Jump to content
tlw content
tlw content

Skrtel rejects 'unacceptable' contract. So what now?

Martin Skrtel’s Anfield future is up in the air after the defender rejected the “unacceptable” contract offered to him by the Reds.

 

The Slovakian has a virtual ever present over the last two seasons but only has one year remaining on his current deal, and said he feels “uneasy” about the terms of the proposed extension, which is believed to be heavily incentivised on appearances.

 

“It's unacceptable for me. I think that such contracts are offered to players who are much older than me or players who have had some health problems” said the 30 year old. “The contract, which was presented to me, makes me uneasy, so I did not sign it” he added.

 

Skrtel has frequently been linked with moves away in recent years but has always been happy to pledge his future to the Reds, but unless an agreement can be reached Liverpool are faced with the choice of selling now and getting something back or allowing him to play out the final year of his deal before leaving on a Bosman.

 

With the Reds having shipped 98 league goals in the last two seasons some will argue that Skrtel - while being the club's most consistent defender - is the common denominator in that. Others will wonder just how much worse that figure would have been without him.

 

User Feedback

Recommended Comments



Because his is the contract being negotiated at the moment. Coutinho may very well have a similar clause 

 

It wouldn't surprise me if FSG are finding yet another way of sharpening up their outstanding profitability model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He should stay if for no other reason we are incapable of signing anyone better and those we have with the possible exception of Sakho when fit are fucking garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if FSG are finding yet another way of sharpening up their outstanding profitability model.

I'm with you, I much preferred it when we paid players massive guaranteed contracts worth far more than the output they gave the club.

 

But the good ol' days are gone.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should know Jules, as a fan of the Red Sox, I hold you partially responsible for all this. 

 

I accept that. I just hope all those losers who bought Red Sox hats when FSG bought the club feel like dickheads now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with you, I much preferred it when we paid players massive guaranteed contracts worth far more than the output they gave the club.

 

But the good ol' days are gone.

 

Indeed. The likes of Jovanovic, Cole, Aquilani and Skrtel are all peas in a pod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco

Posted

Isn't he also our longest-serving player now Gerrard has gone?  Not an especially respectful way to treat him.

What's disrespectful about negotiating a contract? If we know we're getting players in ahead of him, and that he'll just be a very high paid player sat on the bench. The days where we hand out massive contracts to over 30s should be gone, and if they don't like it then that's fine. I honestly don't see what the issue is, or where the disrespect is, in evaluating the worth of a player to the club and offering what you think he's worth. I do see how it's disrespectful to air the dirty laundry in public the way he has, and if it was Ayre or the manager doing it, I suspect they'd be hammered for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if FSG are finding yet another way of sharpening up their outstanding profitability model.

This is exactly what it amounts to. Return on capital employed.  They will expect minimum 10% . No CL money means cut your overheads.  These cunts are just venture capitalists with the words "Sports" in their name to give a thin veneer of respectability. I just wish they would get to the end game and flip us to someone that actually gives a fuck about what we do on the pitch  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I despair at our club sometimes.

 

The one quality, consistent and fit CB we have and they piss him off with a stupid offer.

Others will be all over him now and it will end up costing us more to keep hold of him than he probably would have accepted at the outset. They really are clueless buffoons in charge .

On the wider issue I don't see any hope for us unless we get lucky with better owners, Moores is a fucking cunt for selling us out. 

This is the one thing we’re really good at. Pissing off our best players. Noone comes even close. We’re the best!

 

Wanting Gareth Barry to replace Alonso.  Barry for Alonso? Takes a genious to figure that one out. Surprisingly, however, Alonso wasn’t flattered being labeled almost as good as the great Barry and looked elsewhere for a job. We got rid – success!

 

Keeping Sami, but not listing him in the CL-squad. Take your tired legs and bugger off grandpa! We got rid – success!

 

Some daft fans, like me, see (LOL) Martin as our only defender of any consistent quality, our best defender by a good mile. We’ve got a lot to learn. Success for the club once again? Hell yeah it might work getting rid of Skrtel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is exactly what it amounts to. Return on capital employed.  They will expect minimum 10% . No CL money means cut your overheads.  These cunts are just venture capitalists with the words "Sports" in their name to give a thin veneer of respectability. I just wish they would get to the end game and flip us to someone that actually gives a fuck about what we do on the pitch  

 

Don't forget, mate, in a business employees are in the liabilities, not the assets, column.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's disrespectful about negotiating a contract? If we know we're getting players in ahead of him, and that he'll just be a very high paid player sat on the bench. The days where we hand out massive contracts to over 30s should be gone, and if they don't like it then that's fine. I honestly don't see what the issue is, or where the disrespect is, in evaluating the worth of a player to the club and offering what you think he's worth. I do see how it's disrespectful to air the dirty laundry in public the way he has, and if it was Ayre or the manager doing it, I suspect they'd be hammered for it.

 

No worries mate, pay as you play deals all round then.

 

It seems fairly obvious that it's not in fact the usual thing for us to do when offering a contract to someone Skrtel's age which is exactly why he's kicked off about it  If you think it should be, fine.  I disagree in his case. Wonder why we just decided to start doing it now by offering one to one of the least injury-prone players we've had in recent years.

 

Was Gerrard on a pay as you play deal?  Is Sturridge on one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well I was close.  Lucas is getting sold anyway though probably.

 

Yeah, both seem to be. We're getting close to every single player at the club being signed by this manager with Jones, Gerrard, and Johnson also leaving. Wouldn't be surprised to see Coates, Sterling and Enrique leave too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard his staples are made of unicorn bone and the club are trying to get their money back on the staples outlay.

 

Skrtel is not the best CB in the PL but he's better than Toure and that useless cunt Lovren so he has to stay.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like an industrial estate and workers have to just roll with the punches for fear of losing their job because they'd be fucked without it. He can accept, fight for more or leave the problem is the club trying to be super savers could make it a very unattractive place for a footballer to want to play at. We can't dictate to the market. Are we going to end up as a place for kids to do their work experience and older players who are now rich enough they want some playing time before they retire after sitting on a bench for 5 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So who's responsible for this - Rodgers, Ayre, the owners? Have to believe if Rodgers really wanted him he'd have received better.

 

Not having a dig here, genuinely, but I suspect Rodgers doesn't know much about defenders. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like an industrial estate and workers have to just roll with the punches for fear of losing their job because they'd be fucked without it. He can accept, fight for more or leave the problem is the club trying to be super savers could make it a very unattractive place for a footballer to want to play at. We can't dictate to the market. Are we going to end up as a place for kids to do their work experience and older players who are now rich enough they want some playing time before they retire after sitting on a bench for 5 years.

He's getting a pay rise, how are they trying to be super savers?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites




Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...