The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - THE BIG POST MORTEM

[Hakkz]

Always confused by the one year extension that both sides have to agree to bit. How is that different to having no option at all?

That the rest of the conditions of the deal (salary etc) are already agreed?

 

[Freddie]

That the rest of the conditions of the deal (salary etc) are already agreed?

But there's nothing holding either party to it. Conte could still decide he wants more money for example. Maybe they just got the lawyers to do some extra work to save a few quid down the line but legally it seems to mean nothing at all.

 

[brasil_spur]

But there's nothing holding either party to it. Conte could still decide he wants more money for example. Maybe they just got the lawyers to do some extra work to save a few quid down the line but legally it seems to mean nothing at all.

Nor does having a contract, many a manager has been sacked during his contract term and many a manager, including Conte, has walked during their contract term.

 

[Freddie]

Nor does having a contract, many a manager has been sacked during his contract term and many a manager, including Conte, has walked during their contract term.

Contracts do mean something. Sacking someone or walking away from a contract has legal ramifications and usually involve large sums of money. This is essentially another gentlemen's agreement.

 

[Amo]

Nor does having a contract, many a manager has been sacked during his contract term and many a manager, including Conte, has walked during their contract term.

Well if there’s a contract both sides have to agree a break or one side has to pay compensation or claim a breach. Not the same situation at all.

 

[brasil_spur]

Contracts do mean something. Sacking someone or walking away from a contract has legal ramifications and usually involve large sums of money. This is essentially another gentlemen's agreement.

Well if there’s a contract both sides have to agree a break or one side has to pay compensation or claim a breach. Not the same situation at all.

Yes and no. The point of worry about Conte's contract situation is not a financial one though is it? It's about whether he'll be with us past the end of this season and the point of having an extension clause. My point is that even if he was on a 5 year contract with us he might just decide to leave or we might decide to sack him. The only difference here is that one of those options costs money and the other doesn't. Even then it might not be much money, as we saw with Mourinho - who we got out paying a large sum as he signed for Roma shortly after which released us of much of our financial obligation to him.

 

[Freddie]

Yes and no. The point of worry about Conte's contract situation is not a financial one though is it? It's about whether he'll be with us past the end of this season and the point of having an extension clause. My point is that even if he was on a 5 year contract with us he might just decide to leave or we might decide to sack him. The only difference here is that one of those options costs money and the other doesn't. Even then it might not be much money, as we saw with Mourinho - who we got out paying a large sum as he signed for Roma shortly after which released us of much of our financial obligation to him.

Ok but you can see that having a contract is at least an obstcale, an impediment to parting ways that one has to overcome before making that decision. In this instance I can't see what the purpose of having a clause is that means absolutely nothing. It commits neither party to anything. All terms can be renegotiated. You'd be in exactly the same situation if it didn't exist.

 

[brasil_spur]

Ok but you can see that having a contract is at least an obstcale, an impediment to parting ways that one has to overcome before making that decision. In this instance I can't see what the purpose of having a clause is that means absolutely nothing. It commits neither party to anything. All terms can be renegotiated. You'd be in exactly the same situation if it didn't exist.

But football contract terms get renegotiated all the time, with managers and players wanting more money as they become more successful.

I get what your point is in normal contract law sense, but in football it just doesn't seem to matter much. Case in point - Ronaldo.

At the end of the day Conte will stay only if he wants to, based largely on being backed by the club and the fans. Whether he has 1 year left, 5 years left or is on a rolling monthly contract will make no difference, beyond any possible compensation package we pay him if we were to sack him.

 

[dovahkiin]

some interesting stuff from @Trix and @Hercules in the conte thread