thing is now that the governing bodies should be updating these arrangements to take account of current transfer market trends. There were no £160 MILLION transfers when these development fees were introduced. Current dev fees should reflect current transfer market fees.

Again an issue that needs addressed.

The Training Compensation that applies when a young player leaves his parent club (eg. Max Johnston to Graz) is based on some magic calculation linked to ages 12 to 21.  A set fee per year developed. Like you I don't think that has kept pace with the market.

The Solidarity Compensation which relates to moves thereafter (eg. if MJ joined Juventus tomorrow) is % based so will increase with the market.   5% of the full transfer fee is hived off and shared to those that developed a player from age 12 to 21. Pro rata. . It certainly amounts to very little if MJ moves for £3m. Perhaps £125k only. We would be due around 7 years worth of the 5%.  So maybe that % needs to be upped to 10 or 20% in line with commonly agreed add ons? Seems reasonable

Also the fact that both schemes apply to cross border moves only is a joke. For transfers within the same Country I think UEFA wanted to leave the local Association to deal with it. Maybe because of volumes or maybe to not stand on the home Authoritie's toes. Scotland could just adopt the same schemes if they wanted but that would require common sense. Accies felt they were shortchanged with the outcome of the Ferguson Tribunal.

[Big Wispy Flossy]

I think the 2025 version of Liam Gordon is every bit as bad as kofi balmer. Balmers arguably been better in the league cup games

[weeyin]

2 hours ago, AllyMax said:

100% spot on. The only thing is now that the governing bodies should be updating these arrangements to take account of current transfer market trends. There were no £160 MILLION transfers when these development fees were introduced. Current dev fees should reflect current transfer market fees.

Our CEO was talking about that a few months ago. It's crazy that there hasn't been an update to the fee structure. 

[grumpy]

I may be wrong about this (I usually am) but I think when the compensation scheme was introduced, the fee was based on what the selling club offered as a salary to the departing player and not what the buying club were offering, This gives a huge advantage to the "big" club, but, hey-ho, who wants to upset the apple cart.

[dennyc]

1 hour ago, grumpy said:

I may be wrong about this (I usually am) but I think when the compensation scheme was introduced, the fee was based on what the selling club offered as a salary to the departing player and not what the buying club were offering, This gives a huge advantage to the "big" club, but, hey-ho, who wants to upset the apple cart.

I found  a report on training Compensation and the Solidarity Scheme. States that Uefa and individual Associations decided upon the amount it took to train a player on an annual basis and came up with a payment table. Then they took into account the level of each team and adjusted the fee based on that. I did not find anything about wages offered by either club as being a factor in the calculation. Not saying that was not added later but I cannot confirm. 

I tried to copy the calculation section and post it here but every time I tried it was blacked out. Not sure why. And I could not figure out a way to post it.

I searched ' How is training compensation calculated by Uefa' in Google and then clicked on the top result ' E A Sports Law' . If interested, stick with it for a few paragraphs and you'll find the bit I am quoting from. 

 

For info, the Yanks were late in joining the scheme and initially placed their Clubs in the lowest possible grading (4).... as a way to minimise payments. Cadden was the first real test of their stance. In time they were forced to elevate the grading of the US teams to ensure fairness.. 

[Kmcalpin]

At the end of the day its the fans who wield the power. Stop watching EPL and Euro games on TV and buying their clubs kit and the mega money will dry up.