The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

McGlinchey's Phoenix rebirth highlights compensation flaws

Michael McGlinchey's quest to move to Wellington has raised issues about player compensation and club ownership. (Photo by Paul Barkley/LookPro)
Expert
11th September, 2014
33

One of the A-League’s most drawn-out contract wrangles is nearing a conclusion, with Michael McGlinchey’s signature on a Wellington Phoenix contract expected to be imminent.

Yet while the saga should satisfy McGlinchey, Wellington and the Professional Footballers Association, where does it leave the midfielder’s former team, Central Coast Mariners?

The club has done the admirable thing, and accepted defeat in retaining McGlinchey’s services, but there are a number of problems arising from his defection.

Firstly, A-League clubs aren’t able to exchange transfer fees between each other. They can receive money from overseas clubs, but anytime a player wants to move to another Australian side he has to force through a release from his contract.

So it remains to be seen whether the Mariners will receive any compensation for their part in developing McGlinchey into one of the most consistent, versatile and dangerous midfielders in the league. The contract has been settled, but that’s hardly adequate.

If they do get compensation, how doesn’t it fall under the category of a transfer fee? If that don’t get compensation, how is that a fair deal?

McGlinchey has a market value that could reach more than $1 million, a fee that Wellington could receive if he attracts interest from Asia or Europe over the next 12 months. And while the Mariners seem content to put the matter to bed, the debacle still raises concerns.

For starters, why can’t Australian clubs pay fellow A-League rivals transfer fees? I can understand that FFA don’t want clubs spending money unwisely, but surely there has to be some form of reward for developing talent.

Advertisement

Clubs releasing players from contracts to join other A-League sides is commonplace, but this is one of the Mariners’ greatest talents. The Newcastle Jets released both Connor Chapman and Craig Goodwin in the off-season, but they were mutual break-ups.

FFA need to introduce some sort of compensation fee that clubs pay when they target players still under contract at rival franchises, especially if those players have been there long term or were brought through the youth system.

The next question stems from McGlinchey’s claims that he wasn’t under contract at the Mariners, based on advice he received from the Professional Footballers Association.

In August FFA ruled, through an independent arbitrator, that McGlinchey was contracted to the Mariners until January 1, 2015 and that he was not allowed to sign with Wellington. The PFA refuted the ruling and were in the middle of an appeal.

The confusion can be traced to the Mariners’ ownership, which changed hands in April last year when Mike Charlesworth took majority control from previous chairman Peter Turnbull.

When there’s a change of ownership in the A-League the club’s license must be transferred into a new company, in this case one under Charlesworth’s name. Players are then required to sign new contracts with the new entity.

However, McGlinchey was on loan with Japanese club Vegalta Sendai at the time these agreements were circulated, so according to the PFA he wasn’t tied to a contract and was free to sign with Wellington.

Advertisement

This is where the water gets a little muddy. PFA chief executive Adam Vivian said it became clear the entity licensed to operate the Mariners had not changed, but was due to in the future.

“The reason for the failure to transfer the license has not been satisfactorily explained the PFA,” he said.

Which means that more than a year has passed, and the relevant paperwork to change ownership at the Mariners hasn’t occurred. There may be nothing to read into this, but if anything it signals incompetence as well as neglect for player welfare.

If the players were asked to sign new agreements under a new company, but that company still doesn’t actually hold an A-League license, then where does that leave them?

Are the Mariners able to discard players when this ownership change does come into effect? Is the loophole that McGlinchey tried to exploit also open to the club? The PFA claim that players have lost more than $2.5 million in entitlements due to ownership changes in the A-League.

The loopholes when clubs change owners need to be clarified. It’s lucky the Mariners decided to release McGlinchey, otherwise an appeal from the PFA could have turned into a messy affair.

The saga also brings up questions of how fans will react to McGlinchey’s move. Will they respect his decision to return home to Wellington, or will they resent him for bailing on the club that made him a star?

Advertisement

He’s been training with Wellington since July, and reportedly informed Mariners manager Phil Moss of his decision via text message. That shows a clear lack of respect on the part of the player, even if he felt he was legally in the clear.

Moss aimed a few sly digs at McGlinchey when announcing the club wouldn’t stand in his way anymore.

“This club – and particularly Graham Arnold – took him from being a run-of-the-mill A-League player to an international, who went to a World Cup and an Olympic Games,” Moss told Goal.

“But the culture and the structures here will outlast any player.”

The Mariners helped McGlinchey become the player he is today, signing him in 2009 after growing up in Scotland. He has transformed into a feared A-League attacker in his 121 games, and the Central Coast are right to feel aggrieved.

Struggling with finances as it is, the club could have done with a transfer fee from McGlinchey’s sale and it’s uncertain why they’ve backed out quietly.

Charlesworth is never one to keep his mouth shut when it comes to controversial issues, especially those involving FFA. Have they received a fee for McGlinchey, and if so how does that fit into A-League protocol regarding transfer fees?

Advertisement

This bizarre case has taken too long to be resolved and confusion over the Mariners’ ownership model is not a good look. There’s a lot more to this story than has been fed to the media.

More information is unlikely to surface for the general public and the case will likely be forgotten soon enough. But this saga should at the very least be used as a clutch for FFA to bring in clear guidelines for compensation to avoid unnecessary drama.

close