Charlie Webster - A twist in the Charlie Adam transfer saga

28 January 2011 10:15
It was interesting reading the stories about Ian Holloway's contract at Blackpool this week. The fact he has a clause entitling him to a percentage of any transfer fee of a player he has coached adds a whole new twist to the Charlie Adam saga.

I personally know that some managers throughout the Football League also have similar clauses in their contracts. Holloway is definitely not an exceptional case. Although I would say he's exceptional to the Premier League with his straight-talking quirky personality.

I love listening to his interviews and how he seems to argue with himself during his answers, brilliant. But is it right that through these contract clauses managers get rewarded for working with players and turning them into assets for the club? Or should a manager just get bonuses for the success of the club?

In the case of Holloway, he has helped Adam come a long way since his days as an outcast at Rangers. For Blackpool he has become extremely valuable - both on the pitch and in terms of his value of off it.

Liverpool's bid of £4 million is a bit ridiculous really considering the money Blackpool will make if they survive this season. The Scottish midfielder has been nothing short of instrumental and to risk it all for that amount would be a huge gamble - he's definitely worth more than that.

I interviewed Charlie back in December, just a few days before the then postponed fixture against Manchester United. I really admire his story and what he's been through - it just shows that hard work and dedication does pay off. He was laughed at when he went to Blackpool and now look who's is having the last laugh. It can't be a bad feeling attracting the likes of Liverpool, Birmingham and Aston Villa.

Charlie is one of the genuinely decent few in football, one of the 'good guys' and deserves all the success he can get. I asked him if he aspires to play for a team like the one he was about to take on, Manchester United,  and of course he said yes - what ambitious player wouldn't?

From what I know of him and judging by the way he played against the current league leaders this week, there is no question of his commitment to Blackpool.

On a side note, yesterday's news that Blackpool have been fined for fielding a weakened team against Aston Villa is a very hypocritical move by the Premier League. There are so many cases when this has happened that I don't even need to list them, not least when my own club were involved - an incident which was ultimately one of the reasons, we, Sheffield United, got relegated.

The rules state you can name a 25 man squad and football is supposed to be a squad game. What is it saying about the players outside of the regular stating XI if you're getting fined when you play them? Holloway said he may quit if this happened but I really hope he doesn't go through with it!

Going back to Holloway as a coach, does he deserve a piece of the pie or should only the club benefit when a player is sold? And is that why he has put the number one in front of Liverpool's bid of £4m? If you think about it, the Blackpool boss is going to get a significantly larger amount than from Adam's transfer fee if the club were to stay up.

To be fair, Holloway is the one who brought him over from Rangers, despite the original interest coming from then caretaker manager Tony Parkes'. But the former Leicester City boss has still worked with him and most importantly had faith and belief in the 25-year-old.

What about the managers who put their expertise, time and effort into a player but don't necessarily get success with the club? That manager then wouldn't get anything extra than just his wage. There a lot of smaller clubs who have progressed players but don't have success and have to sell their players as assets to survive.

No reward for the man who has worked closely on a day to day basis with that player. Hardly seems fair when you look at it like that.

Follow me on Twitter @CharlieCW

Source: DSG

Related Stories