Michael McGlinchey (Weston FC | Australia)

That's bluddy Ironic isn't it? #GetToKnowEm #Facts - How about Central Coast become transparent about these so called 'facts' surrounding the transfer of licence reagrding the party legally entitled to run Central Coast? 

How is this different to Ibini signing for Sydney? Wasn't he away on loan?

If the arbitrator's decision is a correct interpretation of the contractual situation, I don't blame the Mariners in the slightest for not letting a player go simply because he didn't want to honour the rest of his contract. Sets a dangerous precedent, particularly for a club that relies so heavily on selling players.

Would be interesting to know if we have been paying weemac these past two months on good faith, are ccm going to start paying weemac now, do we get reimbursed, where does he fit in terms of ccm cap space?

The guy who made the decision is contracted to the NRL, and is "Chairman of the National Dispute Resolution Chambers of Football Federation Australia". No so independant after all.

http://www.fjc.net.au/barristers/kite-peter.html

Surely a massive can of worms has been opened up. How can WeeMac be under contract and old entity and the other players be on new contracts and will come under the new entity. Surely they can't have both.

Well that's really awkward for us and McGlinchey too. Can't imagine him being too enthusiastic about playing for CCM 

Be one of the many questions that this whole decision opens up. If we have been paying then CCM must refund the nix for the payment. But then you have the problem of can they pay him and stay under the salary cap.

What do we do? Keep paying him? That can't continue much longer. Look around and negotiate with another player now? At least we know a bit more about what is going on. Hopefully for McGlincheys sake he can get this sorted ASAP, might be best for him if he just goes back, I hope CCM can clarify if they intend to pay and play him before Jan 1.

CCM to refund Nix? or pay Weemac who in turn has to repay Nix. Wouldn't think CCM have any obligations to the Nix. Someone more enlightened, any issues contractually if CCM haven't been paying Weemac?

That makes no sense - they can't have it both ways...

This is just stupid. McGlinchey doesn't want to play for CCM so why make him. I can't really be arsed reading legal arguments but the whole thing just seems like a pointless dispute.

screwed by the Aussies making up thier own rules again.....same old aussies always cheating

I highly doubt the Phoenix will get compensation as things stand at the moment.

It's all good. Lia has this.

Freeeeee Michael McGlinchey 

I don't think CCM will pay the Nix, but someone has to be paying WeeMac and it should be CCM as he is their player and his loan was finished, so they wanted him, they can pay him. I'd guess in good spirit he'll pay the Nix back for paying him during this time though.

Next question is why did they need a new company at all if the original is perfectly satisfactory?

I hope they pay him now rather than Jan 1 then.

It's messy. CCM can say that they didn't agree to terminate the loan and so don't have to pay him before Jan 1. Yes, that would be a completely wankery thing to do. I can't see us being reimbursed.

So if it is true that no player has had their contract shifted to the new company then its watertight....WeeMac is still a CCM contracted player. The original pre loan to Japan contract stands.

Whaty a clusterfuck.....So who is running CCM?  FFA pays the wages with TV money.....and some new entity runs the club with players who are contracted with the old company. Lawyers could have a field day with this setup.

Most importantly the Nix lose a very valuable player. Odds of us making top 6 have dipped a bit. I feel sorry for Weemac. He now has to pack his bag and shuffle off to Gosford. The CCM fans will hate him. The CCM coach will have a player in the squad whom everyone knows does not want to be there. 

Anyone know when McClincheys contract expires?  Or does it expire when the FFA finally transfer the ownership of CCM to the new entity?

This whole thing has been about FFA scrambling around to save their arses...they have a contract system full of holes and didn't want the Weemac situation creating a legal precedent. 

Wow. 

Guess the Aussies really want to try to get somewhere in the FIFA organisation.

shouldnt be under the cap though as we wouldn't have been paying a contracted player.

This just demonstrates the complete pointlessness of arbitration.  You get the decision and then the person who loses just goes to court anyway, it's just silly for binary decisions like this.

I think that's likely.  When they took on Ibini to replace Weemac they would have needed weemacs loan agreement to say he could not come back before the loan expired, otherwise they'd go over the cap.  Weemac may well be in no man's land for terminating the loan without their agreement.  If his contract with CCM had terminated, as was thought at the time, then he would be fine; he leaves and signs with Nix.  But now, if he is still held under his contract with CCM, he's in a spot of bother.  

PFA may have boobed by jumping the gun ahead of seeing sufficient documentation to prove weemac was released from his contract, or PFA have been misinformed by FFA.  

He won't go/play for them, they are only doing it to be difficult. He doesn't want to play for them and they don't want him.

Either CCM or the team he was on loan too has to pay him. This may have caused more problems due to putting CCM over the salary cap to do this, but I'm sure the PFA will make sure he is paid.

If the loan agreement said weemac couldn't leave Japan and expect to get paid by CCM, it still wouldn't stop him deciding to leave Japan and forego any payments.  The Japanese would be off the hook then if weemac asked for a release. 

If PFA falsely advised him he was off the hook with CCM, he would have thought he was fine to go to the Nix.  It will depend totally on what contractual information PFA received and relied on, from FFA and CCM, and whether they should have relied on it.

Clear that the PFA have been misinformed by the FFA on who holds the CCM licence

When he terminated the loan with the Japanese club, who would have been paying his wages, he would have reached a financial settlement with them.  So he won't be due anything from CCM.  The issue is who is he actually contract to from now until 1 Jan - that to me is not satisfactorily explained by any of this.

No, he was sold to the Chinese team and was loaned to CCM and now loaned to Sydney.

Although CCM did cry about that loan too....

Seems quite simple- the old club ownership is a wave and the new club ownership is a particle.

I did not put a time frame on it.Technically we can still get him either as a player, or a fuckin boot cleaner and I will keep my balls.

this is not what i wanted after coming home from a shitty exam. 

1) If we paid his wages do we get refunded?

2) this is going to be awkward as fuck for weemac

3) can we possibly go for a transfer, he shouldnt cost too much especially if he wants away (maybe a player swap as part of the transfer...vinnnie lia hint hint).

I feel as though ccm have thought of this as loosing potential money rather than a decent player, it was clear weemac wanted away from the moment arnold left and the club had no issues then.

This decision does not make any sense.  According to this Michael McGlinchey is the CCMs only player -the others have been contracted by some other Company who has yet to own the franchise. He is therefore the only legal player in the FFA Cup?

In all seriousness, this sucks.

It sucks balls