*Official* English Football Season 2015-16

[Lillian Thomson]

Hugo Lloris has a broken wrist. Not overly spectacular news, but there you have it.

 

[Furball]

on that, its unfair to compare wages in Germany/Spain to English, stupidly I know, but we do pay over the odds in comparison due to the money in the English game.

Still if Sterling did a comparison to his England teammates

Welbeck - 115k
Shaw - 120k
Lallana - 100k
Sturridge - one and a half decent seasons (if that), playing for the club who's just offered him 100k - 150k
Milner - seen figures quoted upto 150k for him too.

If I was Sterling I'd look at that lot and think 100k is quite low and I can get much better elsewhere, especially as I'm better than Lallana and Milner and probably even ahead of the rarely fit Sturridge.

£100k a week for 'the best young player in Europe' was derisory.

 

[Uppercut]

Rodgers dropped an enormous bollock by not tying him down at the end of last season. I'm not a Sterling sceptic, never have been. There's no such thing as a certain success but a 20 year old with his combination of pace, control and agility is about as good a prospect as you could possibly find. They've got a good price but will do incredibly well to find a replacement and given the choice would surely have kept him for the long term.

 

[Uppercut]

On United's dealings, I think they've been quite good. Darmian I haven't seen but seems like a fair call, Schneid and Depay I'm happy with, Schwein not so much.

The latest word from Jamie Jackson is that we're offering cash plus di Maria for cavani, which if true would absolutely dispel any notion that our transfer policy has suddenly become vaguely competent.

 

[cpr]

£100k a week for 'the best young player in Europe' was derisory.

This is the thing, if you're trying to offer a long term contract to such a potential, you can't just say 'well you're only worth £100k a week now, I don't care if in 2 years you'll be twice the player of our top earner, the contracts staying at what you're worth now'. You've got to factor in the development during the contract, and reward it as much

Its why we've given Shaw silly money when we signed him, because we've got one hell of a young talent and we want him to stay and appreciate the time he's got here. Offering him 40k and telling him to earn more will mean he'll just be pissed come next negotiation and want to go to another team who'll reward him so

 

[GIMH]

£100k a week for 'the best young player in Europe' was derisory.

Which is probably true hence #AMF

 

[Cabinet96]

On United's dealings, I think they've been quite good. Darmian I haven't seen but seems like a fair call, Schneid and Depay I'm happy with, Schwein not so much.

The latest word from Jamie Jackson is that we're offering cash plus di Maria for cavani, which if true would absolutely dispel any notion that our transfer policy has suddenly become vaguely competent.

Should give Di Maria to Bayern so we can buy Götze #Yearlycycle

 

[Ikki]

Haha, wow. Newsflash. Thats your opinion. It doesn't mean its correct. Your opinion is based on the fact you can't see any other reason to leave Liverpool other than money, whereas others can see plenty of reasons - The club isn't challenging for major honours, has regressed massively in the last 12 months, the manager has shown a lack of tactical nous and the club has wasted money on some right duds. Take the money out of the equation and you'll see that City are a far better club to play for - regular Champions League football, regular title challenges, world class players in the squad, but yet he'll still be a regular starter for them. I won't lie and say he'd have signed for them on the same as he earns now, but he knows he's worth more than he's on, worth more than the 100k Liverpool offered, and City are willing to chuck mega money at him.

I'm not sure how many different ways a person can state "it doesn't matter the reasons he's leaving; it's the way he's leaving". I don't care about more money or trophies or even if he hates the Scouse accent as his reasoning. I am not even debating that. I accept whatever the excuse is, why leave the way he left? Why do you keep responding to a strawman?

Was it clear that Liverpool would've allowed him to move anyway? There was lots of 'He's under contract and he's staying' going on, and remember they did exactly that to Suarez for a year (even though Arsenal met the release fee in the contract)

I think it's about as clear as it ever gets. Generally, you can't trust the media; unless the same figures and players are plastered everywhere over all the relevant sites. Liverpool valued him at £50m and he basically just went for that much. It isn't a coincidence.

Gee, never realised i'm not a footballer, thanks. Forgot footballers don't have the same emotional reaction to being put in a horrid situation which they want to get out of. Glad I didn't have to sell out my soul to do my job.#
It quite clear I was comparing the emotive reaction to being put in a position by an employer and wanted, nay, needing to get a change for your own sake (be what it may), yet you've not bothered to read it have you....

Well then stop comparing your situation to something that doesn't align. I read what you've said; there was nothing close to the nonsense about tying him down to a ****ty situation that even remotely relates. And you actually ignored my point: if an employer contracts you for a lot of money and you do not perform; can they just **** you off where they want?

Why don't you guys just agree to disagree

It's funner this way. Bored out of my mind...start the season already.

on that, its unfair to compare wages in Germany/Spain to English, stupidly I know, but we do pay over the odds in comparison due to the money in the English game.

Still if Sterling did a comparison to his England teammates

Welbeck - 115k
Shaw - 120k
Lallana - 100k
Sturridge - one and a half decent seasons (if that), playing for the club who's just offered him 100k - 150k
Milner - seen figures quoted upto 150k for him too.

If I was Sterling I'd look at that lot and think 100k is quite low and I can get much better elsewhere, especially as I'm better than Lallana and Milner and probably even ahead of the rarely fit Sturridge.

Lallana is on 65k IIRC, Welbeck on 75k. Shaw wanting 120k is the reason Chelsea didn't want him. I agree about players being more expensive in general though - especially English players and in England - but I don't think Sterling, in any world, should be making more than Neymar.

But you're taking the piss if you think 200k a week even in England, for Sterling, whose achieved even less than Sturridge, isn't flat out ludicrous. Hazard is on 200k, Sanchez is on 140k; I think only Aguero will make more than Sterling at City. It's definitely going to be one of those transfers you'll look back on and see a huge paradigm shift in terms of money given to footballers.

I stated myself weeks ago that if I were on the board, I'd give him 150k because I think he'll get there anyway and it allowed us to keep him in any case. But 200k? That's what Suarez is on. Giving 200k to a player that young and still needing to develop would mess up any wage structure at any club - even Real and Barca. I can only imagine what the senior players are thinking.

Rodgers dropped an enormous bollock by not tying him down at the end of last season. I'm not a Sterling sceptic, never have been. There's no such thing as a certain success but a 20 year old with his combination of pace, control and agility is about as good a prospect as you could possibly find. They've got a good price but will do incredibly well to find a replacement and given the choice would surely have kept him for the long term.

I would have agreed but in hindsight it just looks like an excuse on Sterling's side. Which club rushes into negotiation contracts with 3 seasons left? And ironically, Liverpool is generally good with contracts. At the same time Sterling was in negotiations, so were Coutinho and Henderson and we got their deals done quickly. I think even if Sterling thought 100k was low, another season of top performances and he'd have gotten another contract. That's the way FSG seem to work.

More to the point...so let's say he did sign a contract and turned his 3 years into 5 years? How is that stopping him from doing all that he already did?

He's going to be a star, I highly doubt we'll get another like him any time soon. Ibe looks amazing, but his game is less cerebral than Sterling who tends to make the right choice, as if he is a veteran. If he improves his shooting he'll be a 20 a goal player, even from the wing.

 

[cpr]

I'm not sure how many different ways a person can state "it doesn't matter the reasons he's leaving; it's the way he's leaving". I don't care about more money or trophies or even if he hates the Scouse accent as his reasoning. I am not even debating that. I accept whatever the excuse is, why leave the way he left? Why do you keep responding to a strawman?

because I was replying to the post you said
" I am saying it's clear the reason he went through all this trouble on ****ting on his own name and bringing all this crap to the club, that gave him the chance to even get this offer, is because of the money"
It's not a strawman if I respond to you underlining the fact you say the reason he's done it is money. I'm addressing the exact point you'd said.

I think it's about as clear as it ever gets. Generally, you can't trust the media; unless the same figures and players are plastered everywhere over all the relevant sites. Liverpool valued him at £50m and he basically just went for that much. It isn't a coincidence.

I don't really see what the media has to do with my point. My point was Liverpool had said that they wouldn't allow him to leave, and they've a track record of holding onto players under intense speculation in the past, even when the player desires the move. Sure the media speculated he'd probably go for £50m, but thats no guarantee to Sterling until it actually happens. Certainly sitting back on his laurels and just hoping it happens wouldn't have worked given how good Liverpool are at resisting. By pushing it, he's not only sending a message that says he doesn't want to stay, but sending a message to whoever wants to bid (in this case City) to say 'I'm serious about this, come and get me', that could be the difference between the City board saying 'Nah, not worth the argument with Liverpool' and 'Well, he wants to come, lets see if we can get them to bite with this offer'

Well then stop comparing your situation to something that doesn't align. I read what you've said; there was nothing close to the nonsense about tying him down to a ****ty situation that even remotely relates. And you actually ignored my point: if an employer contracts you for a lot of money and you do not perform; can they just **** you off where they want?

But it does align, he's a player unhappy where he is for one reason or another, I was a person unhappy where I was for one reason or another. My experience of what its like to try and force a move against an employer who was actively blocking it, and around colleagues who didn't know the full picture but were happy to tell me what I should be doing and what the reasons were for wanting to move. I was trying to get you to maybe see what Sterling is feeling whilst this is going on, and some rationale behind his decision not to train under such pressures, not saying 'Oh Liverpool are doing this horrid thing to him'. You were stubbornly not seeing that side of it, but focusing on the employer comparison.

And for the last point, yes. My employer could **** me off wherever they wanted to within the business, it was actually in my contract that I was considered mobile and could expect to be moved into any post with reasonable notice. Or just get rid of me completely if they felt I was underperforming (subject to usual employment rules). They did actually move me once with a weeks notice to a completely different area. The irony of my situation was I was trying to get them to use the mobility in my contract to allow me to move to a position nearer home, and they were stubbornly refusing. Obviously thats not the same as being transferred between football clubs, but again, my point was the mental side of things for Sterling, not the contract dispute in itself

Lallana is on 65k IIRC, Welbeck on 75k. Shaw wanting 120k is the reason Chelsea didn't want him. I agree about players being more expensive in general though - especially English players and in England - but I don't think Sterling, in any world, should be making more than Neymar.

But you're taking the piss if you think 200k a week even in England, for Sterling, whose achieved even less than Sturridge, isn't flat out ludicrous. Hazard is on 200k, Sanchez is on 140k; I think only Aguero will make more than Sterling at City. It's definitely going to be one of those transfers you'll look back on and see a huge paradigm shift in terms of money given to footballers.

I stated myself weeks ago that if I were on the board, I'd give him 150k because I think he'll get there anyway and it allowed us to keep him in any case. But 200k? That's what Suarez is on. Giving 200k to a player that young and still needing to develop would mess up any wage structure at any club - even Real and Barca. I can only imagine what the senior players are thinking.

The joys of trying to find a footballers wages eh, one site will say one thing, another something different. You mentioned Oscar, I saw quotes of his salary from 40-160k when searching. I didn't correct you because I couldn't be sure who's right or wrong. Basically nobody really knows...... Well, I do know in some regards, having dealt with footballers incomes, alas I could still be prosecuted for revealing stuff from on the job, but I'll go as far as saying I saw a number of footballers in England earning more than 100k a week who couldn't hold a torch to Sterling (obviously none of the ones named, I'm not that reckless!)

I actually agree though that 200k is ridiculous for him, but if City are offering it, then why say no. I don't think Sterling came out and said he wanted 200k, but it's fair to say he did want more than 100k (though he claimed it was not about money). Compared with some others, I don't think is too bad a call to want more than that. I don't really see Sturridge as having achieved much more, he was perennial at Chelsea and City, and has probably performed as much at Liverpool as Sterling. I'd agree with you on offering 150k, given he was probably your most important player (up with Sturridge, wage equality for those two wouldn't be a bad thing)......Though i still think Sterlings more motivated by playing for a team with title aspirations than getting a big pay cheque (though they come hand in hand...). Alas the last 12 months have blown Liverpool out of that pot. Really the club should've snapped up his request to sign last summer when everything was looking so promising.

The only real solution is for Liverpool to invest this money wisely and show Sterling that the club does have the ability to challenge, and make him look a fool for going elsewhere. Sadly I don't think the current transfer set up you have is capable. FTR I'm not 100% convinced ours is a million times better either, we seem to be buying names over positions at times. Really need something like Southampton have, where they are identifying targets ridiculously well.

 

[Johnners]

Why don't you guys just agree to disagree

Indeed

 

[duffer]

Which is probably true hence #AMF

When I become a billionaire I'm buying Tranmere.

 

[cpr]

Indeed

**** off spoiling our fun will ya!

Football isn't the same without a good old fashioned utd v liverpool ****fest

 

[grecian]

I'm calling it, Ikki v CPR in the football thread, the new TEC v Richard for the cricket threads.

 

[Ikki]

because I was replying to the post you said
" I am saying it's clear the reason he went through all this trouble on ****ting on his own name and bringing all this crap to the club, that gave him the chance to even get this offer, is because of the money"
It's not a strawman if I respond to you underlining the fact you say the reason he's done it is money. I'm addressing the exact point you'd said.

I might see how you've misunderstood that, but not when I've posted it several times. I'm not saying the only thing he wanted was money; but I am saying the reason he kicked up such a fuss to get out of the situation the way he has points to the contract that City offered him. He may have never gotten that kind of offer again, even by other teams that could/would win titles. His contracts from here on out will be eye-watering.

I don't really see what the media has to do with my point. My point was Liverpool had said that they wouldn't allow him to leave, and they've a track record of holding onto players under intense speculation in the past, even when the player desires the move. Sure the media speculated he'd probably go for £50m, but thats no guarantee to Sterling until it actually happens. Certainly sitting back on his laurels and just hoping it happens wouldn't have worked given how good Liverpool are at resisting. By pushing it, he's not only sending a message that says he doesn't want to stay, but sending a message to whoever wants to bid (in this case City) to say 'I'm serious about this, come and get me', that could be the difference between the City board saying 'Nah, not worth the argument with Liverpool' and 'Well, he wants to come, lets see if we can get them to bite with this offer'

If Liverpool didn't want to let him leave, then they have a right to do so. Let's stop pretending contracts mean nothing. Sterling's actions don't justify that stance, even if it were true to the end.

However much it is convenient to pretend what the media says doesn't mean anything; it's quite obvious to anyone that follows this old game long enough that the figures, transfers, don't come out of left field anymore. Some media sites will be desperate to just concoct stories but not the likes of the Guardian or the BBC. And Liverpool had that £50m figure out there early; it was only City that stalled. Possibly because they didn't want the image of them being pushovers to propagate. If Liverpool were never going to let him go, then he wouldn't have gone - see Suarez.

And lastly, on this specific point; the clearest sign of wanting to leave is...a transfer request. That leaves nobody in doubt. You don't have to create a ****storm every news day. You just make that statement and it is obvious. The thing with that is, once you hand in a transfer request you forgo any loyalty payments that may have been due. Money, again.

But it does align, he's a player unhappy where he is for one reason or another, I was a person unhappy where I was for one reason or another. My experience of what its like to try and force a move against an employer who was actively blocking it, and around colleagues who didn't know the full picture but were happy to tell me what I should be doing and what the reasons were for wanting to move. I was trying to get you to maybe see what Sterling is feeling whilst this is going on, and some rationale behind his decision not to train under such pressures, not saying 'Oh Liverpool are doing this horrid thing to him'. You were stubbornly not seeing that side of it, but focusing on the employer comparison.

And for the last point, yes. My employer could **** me off wherever they wanted to within the business, it was actually in my contract that I was considered mobile and could expect to be moved into any post with reasonable notice. Or just get rid of me completely if they felt I was underperforming (subject to usual employment rules). They did actually move me once with a weeks notice to a completely different area. The irony of my situation was I was trying to get them to use the mobility in my contract to allow me to move to a position nearer home, and they were stubbornly refusing. Obviously thats not the same as being transferred between football clubs, but again, my point was the mental side of things for Sterling, not the contract dispute in itself

Liverpool can't **** players off where or when they want. They can't terminate contracts and they can't force a player to move somewhere he doesn't agree to go. That's because of his contract. I'm pretty sure even playing time and appearances are negotiated or regulated by player's unions. Besides that, Liverpool wasn't about to bench its best player - the reason they wanted to keep him is because he is a great player.

And you can't leave somewhere, a job, that you're contractually bound to, if you're suddenly unhappy. You were happy enough to sign it just the season before, that you're unhappy now isn't reason enough to stop being professional. The club is not bound to cow-tow to your demands. You're mistaken if you think this is a right Sterling has. It's just the act of a spoiled individual who'd turn over the apple cart, rather than spend the 2 seasons he self-obligated himself to see out. There is no "I'm not happy anymore" termination clause.

All I see is that you contractually agreed for your employers to have certain powers. Whether that makes you happy or not is irrelevant. Employment contracts will state working, duties, conditions and even locations. That an employer (or employee) may take advantage of certain clauses in a contract is an inherent risk. This is nothing new, this is how the world works mate.

The joys of trying to find a footballers wages eh, one site will say one thing, another something different. You mentioned Oscar, I saw quotes of his salary from 40-160k when searching. I didn't correct you because I couldn't be sure who's right or wrong. Basically nobody really knows...... Well, I do know in some regards, having dealt with footballers incomes, alas I could still be prosecuted for revealing stuff from on the job, but I'll go as far as saying I saw a number of footballers in England earning more than 100k a week who couldn't hold a torch to Sterling (obviously none of the ones named, I'm not that reckless!)

I actually agree though that 200k is ridiculous for him, but if City are offering it, then why say no. I don't think Sterling came out and said he wanted 200k, but it's fair to say he did want more than 100k (though he claimed it was not about money). Compared with some others, I don't think is too bad a call to want more than that. I don't really see Sturridge as having achieved much more, he was perennial at Chelsea and City, and has probably performed as much at Liverpool as Sterling. I'd agree with you on offering 150k, given he was probably your most important player (up with Sturridge, wage equality for those two wouldn't be a bad thing)......Though i still think Sterlings more motivated by playing for a team with title aspirations than getting a big pay cheque (though they come hand in hand...). Alas the last 12 months have blown Liverpool out of that pot. Really the club should've snapped up his request to sign last summer when everything was looking so promising.

The only real solution is for Liverpool to invest this money wisely and show Sterling that the club does have the ability to challenge, and make him look a fool for going elsewhere. Sadly I don't think the current transfer set up you have is capable. FTR I'm not 100% convinced ours is a million times better either, we seem to be buying names over positions at times. Really need something like Southampton have, where they are identifying targets ridiculously well.

I'm a realist. I don't think Sterling would have signed anyway. If having 3 seasons on your contract doesn't stop you from creating this mess than there's no more guarantee 5 would. I'm sure all players want to win titles, but I doubt that's the reason for Sterling's urgency in seeking a departure. The lad got a **** tonne of money and went to a title challenging team. He could have had it anyway, without the sideshow.

Anyway, time to follow GIMH's advice.

 

[cpr]

Yeah, all I can say is I can't wait for the season to start so I can lay into Ikki's lot for footballing reasons


As I said with Nate, there's definately an element of tribalness from both sides, why the hell we wasted time trying to convince the other I dunno.


Oh yeah I do, I'm an unemployed insomniac, I literally have all day to waste....

 

[Nate]

Enjoyed the Thai All-Stars vs LFC game. I like the 4-4-2 diamond more than the 4-3-3. Markovic/Origi probably best on ground. Hendo rabona pass whattttttttttttt

 

[Ikki]

I'm going to the Malaysia game

Di Maria seems to be going to PSG. Strange transfer story. I think LvG is the one behind it, not sure why he'd feel Di Maria can't adapt though. He is potentially a player of the season kind of talent.

 

[cpr]

Personally I feel the Di Maria one is a media story. Its a slow summer and an 'EXCLUSIVE' transfer story can help shift papers, even if it's made up crap. Utd have been pretty clear they don't intend to sell and I'm confident thats the case. Di Maria himself has come out and said he'll be at OT next season, but it really just stinks of the ****rags just saying it for the sake of it.

 

[Uppercut]

No there's definitely something to it. Jamie Jackson reckons it's 50-50 to happen. I wouldn't mind him leaving, he was never the global superstar people seemed to expect and the money could be better spent elsewhere.

 

[King Pietersen]

Some of these are awesome: Cracks de todos los tiempos II | PaladarNegro.Net