Another Bellamy thread

[Blue Prophet]

Just been talking to a good mate of Craig's

Craig still wants to come back to Cardiff, but is now resigned to the fact that it is unlikely to happen this season apparently, unless there is a change of mindset at Man City (apparently they are playing hardball) Man City want any loan deal to involve the loan club paying the majority of Bellers salary, the clubs who are willing to do this, well Bellers has point blank refused to go to them, Mancini has shown a willingness (and apparently has boardroom support) to leave Craig rotting on the sidelines rather than give into "player power" and release him from his contract, so it will take a £3m+ bid, and Craig to take a large drop in salary for us to see him this season, CB has not completely given up hope of coming home this season, but it will require a U turn from Man City, and he is not hopeful of this happening, it's not quite dead in the water, but looking that way...........sorry lads.

 

[Captain Hook_ccfc]

Then lets offer £3M and get it sorted !!

 

[BluefromBridgend]

Links in to what I said yesterday Roy. I doubt if the owners want to break the manageable financial structure we have in place.

 

[Blue Prophet]

Andy, yep spotted that, apparently Craig is mega-pissed off and is talking to the PFA, but I can't see Man City's high powered legal eagles steering the club down the wrong road TBH, and whilst CB might be prepared to rationalise his pay demands, we are talking about him dropping around £50K a week

The only hope we have is CB is far from skint, and might just be pig-headed enough to take the hit, but I like you won't hold my breath though

 

[ccfcremotesupport]

As I am a glass half full sort of a person, a well rested Craig may extend his career by a season or two. £80k a week for this season may also mean his demands for the two seasons after may be far more resonable.

Not what we want in the short term, but 'maybe it will turn out for the best, soooooooo, always look on the bright side of life....... '

 

[SBFF]

I would say that Bellamy will gain the upper hand come the close of the transfer window.
The point about Bellamy is that he is in his last year of contract, so Man City will have to shell out nearly £4 million for him to sit in the stands and then see him walk for free come the end of the season, resulting in a complete loss for them.

I believe he will broker a deal once the window has shut and that deal will be favourable to us, in fact I find it hard to see this going any other way, but we wait and see

 

[jck200]

Mancini sky sports: We have not completed our squad but until we sell some players this is very difficult.

Man City are as far removed from reality as a club can be, they expected players they did not want to be snapped up by now. Spurs are dictating the Adebayor deal not Man City.

It is not just Bellamy they would need to pay up his contract a number of other players would want the same deal. If they can shift Santa Cruz and Wayne Bridge along with Adebayor then getting rid of Bellamy by paying him off would not seem such a bad thing.

As for letting him rot in the reserves that would make them a laughing stock week in week out especially when they lose.

Plus the PFA will consider the issue where a player has a contract and is prevented first team football whether they should be made to pay up that contract the same as they would if it was a manager they no longer wanted.

 

[ccfcremotesupport]

It's an awkward one for the PFA as they could end up setting a dangerous precident.

Players could make themselves un-popular with a manager and say, 'so pay me off'. Both the club and player enter into an agreement, however, with Man City creating such a large wage differential between themselves and other clubs, there will be little sympathy. Most of these players could be moved on if they were on wages comparable with other clubs. Craig is an unusual case in that even if they found a club to pay all his wages, he's still likely to say no.

The power has definitely shifted to the player over the last couple of seasons, especially with the Bosman ruling. A player you want to keep can run down his contract and leave for nothing or another can sit on his arris and demand to get paid as you can't get rid of him if he doesn't want to go.

Most clubs will learn and manage accordingly, however the vast wealth of a small number of clubs will create this anomaly.

 

[Stevoldinho]

My main concern is that this is personal between Mancini and CB. I can see him leaving Craig to rot.

From a financial point of view once the chance to sell him is removed a loan deal which saves paying 100% wages for the final year of his contract makes sense to everyone, BUT since when have Man City's financial decisions been based on any sort of reason.

I wonder what the PFA can do when Man City have offered Craig a number of chances to leave the club. They are not really restricting his chance to play, it is his choice of where he wants to live and refusal to sign a contract with anyone other than us that is restricting his options.

 

[jck200]

The player was encouraged to sign for Man City and the wage was deliberately high.

Forget the wage, any players at other clubs not wanted cannot be forced to go to any club unless it is what they want.

What matters here is a club he does want to play for has offered part of his wage, Man City have no excuse to refuse when the only other option is to pay it in full themselves. That is a deliberate attempt to prevent the player doing anything at all.

Still you got to admire Bellamy whatever happens.

 

[Stevoldinho]

Bellamy signed for MC on the back of a very successful season and his wages were in line with other top premier league strikers at the time. He was MC's player of the season meaning that status and pay grade were proven to be justified.
Obviously it gets messy when Mancini decided one disagreement warranted binning last years player of the season.

I don't know football employment law well enough (at all!) to know at which point the employees rights override the huge asset value players hold to the company that owns them. Man City or any other club can't be expected to write off millions because a player only wants to go to one club, but the fact CB has stated many times he is very happy to honour his contract with MC clouds that significantly.

They have deemed him surplus and destroyed his resale value accordingly I suppose.

 

[Oldsparkey]

What matters here is a club he does want to play for has offered part of his wage, Man City have no excuse to refuse when the only other option is to pay it in full themselves. That is a deliberate attempt to prevent the player doing anything at all.

How do you work that out? Both parties are subject to an agreed contract that nobody forced either to sign.

Man City have every right to insist upon the best financial deal for themselves irrespective of any club that Craig may want to play for.

The reasonable case that Craig would need for the PFA to get any success at all is one of restriction of trade, viz preventing him from plying his trade.

If an offer has been made by another club that is financially acceptable to Man City and at no financial loss to Craig, he could be on a loser. If he'd declined to move on the basis that he just didn't want to go there, it would be very difficult to get a restriction of trade result in his favour.

I still think this one is in the balance, though I do expect to see him in a CCFC shirt this season.

 

[jck200]

Bellamy has been sacked.

When a manager is sacked they pay up his contract they do not insist he sits there for the rest of the term of the contract. They cannot sack a manager and demand he go to a certain club, he decides what club.

 

[SBFF]

I think the threat of the PFA is just that, a threat!
However it is one that Man City may want to aviod, remember the refusal for him to be sold/loaned to another club in the premier! that could easily be interpreted as deliberate attempt to deny him to ply his trade at the level he had attained, remembering his rating at that time.
Luckily Craig agreed to play in a lower league for that season, no doubt in the hope he would be reinstated in the 25 man squad come the following season, or at least be allowed to continue the loan agreed the previous season.

This time man City are now denying him even that, dictating where he can and cannot play, which in itself is an unfair policy, even in an everyday job you wouldn't be dictated to in such a way, they couldn't for instance insist you move to Scotland because there isn't any work for you down here, although they might put this to you in an offer, it isn't a reasonable offer.
A contract was signed, but it would be obvious that the player signed in the belief that if he was fit and of the ability required throughout that contract, then he would play some part in that squad, it's a reasonable assumption and would therefore carry some weight when looking at this matter.
Anyway, the point is i doubt Man City would want to take things that far, but for the players it doesn't really matter.
To avoid any of that man City will eventually release Craig after coming to an agreement regarding wages.

 

[Oldsparkey]

Bellamy has been sacked.

Has he really? I must have missed that.

I thought he was just at odds with Mancini and was still under contract to the club notwithstanding the 25 man squad decision when it's made on Sept 1st. Are you suggesting that the decision has already been made that he wont be included and is therefore effectively "sacked"?

I don't understand why, other than morally, anyone thinks Man City are under any obligation to do anything regarding Craig's contract with them.

I agree Sweetblue, Man City will not want to set a precedent with the PFA over Craig as the implications for the club with other players left out in the cold would really open a can of worms.

Best bet is as I said earlier - an agreement will be reached that satisfies Craig to a greater extent than Man City, and we will see him wearing a CCFC shirt this season.

 

[SBFF]

Well thats the hope sparkey, bellamy is the icing for me that will give us the impetus we need to take a top 6 spot.

 

[jck200]

The situation has changed from previous seasons.

With the 25 man squad rule there is no longer any chance of a player not named to play any part. Bellamy has nothing to lose by pressing the matter further after the transfer window shuts and the 25 man squads are known.

The player would then have a genuine reason to question whether he is being unfairly treated.

 

[ccfcremotesupport]

I suppose the other oddity with this case comes down to the fact Craig is in the last year of his contract. Younger players with a few years left could go out on loan, develop and make the the 25 man squad next year. If Craig isn't in the 25 this year, that's it.

 

[Oldsparkey]

The situation has changed from previous seasons.

With the 25 man squad rule there is no longer any chance of a player not named to play any part.

As far as I know nothing has changed since last season.

A Premier league club can change any number of their squad in the transfer windows. That means Man City could name an entirley different 25 in January if they wanted to.

 

[SBFF]

As far as I know nothing has changed since last season.

A Premier league club can change any number of their squad in the transfer windows. That means Man City could name an entirley different 25 in January if they wanted to.

Could have been a good reason for them holding onto Bellamy if it wasn't for the fact they have tried to sell him along with the other "Frozen Five"