Premier League Wigan Athletic set to sign released Watford defender Rob Kiernan

Released Watford defender Rob Kiernan set for Premier League move

Released Watford defender Rob Kiernan set for Premier League move

First published in Watford FC News Watford Observer: Photograph of the Author Exclusive by , Deputy Group Sports Editor

Released defender Rob Kiernan could be set for a surprising move to Premier League side Wigan Athletic, the Watford Observer understands.

Kiernan had been offered a new two-year contract by Watford this summer but he decided against signing the deal which was on, what the club described as, “marginally reduced terms” compared to his previous contract.

No compensation fee is due for the 20-year-old centre half, who is comfortable on the ball and can also play in midfield.

When Kiernan left the club last week, Watford’s head of football business Ross Wilson explained: “As he is under 24, this means he has the option to leave.

“Rob is now free to join another club without any compensation being due.

“We wish him all the very best for his future career in football.”

Kiernan only made two substitute appearances for Watford, both from the bench in the FA Cup, and had loan spells at Kilmarnock, Yeovil Town, Bradford City and Wycombe Wanderers.

The Republic of Ireland Under-21 international’s time at Wycombe was severely hampered by injury as he went off in his opening game at the club. Whilst he was fit enough to start the following match, he went off again and was then unable to break into the promotion-chasing side.

Kiernan had been at Watford since the age of nine but was a midfielder until a few years ago when new Watford boss Sean Dyche recommended he switched to centre back.

In an interview the Watford Observer earlier this year, Kiernan said: “I prefer to play at centre back. I made the switch two seasons ago so I am a new centre back, so to speak, and I am still learning the position a lot.

“I do prefer it though and I am more suited to it. Now I want to try and make that position my own.”

Click here to read more of Kiernan’s interview, where he explains why he tries to mould himself on Bolton’s Gary Cahill.

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:53pm Wed 6 Jul 11

ET WFC says...

He must be a decent youngster then? But with Mirfin coming in the club probably felt they could only afford to offer Kiernan a deal on reduced terms. Time will tell whether we missed a trick here.
He must be a decent youngster then? But with Mirfin coming in the club probably felt they could only afford to offer Kiernan a deal on reduced terms. Time will tell whether we missed a trick here. ET WFC
  • Score: 0

7:01pm Wed 6 Jul 11

WFC4ever says...

Interesting..was highly rated beforehand by Rodgers and co.

Maybe a falling out somewhere?
Interesting..was highly rated beforehand by Rodgers and co. Maybe a falling out somewhere? WFC4ever
  • Score: 0

7:26pm Wed 6 Jul 11

hogweed says...

Brilliant. Not good enough for us but good enough for Wigan. We are a joke at the moment.

Hog out
Brilliant. Not good enough for us but good enough for Wigan. We are a joke at the moment. Hog out hogweed
  • Score: 0

7:50pm Wed 6 Jul 11

Bringe says...

Will he ever get past their reserves?
Wigan can afford to take the gamble, quite simply we can't so keep your hats on.
Will he ever get past their reserves? Wigan can afford to take the gamble, quite simply we can't so keep your hats on. Bringe
  • Score: 0

9:29pm Wed 6 Jul 11

cliff46 says...

Surely the decision re this lad should have been to offer him a contract or not offer him a contract.
To offer him something that was "marginally less" seems a bit pointless.
Looks as if he might have called our bluff rather well--were we naive again as we appear to have been with Cowie?.
I accept we won't get everything right but to lose someone who has always been labelled as very promising etc for a just a few pounds is at least questionable.
Surely the decision re this lad should have been to offer him a contract or not offer him a contract. To offer him something that was "marginally less" seems a bit pointless. Looks as if he might have called our bluff rather well--were we naive again as we appear to have been with Cowie?. I accept we won't get everything right but to lose someone who has always been labelled as very promising etc for a just a few pounds is at least questionable. cliff46
  • Score: 0

10:26pm Wed 6 Jul 11

not a regular says...

His track record in Scotland and the lower leagues does not exactly speak wonders... I'd get over it if I were you lot.
His track record in Scotland and the lower leagues does not exactly speak wonders... I'd get over it if I were you lot. not a regular
  • Score: 0

11:55pm Wed 6 Jul 11

mark_123 says...

im friends of his uncle, hes going on loan for a year to wycombe. Hes irelands under 21 captain and the lowest paid player there... he must have some kind of talent to be the captain and picked in every squad.
im friends of his uncle, hes going on loan for a year to wycombe. Hes irelands under 21 captain and the lowest paid player there... he must have some kind of talent to be the captain and picked in every squad. mark_123
  • Score: 0

6:04am Thu 7 Jul 11

HughJarce says...

I'm friends of his uncle's best mate who stood behind him once in the chippy queue and he says I wouldn't worry too much about it.
I'm friends of his uncle's best mate who stood behind him once in the chippy queue and he says I wouldn't worry too much about it. HughJarce
  • Score: 0

7:34am Thu 7 Jul 11

BigDaveH says...

"Slightly reduced terms" baffles me. Excluding the expected income from Graham and Buckley, we have the unexpected and therefore "surplus" income from Saracens and MM departure. The player is still young, and therefore why would you not continue with the same contract for another season. Too many changes de-stabalise a club, so i would have retained him. I worry about the financial decision making at WFC.
"Slightly reduced terms" baffles me. Excluding the expected income from Graham and Buckley, we have the unexpected and therefore "surplus" income from Saracens and MM departure. The player is still young, and therefore why would you not continue with the same contract for another season. Too many changes de-stabalise a club, so i would have retained him. I worry about the financial decision making at WFC. BigDaveH
  • Score: 0

9:29am Thu 7 Jul 11

chrisptrifle says...

Sorry for re-posting this, but its bugging me... I don't understand why we aren't due any compensation ? Other under 24 players who have 'run down their contract' despite being offered other deals (irrespective of the terms of the deal) have moved resulting in compensation for their parent club...
When we signed Danny Graham he was offered a new contract to stay at Carlisle, but he didn't want to sign and we had to pay compo. The link below reports that Stephen Henderson from Bristol C is in exactly the same situation as Kiernon - he was offered a reduced terms contract, but didnt sign, yet Bristol are still entitled to compo. It doesnt quite add up to me and in these times of hardship, I'm just wondering if we are potentially missing out somewhere.

http://www.skysports
.com/story/0,19528,1
1688_7021335,00.html
Sorry for re-posting this, but its bugging me... I don't understand why we aren't due any compensation ? Other under 24 players who have 'run down their contract' despite being offered other deals (irrespective of the terms of the deal) have moved resulting in compensation for their parent club... When we signed Danny Graham he was offered a new contract to stay at Carlisle, but he didn't want to sign and we had to pay compo. The link below reports that Stephen Henderson from Bristol C is in exactly the same situation as Kiernon - he was offered a reduced terms contract, but didnt sign, yet Bristol are still entitled to compo. It doesnt quite add up to me and in these times of hardship, I'm just wondering if we are potentially missing out somewhere. http://www.skysports .com/story/0,19528,1 1688_7021335,00.html chrisptrifle
  • Score: 0

10:11am Thu 7 Jul 11

BigDaveH says...

Good Point Chris, and it reinforces my concern that we do not have anyone at the club who understands football finance in enough detail and can challenge these issues.
Good Point Chris, and it reinforces my concern that we do not have anyone at the club who understands football finance in enough detail and can challenge these issues. BigDaveH
  • Score: 0

10:16am Thu 7 Jul 11

not a regular says...

Sky have got it wrong then. The club is only owed compensation if the same deal or better was offered to the player.
Sky have got it wrong then. The club is only owed compensation if the same deal or better was offered to the player. not a regular
  • Score: 0

10:16am Thu 7 Jul 11

chrisptrifle says...

Sorry if this is boring, but I checked on the FA website:

http://www.thefa.com
/TheFA/RulesandRegul
ations/~/media/Files
/PDF/TheFA/FA%20Hand
book%2009%2010/FIFA_
Regs_Transfers_pg435
-450.ashx/FIFA_Regs_
Transfers_pg435-450.
pdf

According to Article 20 Annexe 4 (training compensation) the following applies:

1. A player’s training and education takes place between the ages of 12 and 23. Training compensation shall be payable, as a general rule, up to the age of 23 for training incurred up to the age of 21, unless it is evident that a player has already terminated his training period before the age of 21. In the latter case, training compensation shall be payable until the end of the season in which the player reaches the age of 23, but the calculation of the
amount payable shall be based on the years between the age of 12 and the age when it is established that the player actually completed his training.
2. The obligation to pay training compensation is without prejudice to any obligation to pay compensation for breach of contract.

Payment of training compensation
1. Training compensation is due when:
i) a player is registered for the first time as a professional;
or
ii) a professional is transferred between clubs of two different associations (whether
during or at the end of his contract)
before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday.
2. Training compensation is not due if:
i) the former club terminates the player’s contract without just cause (without prejudice to the rights of the previous clubs);
or
ii) the player is transferred to a category 4 club;
or
iii) a professional reacquires amateur status on being transferred

From this I read that we are entitled to compensation for Kiernon. It also still bugs me why were required to pay Carlisle training compensation for Danny Graham when he was actually trained at Middlesborough and I believe there was 'evidence that he had terminated his training period before the age of 21' as he left Boro when he was 22. Anyway, what do I know. Just hope we don't miss out on something down the line.
Sorry if this is boring, but I checked on the FA website: http://www.thefa.com /TheFA/RulesandRegul ations/~/media/Files /PDF/TheFA/FA%20Hand book%2009%2010/FIFA_ Regs_Transfers_pg435 -450.ashx/FIFA_Regs_ Transfers_pg435-450. pdf According to Article 20 Annexe 4 (training compensation) the following applies: 1. A player’s training and education takes place between the ages of 12 and 23. Training compensation shall be payable, as a general rule, up to the age of 23 for training incurred up to the age of 21, unless it is evident that a player has already terminated his training period before the age of 21. In the latter case, training compensation shall be payable until the end of the season in which the player reaches the age of 23, but the calculation of the amount payable shall be based on the years between the age of 12 and the age when it is established that the player actually completed his training. 2. The obligation to pay training compensation is without prejudice to any obligation to pay compensation for breach of contract. Payment of training compensation 1. Training compensation is due when: i) a player is registered for the first time as a professional; or ii) a professional is transferred between clubs of two different associations (whether during or at the end of his contract) before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday. 2. Training compensation is not due if: i) the former club terminates the player’s contract without just cause (without prejudice to the rights of the previous clubs); or ii) the player is transferred to a category 4 club; or iii) a professional reacquires amateur status on being transferred From this I read that we are entitled to compensation for Kiernon. It also still bugs me why were required to pay Carlisle training compensation for Danny Graham when he was actually trained at Middlesborough and I believe there was 'evidence that he had terminated his training period before the age of 21' as he left Boro when he was 22. Anyway, what do I know. Just hope we don't miss out on something down the line. chrisptrifle
  • Score: 0

12:49pm Thu 7 Jul 11

JimBob1 says...

Chris, kudos for doing the research. If the WO's source is the club though I expect them to know exactly what they're due or not due.

As for the decision to offer him slightly reduced terms - this is a 20 year old we're talking about. That's a fair old age for a player to have made no impact at all on a very inexperienced team. And if he goes to Wigan so what? Anyone remember Joe O'Cearuill? Released by the Watford youth team in 2006, signed straight for Arsenal but now plays for Bishops Stortford!
Chris, kudos for doing the research. If the WO's source is the club though I expect them to know exactly what they're due or not due. As for the decision to offer him slightly reduced terms - this is a 20 year old we're talking about. That's a fair old age for a player to have made no impact at all on a very inexperienced team. And if he goes to Wigan so what? Anyone remember Joe O'Cearuill? Released by the Watford youth team in 2006, signed straight for Arsenal but now plays for Bishops Stortford! JimBob1
  • Score: 0

1:22pm Thu 7 Jul 11

cliff46 says...

Chrisptrifle that's a good piece of work, is it worth sending it to the WO asking if they can provide an answer that we can all understand?
Jimbob1. You are right about his lack of impact but the fact remains that we were prepared to offer him a two year contract so clearly management still rate the lad and think he has potential.
To miss out on that potential and possible compensation purely because of a marginal difference in pay makes little sense to me.
Chrisptrifle that's a good piece of work, is it worth sending it to the WO asking if they can provide an answer that we can all understand? Jimbob1. You are right about his lack of impact but the fact remains that we were prepared to offer him a two year contract so clearly management still rate the lad and think he has potential. To miss out on that potential and possible compensation purely because of a marginal difference in pay makes little sense to me. cliff46
  • Score: 0

2:14pm Thu 7 Jul 11

PeteBogHorrorHornet says...

We kept giving Laim Henderson contract after contract and he never made an impression either so I think the club probably thought the same of Kiernan...no great loss
We kept giving Laim Henderson contract after contract and he never made an impression either so I think the club probably thought the same of Kiernan...no great loss PeteBogHorrorHornet
  • Score: 0

2:28pm Thu 7 Jul 11

cliff46 says...

Liam Henderson wasn't an under 21 international.
Liam Henderson wasn't an under 21 international. cliff46
  • Score: 0

2:48pm Thu 7 Jul 11

chrisptrifle says...

@Petebog. That's not the point I'm making really. Irrespective of whether its a footballing loss or not, are we missing out on potential compensation ? It may well be that I'm missing something important - Perhaps I'm misinterpreting the FA document, or perhaps the club are simply 'doing him a favour' by waiving the right to future payments in the hope that he can find himself another club. However, IF Wigan do sign him, I believe we should be entitled to something, even if its only 50K. I will send this info to WO and to WFC - they may not have the time or the inclination to chase this, but I certainly think that for a club in financial trouble, it may well be worth clarifying the situation.
@Petebog. That's not the point I'm making really. Irrespective of whether its a footballing loss or not, are we missing out on potential compensation ? It may well be that I'm missing something important - Perhaps I'm misinterpreting the FA document, or perhaps the club are simply 'doing him a favour' by waiving the right to future payments in the hope that he can find himself another club. However, IF Wigan do sign him, I believe we should be entitled to something, even if its only 50K. I will send this info to WO and to WFC - they may not have the time or the inclination to chase this, but I certainly think that for a club in financial trouble, it may well be worth clarifying the situation. chrisptrifle
  • Score: 0

3:02pm Thu 7 Jul 11

harrowboy says...

He was always well regarded as a youngster, & someone once described him as the best passer of a ball at the club. However he has not set the world alright when out on loan & we should be well covered at centre half. Good luck to the lad but I suspect that the current management team decided we have better prospects that we need to hang on to. p.s. my sister-in law was his Mum's best friend at school 35+ yrs ago!!!!!
He was always well regarded as a youngster, & someone once described him as the best passer of a ball at the club. However he has not set the world alright when out on loan & we should be well covered at centre half. Good luck to the lad but I suspect that the current management team decided we have better prospects that we need to hang on to. p.s. my sister-in law was his Mum's best friend at school 35+ yrs ago!!!!! harrowboy
  • Score: 0

4:19pm Thu 7 Jul 11

cliff46 says...

With respect Harrowboy the current management offered him a two year contract but then some bright spark decided to make a "marginally reduced offer".
With respect Harrowboy the current management offered him a two year contract but then some bright spark decided to make a "marginally reduced offer". cliff46
  • Score: 0

4:48pm Thu 7 Jul 11

DEVONHORNETTE says...

I was in the chippy at the same time as his uncles mate and overheard him say that Wigan had tapped him up three weeks ago!!
I was in the chippy at the same time as his uncles mate and overheard him say that Wigan had tapped him up three weeks ago!! DEVONHORNETTE
  • Score: 0

5:28pm Thu 7 Jul 11

mile high ron says...

As I said at the time, it's all very well (for whatever reason) losing players.

The trick is getting in better new ones…
As I said at the time, it's all very well (for whatever reason) losing players. The trick is getting in better new ones… mile high ron
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree