Maybe, maybe not, but the manager better have a darn good explanation of how throwing out 5 world class top ten players would be worth any amount of money especially if they had been apparently serving so well for so many years. Now 10 million dollars may be a different story... But it's interesting how Lars the head coach and the assistant coach both helped to broker the deal with Danisa, all the while knowing Kjeldsen's involvement with their star players...
This is a google translate of the Badminton Denmark link So each, employee was asked to refer contacts for potential sponsorship to Badminton Denmark. Each employee would receive a fee for this, as does every other employee of Badminton Denmark doing the same. It's clearly the duty of every employee to refer any sponsor enquiry to Badminton Denmark.
That's one of the most concerning thing. For nearly all of Denmark's top players to even go out and do such a thing and more over being able to do it without the DBA being able to know the situation shows that there are fundamental issues at DBA. It's not just one or two rogue players.
Actually, almost anybody can do it whatever organisation they work in. It's up to the organisation how strictly it is enforced and how much the employee pushes the limits.
I should clarify a bit more. I worked for an organisation where I was not allowed to be paid for outside work. If there was any paid work, I would have to fill in a special form for approval by the top man. Technically, I was also not able to use the resources from work. Sounds heavy handed, but yes. That meant any outside work would have to be voluntary.
Well that is what I am saying, surely if individual contracts by players can interfere with national contracts then the protocol of all individual contracts should be checked for conflict by a DBA lawyer pre the player signing their individual contract should have been in place (and stated in the players contract when they join the team). No mistake would be made and no shambles would follow, if the players didn't find this acceptable then they have the choice to go independent. Or you could just have all your players running amok get yourself in a situation then fire everybody sounds like a plan
It's a bit of a bonkers situation right? The player contracts were pre-existing and they offered solutions. To drop all your better players to please a sponsor sets a worrying precedent.
It does not matter whether the players' contract was pre-existing or not. The bottom line is that they had no right to sign that kind of contract in the first place and they knew it. They foolishly thought the chance of a conflict is low and they can gamble on it. They did not leave themselves an out cause and their sponsor couldn't care less about throwing Danish badminton in turmoil. The so-called solutions did not address the fundamental issue of wearing the national team jersey as is when playing for the team. DBF's kicking them out of the national team may seem way beyond wearing team jersey at the Sudirman Cup. But that's probably for the breach of contract with DBF. The action of these players hurt Danish badminton and all other Danish players who would benefit from DBF's contract but not from those players' contract.
Put it this way. The players breach of contract already happened a few yrs ago and it has been patent obviously all the while to everyone and the world as they have been wearing Kjeldsen's logo on their jerseys all this time. So in all these few golden yrs of these 5 players performing really well in the top 10 of their disciplines and bringing home medals and recognition, DBA was fine to turn a blind eye to this "rogue" behaviour and now suddenly decides that it's not acceptable because... 1) there's now sponsorship money in their hands at stake, and 2) the players are old anyways and can be replaced by a younger generation? I never thought I'd say this, but I really feel sorry for Boe and Mo...
It also spells out what the player's can or can't do for the future - i.e. where they have to be careful. Did the players offer a solution of dropping the Kjeldsen contract?
Yes. Agree it wasn't a problem before and can turn a blind eye because there was no conflict and that is an out-of-contract flexibility. I think what the players overlooked is that it cannot be assumed to stay that way in the future.
My guess as to what happened is this: 1. Danisa approached DBA early this year (or late last year) and offered DBA a lot of money to become a sponsor. It is implied that Kjeldens will be removed. (Well, Danisa might be expressly requested it.) 2. DBA, who is short on money, promised Danisa that it will be done: "the top 5 players are contractually obliged to obey us or be expelled from the team. Don't worry! They will comply." 4. Danisa was persuaded and signed the contract with DBA. 5. Surprise! The five players didn't back down. The rest is history. Again, the above is just my own pure speculation.
both party have their own contracts with their own sponsors. and both party have a contract with each other. there are 3 things that collectively in conflict. 1 of the 3 has to go for the conflict to be removed. neither party wants to part with their money, thus the contract of their relationship has to go. hence the separation.
This is assuming the federation knew the contents of the players' contracts with Kjeldsens. It is perfectly normal for players to sign a contract when joining the national team, usually contains code of conduct, image rights, facilities, obligations etc. For individual things players often can have a personal/external manager to look after their interests, this is not the job of the federation.
According to the players' version of the story, they knew full well that they cannot go against DBF on this particular issue. What they assumed wrong was that their sponsor's competitor will not sponsor DBF and put them in direct conflict with DBF. As to why the players were playing with different logos on their shirts in the past, we don't know whether that was officially sanctioned by DBF or silently tolerated. Either way, the right to make that decision remains with DBF rather than individual players.
By that I mean that those players seem fully ready to go with whatever logo on the team uniform, unless, OOPS, that logo belongs to their sponsor's competitor.
