Brandon Hanlan | Page 9 | Vital Football

Brandon Hanlan

markinkent said:
This has gone on long enough. Leave the offer on the table (for reasons of compensation) but until he signs ask him to stay away from the club, no training etc. He needs to be forced to make a decision. Sign for someone else or sign for us, have a great start to the season and ask for a move in January.

He is at risk of falling between the cracks and playing for no one. The worst outcome for someone at his stage of career.
Click to expand...

agreed, though legally a club isn’t allowed to prevent a player from training but you can make them train with the kids.


he should let his football do the talking
 
SE1_Gills said:
agreed, though legally a club isn’t allowed to prevent a player from training but you can make them train with the kids.


he should let his football do the talking
Click to expand...


Does that apply when he is out of contract? Or is this due to his age and the fact that we hold his registration ?
 
Not sure about all the comments on here talking about Branson’s attitude, and taking the club for a ride, billy big bollux, thinks he’s better than he is etc.

I don’t think he’s actually said anything has he? Probably doing exactly what his manager, agent or management company are telling him to do. Just train and sign nothing.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he actually would like to just sign with us and play but is restricted by his own contract arrangement with his manager.

Anyone know who his agent or advisor is? Is it possibly a family member? Or is it a company?
 
markinkent said:
Does that apply when he is out of contract? Or is this due to his age and the fact that we hold his registration ?
Click to expand...

Technically a club could put a player out on gardening leave and tell them not to bother coming into work and so ban then from training on club facilities. The player would of course be free to train on their own. Quite extreme measure and probably only saved for the Mark McCammon situations.

And of course doing this with Hanlan would be a poor move if you wanted to convince a future tribunal that the contract offer was genuine.
 
OneSirKeefy said:
Not sure about all the comments on here talking about Branson’s attitude, and taking the club for a ride, billy big bollux, thinks he’s better than he is etc.

I don’t think he’s actually said anything has he? Probably doing exactly what his manager, agent or management company are telling him to do. Just train and sign nothing.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he actually would like to just sign with us and play but is restricted by his own contract arrangement with his manager.

Anyone know who his agent or advisor is? Is it possibly a family member? Or is it a company?
Click to expand...

As I alluded to earlier, it could be with the new signings and the systems the club has been training with that he is not guaranteed to be one of the main first choice starters like he might have been the prior season. At his pivotal age, he probably needs to be one of the first choice strikers playing every week. Personally I see Akinde and Oliver as Evan's first choice pairing.

Considering he was offered at least an equal contract in order to qualify for a tribunal fee, I'm not sure why there should be a contractual issue. In the current climate, he surely isn't demanding a wage increase? Personally I don't think he is a Billy Big Balls either.
 
OneSirKeefy said:
Not sure about all the comments on here talking about Branson’s attitude, and taking the club for a ride, billy big bollux, thinks he’s better than he is etc.

I don’t think he’s actually said anything has he? Probably doing exactly what his manager, agent or management company are telling him to do. Just train and sign nothing.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he actually would like to just sign with us and play but is restricted by his own contract arrangement with his manager.

Anyone know who his agent or advisor is? Is it possibly a family member? Or is it a company?
Click to expand...
Volenti
 
Baghdad_Rob said:
Technically a club could put a player out on gardening leave and tell them not to bother coming into work and so ban then from training on club facilities. The player would of course be free to train on their own. Quite extreme measure and probably only saved for the Mark McCammon situations.

And of course doing this with Hanlan would be a poor move if you wanted to convince a future tribunal that the contract offer was genuine.
Click to expand...

How can someone be put on ‘gardening leave’ when they’re not contracted?

I doubt that it no more ‘illegal’ for me to be not allowed to train than it is for Hanlan.
 
I think that some are misunderstanding the situation.
Hanlan is out of contract and therefore no longer an employee.
SE has allowed him to train to get match fit.
He didn’t have to, but chose to.
A new (better) contract had been offered but Hanlan hasn’t signed it, so for now, he is unemployed.
The contract has to remain on the table for GFC to claim compensation from any other club.
So, for now, Mexican Standoff.
The chances of GFC withdrawing the offer grows as time goes by but meanwhile, the player is living on fresh air.
If I was advising him, I’d say sign one year because things will hopefully be different by next season.
Stay fit, improve and better things may come.
I think his head has been turned, as they say.
 
I`m surprised Brandon hasn`t signed with GFC; in the current climate he might find alternative grass not quite as green as alluded to by those "advising" him. Brandon would likely have fitted in well with the style that SE is shaping up.

As it stands, and thanks to shotshy for adding clarity, Brandon is fast becoming an irrelevance. GFC should keep the offer on the table but underline the fact that we can get a long without him by signing another forward. Sorry, but this has rapidly become a case of "Brandon who....?"
 
shotshy said:
I think that some are misunderstanding the situation.
Hanlan is out of contract and therefore no longer an employee.
SE has allowed him to train to get match fit.
He didn’t have to, but chose to.
A new (better) contract had been offered but Hanlan hasn’t signed it, so for now, he is unemployed.
The contract has to remain on the table for GFC to claim compensation from any other club.
So, for now, Mexican Standoff.
The chances of GFC withdrawing the offer grows as time goes by but meanwhile, the player is living on fresh air.
If I was advising him, I’d say sign one year because things will hopefully be different by next season.
Stay fit, improve and better things may come.
I think his head has been turned, as they say.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It isn’t ‘illegal’, as BR said, for GFC to not involve Hanlan in training.
 
The crazy thing about all this is that he isn't actually very good at football. He has great stamina and can run fast. He's an athlete and bloody good one.

One on one with the keeper ? I am never confident.

He's lucky to have been offered a new contract at a league one level.

Evans clearly sees potential that he can develop so happy to trust him on that.
 
Trashbat said:
How can someone be put on ‘gardening leave’ when they’re not contracted?

I doubt that it no more ‘illegal’ for me to be not allowed to train than it is for Hanlan.
Click to expand...

I meant gardening leave in the context of being told to stay at home and not to show his face unless he signs a new contract. Ditto in the same context that if I said we should send him to Coventry until he signs I don't mean we should force him to sign for Coventry City FC.
 
Baghdad_Rob said:
I meant gardening leave in the context of being told to stay at home and not to show his face unless he signs a new contract. Ditto in the same context that if I said we should send him to Coventry until he signs I don't mean we should force him to sign for Coventry City FC.
Click to expand...
That’s a bit of an extreme way to treat a young man Rob .
He seems a nice lad.
 
shotshy said:
That’s a bit of an extreme way to treat a young man Rob .
He seems a nice lad.
Click to expand...

We've not actually done that and my comment was a response to a slightly different question.

However, if Steve Evans said tomorrow to Hanlan "Now then young man** you need to be making your mind up***. I think you should sit at home and decide if you want to play or not for the mightly Gillingham FC and not return until you do" and then as a result of it if Hanlan comes back in on Wednesday morning with a pen to sign the contract then we'd probably praise Evans for focusing young Hanlan's mind.

Hanlan may or may not be a nice man. I've never met him. However, we want players who want to play for Gillingham and not players who maybe want to go elsewhere but was forced to sign as noone else came in with an offer. Personally I'd give him a deadline prior to the first league match to sign or we'll withdraw the offer.


** for some reason when I started that sentence, I heard the voice of the great Brian Clough.
*** apparently Steve Evans has been drinking some Bucks Fizz
 
LancsGordoRoad said:
GFC should keep the offer on the table but underline the fact that we can get a long without him by signing another forward.
Click to expand...

The trouble is, we can't really sign another forward all the time the offer to Hanlan is on the table. Otherwise we could end up signing someone, and then Hanlan also decides to stay, and we end up over budget. Or we sign someone who we could still afford, even in the event that Hanlan does sign, in which case we'd presumably be looking at a lower quality of player than we could potentially get if Hanlan leaves.

LancsGordoRoad said:
Sorry, but this has rapidly become a case of "Brandon who....?"
Click to expand...

Any relation to Chris?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.