Michael McGlinchey (Weston FC | Australia)

Does anyone know why and what CCM actually changed which made them need to re-sign all contracts? It wasn't just a change of ownership was it? Does the FFA actually have a set of rules that override common law regarding player contracts when that happens?

There is one interesting aspect that just occurred to me and I wonder if anyone has thought about this?

Does McGlinchey not like Phil Moss?

He was playing under Arnold, he was happy and putting in great performances. Then Arnold goes off to Japan (thats the right country?) and McGlinchey rather than stay under Moss, follows. Now his loan is up and he does not want to go back to CCM. 

I might well be reaching here but what would cause McGlinchey to not want to go back to a place he was happy at. The only thing I can thing of that has changed is the coach... (and perhaps a lot more money from the Phoenix)

Charlesworth has a bit of a reputation of talking a big game and underdelivering.

And Wee Mac was very very loyal to Arnold. I don't know this for sure, but Arnold was possibly the only reason that Wee Mac was staying at CCM.

Think I was wrong on the ownership.

But at some point, they moved their players to new agreements. But McGlinchey never signed one.

On your last sentence, it should be game, set and match then. 

Gonna enjoy watching them tomorrow night, real fish and chips and watching the Nix. Life is good.

The owners I dont think can sell the license for the club afaik, it has to be handed back to the FFA and they give it to the new owners. So it is probably the change of ownership that has caused this.

I find it interesting that CCM think he is only available to them come 1 Jan 2015 when it seems clear that his loan contract has been terminated. 

“We are currently seeking legal advice to prevent Michael from playing for any Club without our authority from now until 1 January 2015, the day that he is expected back at the Mariners to fulfil his contract.”

Is he currently getting paid by anyone? He doesn't seem to be in CCM plans for the start of the season as they think he is not available to them/still on loan (or something like that). 

But if McGlinchey has signed a letter or intent, is it?

I can understand why CCM want to hold onto him but why do you want a player that publicly does not want to play there and is training at another club? The only reason is to stop a rival (used loosely) team from getting him and playing against you cause he is that good.

Seems weird, not sure on the loan contract but would think that once that is terminated (if it is allowed to be terminated) he would be back on CCM pay roll. 

maybe they were receiving a fee for the loan until January, at which point they'd probably planned to terminate his contract? But obviously they miss out on that fee if he isn't under contract with CCM.  Otherwise the 1st January thing in the statement is odd. 

Not getting paid is par for the course for a CCM player I thought...

I think the loan was probably until January. As far as I can understand McGlinchey and the Japanese team would have terminated it mutually. He did so thinking he would sign for Phoenix since he doesn't have a contract with CCM due to the legal change for them. But CCM believe that morally he is theirs because he had a contract with them previously which extends past Jan. I doubt he is being paid by anyone at the moment.

We may never be able to attract world class players, but by God, we sure can put on a world class transfer saga.

This one is an epic for the ages. 

I honestly think that McGlinchey would be at CCM but they messed up and when the loan contract was terminated they are now unable to pay his salary until after 1 Jan 2015 so McGlinchey is looking at coming here. If he is not getting paid by CCM then surely that is a breach of contract anyway.

I don't think that is the case. If he still had a contract with CCM, and the loan was for a set period of time, he would not be allowed to terminate it without CCMs permission.

This is where having Terry on board still would be good. He was excellent at getting out of seemingly binding contracts.

Is it possible that CCM are more shambolic than us?

All of this is odd.

I heard that they had forgotten to resign McGlinchey as someone in the office thought that he wasn't a contracted CCM player anymore.

So if PFA and FFA find in favour of CCM, McGlinchey could be 'without a club' and unpaid for the rest of the year.

Assuming he doesn't have contract, I don't believe there is any chance at all the PFA will side with CCM. FFA is much harder to judge and could try mediation, who knows what they will do.

American-sized jumbo popcorn needed for watching this unfold

From a contract law text:

Where it is found that the parties have not yet truly reached an agreement capable of having contractual force, either because the intended terms of the agreement are too uncertain or because the parties intended to postpone any undertaking of contractual liability until a future time when some outstanding matter was to be settled by personal agreement of the parties, the Courts must conclude that no contract has been achieved.

http://www.fourfourtwo.com/au/news/merrick-calls-end-mcglinchey-stalemate?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=aleague

Merrick wants to see situation resolved. 

Also includes some positive  news on Iffy

Thats great news about Paul but I guess he is now in a position that if he wants and import, a defender and Paul Ifill with only 2 spots, then he is in a bit of a problem. Perhaps keep Ifill training and use him as injury cover this year?

guess Ifill won't be counted as a local this season then. Was under the impression there was a chance that he might be. 

someone Wiki it

He's wearing the No. 10 in the photos.

I'd say that is a bridge to cross if he makes it back

CCM Fans getting knickers in a not.

CCM Fans getting knickers in a not. Yes NOT  (double post)

CCM Fans

They do raise fair points though.

I can understand them being upset. I don't think the situation is as simple as that guy was making out though.

Absolutely. Imagine the nuclear meltdowns that would be occurring here if the situation was reversed.

What would happen if Wee Mac was to get injured while training with us? If he was obliged to return to CCM then I imagine we'd be in deep shit. We need a definitive answer asap, the FFA and PFA need to man up and tell everyone what's up.

The issues seems to be as already stated does he have a contract with the current or former Mariners club...

How the legal issues work out appears to be in the hands of FFA...

There are two schools one which I assume this forum takes [as this time its in your favour]  is ... whatever it takes ... if there is a loop hole and we can exploit to our advantage then thats good for us... yepeee

The second school was a player was offered a much higher salary while under contract, for a specific time ... he was allowed to take the higher salary on the premise he would return or the other club would pay a transfer fee... a change in ownership may have provided a legal way out ... the end result is no player at any club will be allowed this again  nor will it sit well at the Mariners [who cares from the Nix's view I understand] ... But we let Flores go amongst other things... so tis easy when you think by heck we got em and its our way but it will mean a lot of hand shake and things agree will not longer work ...

Twas interesting when the Nix's when tho their legal ownership changes how no club went after your best using the same avenues ..

To me it looks like you have won... but in the long run I think you loose 

Did anyone want our best?