Just read the Micheal Carter interview in the WE where he states people are screaming for payment.

Interestingly the ones who he claims are screaming the loudest are those parasites that call themselves players agents. I can't believe we have been daft enough to agree to pay the fees of those parasites when we have signed their players.

Let them scream long and hard Mr Carter and leave them at the bottom of the pile.

Tell 'em Jack!

But if we do....will we then lambast Carter like a lot have been doing over Glover and Elston for doing the same?

You can't pick and choose

This is no news. We know about the debts and the need to raise the money. There will always be those wanting payment but there are people at the club prioritising these screaming people/businesses into a hierarchy of importance I would think.

They're a necessary evil, unless Wilkin's vanity union can negotiate for players when renewing/signing contracts without the need for an agent.

If they are to be be paid, then they should be paid (at some point).
If players need them though, players should pay them or give them a larger % or fee.
I'm sure clubs can manage just fine without them.

From what I have seen they take a %age of the total figure agreed upon in the contract? That's a great deal for the player if the club pays the fee!

Well not really

If the club can afford £100k and the agent has say 15% fees, a well run club is only going to offer the player £87k.
With no agent, they could offer the player more

Agents should be centrally employed and should not have a financial interest in any transfer at all. The players union could contribute to the costs also. Players needing a contract or wanting a move could have access to these agents who will work for them with the players interest at heart and not theirs. It seems so simple.

You're wrong poptart. This fiasco is down to incompitence by whoever signed up to the deal. Usually the player would pay the agent an agreed percentage over the period of his contract on a monthly basis. Wakefield trinity in this case have agreed to pay the agents fees and the player will receive his salary and not have to pay his fee by the sounds of this it is up to the player to pay his agents wages and I can't believe the club have been persuaded in to doing so on their behalf. Complete madness and another small reason as to why were in the mess that were in.

The only other way the club could have to pay the agent is if they have recruited one to sign players for them (basically an agent acting for the club rather than a player, he can only do one or the other by law ie be a player agent or a club agent). I very much doubt this is the case as probably 90% of players ha van agent nowadays.

All in all it's the fault of the club for agreeing to this and a pretty smart move by the agents that will keep their client extremely happy indeed!

If the club didn't agree to pay the agent then its likely the agent will have directed the player elsewhere.

This to my knowledge this is the truth and the buck stops with Elston AGAIN still lets overlook the mess we are in and pretend its not happening, its for the best.

Hardly! No other club would do this and with deals that were being handed out the players we got wouldn't have commanded their wages at any other club. I'm not slating the players as the vast majority have done a fine job but also quite a few have been over paid for doing so. Once again JE messed up and proved to the doubters they were right and he was out his depth. The club was being run like a shambles but hey ho let's forgive and forget. The players signed will have been laughing their asses off. It's madness

I can hear Justin Poore laughing from Ossett and he's back in Aus.

Tell you what, it would be an even smarter move by the agent that got a fee from both parties, the player and the club