NON -Greed in the game

ChampagneCherry said:
While we might have missed going to grounds for the last year , we did survive without it so maybe a nationwide boycott of the top two tiers for 4 weeks, instead going to non league might make people wake up and realise they can't just pay people whatever silly money!! Even one week with the threat of it continuing could send ripples.

For me all players should take a permanent 25% drop in salary and receive in return a prorata share of the first £xm of profit made by their club, X based on their total club salary and prorata including non playing non director staff.
Click to expand...
People not going to games won’t make a difference. Cancelled by tv subscriptions is where it matters.
 
Gentleman’s Agreement ......... what a load of poppy-cock.

I think I’d be tempted to insert a clause called ‘The Spring Door Provision’ as in “don’t let the door hit you on the backside on your way out” ...... as long as the selling club valuation is met. If not, players should shut the **** up and get on with their job.

King, Kane and any other contracted player who uses the gentleman’s agreement phrase, are living in cloud cuckoo land. There’s not many gentlemen around these days when multi-million pounds are involved.


Kane - what a shining example of how to go about things from the England captain.
 
Is Kane the new Wee Man? Spurs should fine him for breach of contract if he hasn't turned up for work. I struggle sometimes to understand how footballers brains work. These top players / earners really do buy into this self belief demi-god status of themselves. I'd just love for spurs to stick him I. The reserves until his contract runs out. They won't of course and he'll end up getting his own way.
 
4FCB said:
Gentleman’s Agreement ......... what a load of poppy-cock.

I think I’d be tempted to insert a clause called ‘The Spring Door Provision’ as in “don’t let the door hit you on the backside on your way out” ...... as long as the selling club valuation is met. If not, players should shut the **** up and get on with their job.

King, Kane and any other contracted player who uses the gentleman’s agreement phrase, are living in cloud cuckoo land. There’s not many gentlemen around these days when multi-million pounds are involved.


Kane - what a shining example of how to go about things from the England captain.
Click to expand...

All this hard talk sounds great but in the end the club will just lose loads if money if they try to keep a player who isn't fully committed. Personally I've no sympathy for the clubs as they are just as ruthless as the players in their dealings yet fans always seem to side with clubs.
 
Sorry Roger said:
If Kane is moving to win trophies and not for the money then there is an easy solution.

He agrees to play for Man City for three years for free, and City pay Spurs the £100 million they’ve offered plus the £50 million in wages they’ll save.

Result: Spurs are quids in, City have spent no more than they set out to do, and sporting Harry Kane gets to lift a trophy, which is all he ever wanted out of the game.
Click to expand...

Well, when you put it like that, yes... good point.
 
Red_till_im_ded said:
Is Kane the new Wee Man? Spurs should fine him for breach of contract if he hasn't turned up for work. I struggle sometimes to understand how footballers brains work. These top players / earners really do buy into this self belief demi-god status of themselves. I'd just love for spurs to stick him I. The reserves until his contract runs out. They won't of course and he'll end up getting his own way.
Click to expand...

Why doesn't he just feign a sudden onslaught of migranes? They wouldn't be able to fine him then!!
 
AFCB_Liam said:
Really? Surely the club has to agree the selling price. Otherwise a player on 100k a week with 3 years left on their contract could leave for 15m?
Click to expand...

Is Kane worth much more than 100 million? He has two dodgy ankles and has a 6 week injury break at least once a season. As others have said, although brilliant, he isn't the fastest. He's 28. Could be a Messi or Ronaldo but unlikely.

This gentleman's contract is interesting. Of course, clubs should get a fair price but who is judging what "fair" means? Perhaps there should be an independent body to make judgements in disputes like this.

Did Levy say "It would be good for us both if you extend because you're happy here and we can profit more from what we've invested in you... Don't worry. Of course you can leave early"? Or did he add on "for the right price"? Whatever was said Kane was clearly poorly advised by his agent or he didn't listen.

At the end of the day, Spurs will lose out if they don't let him go. He will devalue and the rest of the squad will get the picture: Safer to run down the contract and leave the club with nothing than extend and not be allowed to leave. It is football clubs as well as players who cannot have their cake and eat it.
 
Garbo said:
I think that Kane's stand off with Spurs shows what a mess the game has gotten into..

Players are happy to sign improved contracts with better pay etc..then try and challenge those very same contracts by effectively going on strike!

I understand that players want the whole cake and to eat it all themselves...

At some point in time the game has to evolve in a better form??

yes I know that Kane is probably doing it to win trophies and not the money...but still what is a contract worth?
Click to expand...

Whilst I take your point, at the time Kane signed that contract he would have been promised investment in the team, success and trophies. Now, none of this has materialised and Kane only has a few good years left. So, is he wrong to try and get out of his contract when the reasons he signed it didn't happen?
 
cherrybeetle said:
Whilst I take your point, at the time Kane signed that contract he would have been promised investment in the team, success and trophies. Now, none of this has materialised and Kane only has a few good years left. So, is he wrong to try and get out of his contract when the reasons he signed it didn't happen?
Click to expand...
....thing is that he has signed because he gets an increased deal in terms of salary and other incentives...sure he was promised investment in the team etc and this did happen under Jose, but it just didn't turn out the way Harry might have wanted (or many Spurs fans either!)...even if he had a gentlemans agreement with the club...Levy still has to get top dollar for him and that is obviously the sticking point?
 
SlowDownDerek said:
All this hard talk sounds great but in the end the club will just lose loads if money if they try to keep a player who isn't fully committed. Personally I've no sympathy for the clubs as they are just as ruthless as the players in their dealings yet fans always seem to side with clubs.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Kanes salary has anything to do with it?
 
SlowDownDerek said:
All this hard talk sounds great but in the end the club will just lose loads if money if they try to keep a player who isn't fully committed. Personally I've no sympathy for the clubs as they are just as ruthless as the players in their dealings yet fans always seem to side with clubs.
Click to expand...


...... and that is what this forum is all about .... being able to express personal opinions.

Just wondering, how did you feel about Ryan Fraser and the way he treated our club, the supporters and his teammates?

.
 
RobTrent said:
People not going to games won’t make a difference. Cancelled by tv subscriptions is where it matters.
Click to expand...
Maybe not to us but spurs need those crowds to payback their investment in the new ground. Supporters stop going and paying silly money for shirts and they will. Only challenge is season tickets have been sold so they don't care ironically if they show up or not. But you are right if everyone cancels TV subs in the month leading up to the next deal, then those deals will be lower and the cost later when you resubscribe, plus clubs forced to get a grip.
 
4FCB said:
...... and that is what this forum is all about .... being able to express personal opinions.

Just wondering, how did you feel about Ryan Fraser and the way he treated our club, the supporters and his teammates?

.
Click to expand...

I don't have an issue with players who don't sign a contract but a lack of effort in the final year or at any point is very poor. Then again he might just be a bit crap.

The covid extension period was an unusual quirk and whilst he was under no obligation to play I thought that it was poor given the risks and sacrifices loads of people were making at the time.

I'm not one to slag off players who decide to leave but I certainly wouldn't jump to Fraser's defence like I have done for some others. I'd join in with the pantomime boos if he ever comes back to DC too.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Kanes salary is the reason people take the clubs side?
Click to expand...
Probably yes. He, and others, come across as greedy people.

I don't like clubs who cancel contracts either, but in this case Kane signed the deal and he should stick to it. He'll be writing 'slave' on his cheek next.
 
RobTrent said:
Probably yes. He, and others, come across as greedy people.

I don't like clubs who cancel contracts either, but in this case Kane signed the deal and he should stick to it. He'll be writing 'slave' on his cheek next.
Click to expand...

But the clubs are as likely to ditch the player if things go badly. Part of the reason they wanted such a long contract was to bump up the fee they'll get. How many contracts actually are honored to the end by both parties?

Personally I'd rather the money goes to the talent that people are paying their money to see.

Having said that the conveyor belt of players to bigger/richer clubs makes football at the top level very boring.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
But the clubs are as likely to ditch the player if things go badly. Part of the reason they wanted such a long contract was to bump up the fee they'll get. How many contracts actually are honored to the end by both parties?

Personally I'd rather the money goes to the talent that people are paying their money to see.

Having said that the conveyor belt of players to bigger/richer clubs makes football at the top level very boring.
Click to expand...
Clubs mostly have to pay up contracts if they ditch players, which I agree with.

I dont begrudge players a penny but things are too heavily weighted in their favour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;