Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Skrtel rejects 'unacceptable' contract. So what now?


tlw content
 Share

Recommended Posts

If all the new contracts are based on this bright idea, it puts a new complexion on the way the manager stops playing people and 'disappears' them for months at a time. If these contracts are affecting team selection that's a much bigger problem than selling Skrtel.

No it doesn't.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disrespectful of Skrtel towards the club to use the media as a device to leverage more money from the club.

But it's ok for Fenway to brief and leak to fuck? Fuck them, the know nothing about football cunts. I said they'd be shite (in terms of making us successful on the pitch) from day one. I've no time for tight, rich cunts in any walk of life.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't get people not being at all bothered by this story, fine you don't think it's disrespectful and that's simply a matter of opinion that I disagree with. But we are becoming a less attractive football club with every one of these stories, less attractive to sponsors, to supporters and to players. Of course some will argue that's a matter of opinion too while ignoring what's going on in front of their eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly some half and half in there, I don't know, but suspect Sterling's motives are based on moving to London rather than financial.

Fair enough. I just recall you being pretty adamant and wondered if you might now see things in a different light .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it's ok for Fenway to brief and leak to fuck? Fuck them, the know nothing about football cunts. I said they'd be shite (in terms of making us successful on the pitch) from day one. I've no time for tight, rich cunts in any walk of life.

One of your best ever posts Tony.

Repped.

 

.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has nothing to worry about then, he's getting a pay rise.

 

Cardie, I've been here for ten years.  In all that time your m.o. has never changed, not even once.

 

That's why I'm not even going to quote my two previous posts which have pointed out the other, blindingly obvious issue which could in fact affect the number of games he's going to play.  I think one person quoting selectively on here is quite enough and I'll happily concede that you have dibs on the method.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody finds it disrespectful when a player expects 100-150 thousand a week and then expects more on top of that for granting us the honour of playing a game for us or for winning a game.

I'm sure many people find it sickening actually, I know I do. But if we want to compete at the top level of the game it's a necessary evil, and if we don't want to compete at that level, well we'll soon find out what that leads to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be disrespectful to offer him 20 year contract on 100000000000000000 per minute? That'd also be unusual

 

No, but of course if we'd offered him an unusually generous contract, I wouldn't have suggested that there was any lack of respect involved.  I wouldn't have suggested for a second that we should do that though. 

 

As for our best centre back, Sakho says hi.

 

I don't think there's much between them at all, I like Sakho.  I wonder if he's on one of these wonderful contracts, if he is I bet he won't be too chuffed at not playing 80% of our games these last two seasons due to the manager not picking him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cardie, I've been here for ten years. In all that time your m.o. has never changed, not even once.

 

That's why I'm not even going to quote my two previous posts which have pointed out the other, blindingly obvious issue which could in fact affect the number of games he's going to play. I think one person quoting selectively on here is quite enough and I'll happily concede that you have dibs on the method.

The rest isn't relevant to Skrtel position.

 

If he's never injured, and is available for most games then why make such a fuss over a contract that will a) increase what he's earning and b) reward that reliability.

 

We're not talking about a clause that is left to the whim of a manager or club, we're talking about a contract that will pay him the full amount if he's available for selection but will pay a reduced fee if he unavailable. Not if he actually plays.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rest isn't relevant to Skrtel position.

 

If he's never injured, and is available for most games then why make such a fuss over a contract that will a) increase what he's earning and B) reward that reliability.

 

We're not talking about a clause that is left to the whim of a manager or club, we're talking about a contract that will pay him the full amount if he's available for selection but will pay a reduced fee if he unavailable. Not if he actually plays.

 

Are we?  Every reference to the contract on the table that I've seen refers to appearances not availability.  If you have a link or some other confirmation that it is solely dependent on availability I'll happily concede the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we?  Every reference to the contract on the table that I've seen refers to appearances not availability.  If you have a link or some other confirmation that it is solely dependent on availability I'll happily concede the point.

 

He already has an appearance bonus in his contract, most if not all players do.

 

The fact they call it an appearance bonus in reports seems to be an issue of terminology.  In fact I'd wager that it's not a bonus at all in the traditional sense but a reduction in the basic wage deferred as a bulk payment once the target is hit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it's ok for Fenway to brief and leak to fuck? Fuck them, the know nothing about football cunts. I said they'd be shite (in terms of making us successful on the pitch) from day one. I've no time for tight, rich cunts in any walk of life.

He's had £200m plus Kenny got money for Carroll and the rest. Hardly tight

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
Reply to this topic...

×   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.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...