Nathan Byrne - Joined Charlotte FC

[StarterForTen]

1 hour ago, i-Ram said:

Came on here looking for actual and verifiable facts.  When will I learn.

This is a forum for opinions, so you are looking in the wrong place.

For actual and verifiable facts I suggest you go to Derbyshire Live.... Actually, best stay right here.

[StarterForTen]

2 hours ago, Sparkle said:

Yes you can when they have signed a contract to work for you and they can’t walk out of it without everyone’s agreement 

 

2 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

You can if it's with another employer when said employee is already contracted solely to work for their existing employer.

Perfectly reasonable.

Actually, you still can't. Though what you can do is sue for breach of contract.

And, in the particular case of a professional footballer, as their most likely employers are all part of a 'membership cartel', they may struggle to find anywhere to ply their trade.

[Amberram]

Forget about them they are ghosts.

 

[PistoldPete]

Nathan Byrne has a player profile on DCFC website. So does Buchanan .. and Fozzy. Make of that what you will. 

Edited July 20, 2022 by PistoldPete

[Ambitious]

11 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Nathan Byrne has a player profile on DCFC website. So does Buchanan .. and Fozzy. Make of that what you will. 

I imagine Derby are going down the lines of not acknowledging the claims of Buchanan and Byrne so will treat them as their own players until compensation is paid or legalities are concluded. 

I bet both are now getting paid as normal, albeit fined for breach of contract - essentially striking. 

[rammieib]

Looking like Byrne going into the new season without a team to play for. What a plank. Final years of your career and you’re going to be running around fields trying to keep fit.

[MackworthRamIsGod]

1 minute ago, rammieib said:

Looking like Byrne going into the new season without a team to play for. What a plank. Final years of your career and you’re going to be running around fields trying to keep fit.

Good, let him rot for a year.

[Alty_Ram]

After everything that everybody at DCFC have collectively endured over the last year or two this really stinks. In recent years in particular I haven't had a particularly high opinion of many footballers but then folks like Curtis and Colin Kazim Richards completely restore your faith only for it to be 'Byrned' or 'Buchananed'. If this is true then it's just a cynical way of trying to denying the club any cash while slightly improving their own negotiating position. It's just despicable behaviour and I have nothing but utter contempt for them.

[DCFC27]

I think I'm in the minority here but with Byrne I have slightly more respect for as he hasn't actually signed for anyone else yet. Hasn't come out and said anything derogatory.

He's been given advice saying DCFC are in the wrong. DCFC have been given advice saying Byrne is in the wrong. He's waiting on an outcome. It probably wouldn't right for him to be with the squad, on either party. DCFC don't want someone with an active dispute in training. Byrne can't really train with us as it might prejudice his case. 

If Derby turn out to be in the right, I'd give him the opportunity to rejoin the squad and play. (Albeit, probably with an apology) Buchanan however is playing for another club right now. 

[StaffsRam]

Thing is, both are good enough to be wanted by any number of Championship teams if they were made available for transfer.

Had either one said “Look, I know I’m under contract but I don’t want to play in L1 so I want to go” then we could have listed them accordingly. With a year left on their contracts any transfer price we put on them would have been appropriate, ie not silly money. I would bet that both would have been snapped up by now for a nominal/respectable fee. 

Instead, their behaviour has legitimised the view of other clubs that “Why should we pay anything when they might not be contracted?”. 

Bottom line, had either handled this better then both would likely have gone by now, and we’d have some £££ in the bank, but instead, no one wins and either we’re going to get screwed out of transfer fees, or they’re going to be left with no clubs to play for come the start of the season.

I have more sympathy for Byrne’s position as he hasn’t publicly tried to force the issue, but from our perspective they’ve both removed themselves as options for the coming season, and it’s an insult to the bond that the (vast majority of the) squad helped form with the supporters last year.

[Tamworthram]

27 minutes ago, DCFC27 said:

I think I'm in the minority here but with Byrne I have slightly more respect for as he hasn't actually signed for anyone else yet. Hasn't come out and said anything derogatory.

He's been given advice saying DCFC are in the wrong. DCFC have been given advice saying Byrne is in the wrong. He's waiting on an outcome. It probably wouldn't right for him to be with the squad, on either party. DCFC don't want someone with an active dispute in training. Byrne can't really train with us as it might prejudice his case. 

If Derby turn out to be in the right, I'd give him the opportunity to rejoin the squad and play. (Albeit, probably with an apology) Buchanan however is playing for another club right now. 

I do wonder though if the only reason he hasn't signed for anyone else is because no one has made him an offer he's prepared to accept. If he doesn't want to stay at Derby then he must be looking to remain at Championship (or above) level and/or on higher wages than Derby are offering. Given the number of experienced players we have managed to pick up, because they have been released by their clubs, then this is a possibility. If true, then it does seem a bit foolish on Byrne's behalf. It seems more likely other clubs have shown an interest but he is waiting for this to be resolved. 

If he does end up staying at Derby then he will certainly have a job on his hands building bridges. My best guess is that the club don't want him, now he's so clearly indicated he doesn't want to be here, but they're playing hard ball and holding out for a fee or compensation.  

[ilkleyram]

Perhaps - and I have no itk - the difference between the two is geography and football regulation. Buchanan goes abroad and UEFA are involved regarding transfer of player registrations and Byrne wants to stay in the UK where clubs are wary of doing to another club what might then be done to them at a later date.

[EnigmaRam]

I would imagine, in Byrnes case, getting signed by an EFL team may be problematic if the EFL are on our side. So it’s a prem  team or abroad but that is still risky. Maybe he’s waiting to see what happens with Buchanan or hasn’t had an offer 

[PistoldPete]

1 hour ago, DCFC27 said:

I think I'm in the minority here but with Byrne I have slightly more respect for as he hasn't actually signed for anyone else yet. Hasn't come out and said anything derogatory.

He's been given advice saying DCFC are in the wrong. DCFC have been given advice saying Byrne is in the wrong. He's waiting on an outcome. It probably wouldn't right for him to be with the squad, on either party. DCFC don't want someone with an active dispute in training. Byrne can't really train with us as it might prejudice his case. 

If Derby turn out to be in the right, I'd give him the opportunity to rejoin the squad and play. (Albeit, probably with an apology) Buchanan however is playing for another club right now. 

 

werder Bremen May have been willing to take a risk with Buchanan but I doubt anyone in the Efl would risk offering Byrne a contract while he is still registered with us. 

[gfs1ram]

2 hours ago, EnigmaRam said:

I would imagine, in Byrnes case, getting signed by an EFL team may be problematic if the EFL are on our side. So it’s a prem  team or abroad but that is still risky. Maybe he’s waiting to see what happens with Buchanan or hasn’t had an offer 

Since when have the EFL ever been on our side ????

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

3 minutes ago, gfs1ram said:

Since when have the EFL ever been on our side ????

I think the EFL need to be on our side in this instance, if leaving a club under TUPE becomes a standard practice for players when their club goes in to/comes out of  administration the EFL (and any club going in to administration) has a pretty significant problem. If all of the players for a club can simply walk away once a team comes out of administration then what exactly are any prospective new owners going to be buying? All of the asset value of remaining players essentially becomes 0, which in turn massively impacts the value of the club.

[i-Ram]

Lots of posters still rattling on regarding TUPE. It’s getting boring as hell. Isn’t it more likely the case that Buchanan and Byrne are disputing that their contracts could be extended for a year at the option of the club, whilst the club was in administration. No other contracted player has tried to escape their contract, just the two who were subject to an option. Please, please, PLEASE, stop rattling on about TUPE until there are actually any facts out there to suggest this is a bloody TUPE matter.

[Ram-Alf]

4 hours ago, DCFC27 said:

I think I'm in the minority here but with Byrne I have slightly more respect for as he hasn't actually signed for anyone else yet. 

My guess is while we hold his registration and there's a dispute clubs are waiting on the outcome, Meanwhile Byrne is losing his match fitness and Buchanon will be enjoying his Sauerkraut and Sausage.

[PistoldPete]

25 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

My guess is while we hold his registration and there's a dispute clubs are waiting on the outcome, Meanwhile Byrne is losing his match fitness and Buchanon will be enjoying his Sauerkraut and Sausage.

Buchanan at least has played in practice matches but he won’t be able to play in any competitive games unless his registration is sorted out. 

[PistoldPete]

47 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Lots of posters still rattling on regarding TUPE. It’s getting boring as hell. Isn’t it more likely the case that Buchanan and Byrne are disputing that their contracts could be extended for a year at the option of the club, whilst the club was in administration. No other contracted player has tried to escape their contract, just the two who were subject to an option. Please, please, PLEASE, stop rattling on about TUPE until there are actually any facts out there to suggest this is a bloody TUPE matter.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that these two are the only ones that we know are affected. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence either that the only player who has signed for another club has gone abroad. 

On the EFL website these two were listed as having been retained beyond end of June. So EFL has approved these two’s registration with us for this year and their (or FA?) approval will be needed to transfer the registration to another EFL club. I don’t expect that to happen without any compensation for the Rams. 
 

The issue about transferring contracts to a new company was raised by the BBC reporter so it’s not just idle speculation On this forum. But by I should say that same report likened our situation to Glasgow Rangers , when in fact our situation  is very different to Rangers. 

Edited July 21, 2022 by PistoldPete