Lescott : would you have him back?

[Little Ralphy]

It was common knowledge that Pienaar wanted similar money to Arteta. His agent said as much on SSN at the time. That was when he had two years on the deal and the club put talks off. Pienaar said what he wanted and didn't get it. If he can get that elsewhere and the club were willing to sell, which they always are, it's not on him in any way. He never, ever gave less than his best for us right up to the day he went.

If that were true he would have played in the derby.

 

[Brennan]

How do you think Fellaini would react if the richest club in the world bid for him but David Moyes was insistent on blocking the deal? Would he not kick up a fuss and force the club to sell him, as you put it? Or do you think he would ignore it and continue on as normal? I mean, after all, Fellaini 'Can't be blamed' for wanting to move to a bigger club, can he?

What type of moron selects a player who has handed in a transfer request and was desperate to move to the richest club in the world anyway?

It's common knowledge that there is and has been strong interest in Fellaini. If he wanted to leave he easily could have, and he most certainly didn't have to sign a new contract with us.

 

[Royal Blue Jersey]

If that were true he would have played in the derby.

Maybe it could be argued Moyes learnt his lesson from the Lescott fiasco (regardless of who you blame, that result completely derailed the start of our season) and decided it wasn't worth playing him?

 

[Royal Blue Jersey]

It's common knowledge that there is and has been strong interest in Fellaini. If he wanted to leave he easily could have, and he most certainly didn't have to sign a new contract with us.

Steady on. There is a world of difference between actual overtures (Harry talking up 'Steven' in the press, as the melt-faced c**t always does) and mere interest. No-one has ever been close to signing Fellaini, there's been nothing like the sustained and persistent links we had to deal with for months before Lescott and Pienaar left.

 

[njligernj]

99% of all footballers would do what Lescott done to Everton,leave for a much higher wage packet and sadly to a club with better prospects than us.

No they wouldn't. Baines and Jags have had CL teams sniffing around them and didn't act like complete scum to force a move. I believe Arteta (before the Arsenal move) turned down offers too.

The false equivalency in this thread is amazing. It's not the same as Pienaar, Arteta or anyone we've sold in recent memory (or perhaps history -- I'd argue Wayne wasn't as bad). He essentially quit on the pitch in the middle of a game -- if I were City I would have pulled my offer right there on the basis that such a deep lack of character would likely hurt my club one day.

The next time someone says "they've got to feed their family" or something along those lines about a player going from 40-50k a week to 80-90k I swear I will ... do nothing but I'll be right upset I tell you.

"You would do the same" ... first off people always say this as if it's hypothetical. As if people in the "real world" aren't offered jobs. We are. Lots of people turn them down (even for more money -- and even when the difference between making tens of thousands a year is actually bigger in terms of the impact on your lifestyle than the huge footballer wage amounts) for various reasons (family, location, happiness at current job etc.) Hell I've seen people move jobs and take LESS money. Actually I've seen footballers do that too. So this "everyone is a money hungry scumbag who will not only do anything for money but act like absolute human garbage to force a move" doesn't really line up with reality. Yes there are lots of "Wall Street" types about who will stab their mother for a nickel but there are also people who could make six figures a year who take a lot less to help out others. Takes all sorts but don't paint all of us with the Lescott brush. Lescott is the vulture capitalist of footballers but there are some Warren Buffets out there too. Wherever you guys live sounds like a horrible place -- you should move ... take less money if you have to.

Oh ... in case it wasn't clear: of course I'd take him back he's great bloke!

 

[Royal Blue Jersey]

RE: njilger, don't want to reply to your whole spiel - you do make some good points - but implying Warren Buffet was some sort of philanthropic angel is just painful to read.

 

[Ihaters]

You heard it here first. Playing out the contract you signed because the club are blerts and won't give you a deserved pay rise is the same as deliberately playing like a tit and forcing a transfer.

Unreal.

Your basing your whole argument on rumour, its only rumour he wanted parity with the top earners and its only rumour that that is why he even left, as far as anyone knows he may of just been waiting to see who comes in for him and jumped ship earliest possibility.. What we do know for sure is that Pienaar got us a couple of mil, Lescott got us full price so from a club perspective its far worse.
However they go its better the club gets what the player is worth. If they all went the way you suggest, leaving us guessing as to whether he will sign, constantly telling us talks are close, then going for almost nothing.... you seem to forget he didn't see out his contract either and left for Spurs with time remaining.. then we would be without any means of making money as none would go on a transfer.
But there you go, I guess it depends how much contract is left when the team comes in.. if its only a few months and the club have no choice but to take it then its okay, if its a few years and the player has no choice but to force it then it isn't.
Personally I prefer Lescotts because we got money for it.

 

[njligernj]

Steady on. There is a world of difference between actual overtures (Harry talking up 'Steven' in the press, as the melt-faced c**t always does) and mere interest. No-one has ever been close to signing Fellaini, there's been nothing like the sustained and persistent links we had to deal with for months before Lescott and Pienaar left.

You know there is no smoke without fire right? That when there is "sustained and persistent links" or "mere interest" it's not like either way the player is sitting back uninvolved in the process. "Mere interest" often evolves into "sustained and persistent links" when the player and his agent tell the other club "we're interested ... get on it." The players who end up leaving with always have heavier media ahead of it because they are encouraging it -- your example is self-fulfilling. The players who aren't interested (or maybe float some vague interest to get an idea of an offer then retreat when they think about it and talk it over) never encourage that much hype from the bidding club.

Personally I prefer Lescotts because we got money for it.

Someone else said this earlier and its doing my head in. The amount of money City paid had nothing to do with Lescott's behaviour. Hell you could argue we could have got more if Lescott hadn't made it abundantly clear that his time with us was done in the Arsenal game. He had likely forced a transfer prior to that game (especially given our finances) but we were holding out to cash in -- it was clear after that game that we lost our leverage in negotiation because his status here was now untenable. If City weren't so impatient they should have knocked 5m off the offer after that game and said take it or leave it ... we would have taken it.

 

[Brennan]

RE: njilger, don't want to reply to your whole spiel - you do make some good points - but implying Warren Buffet was some sort of philanthropic angel is just painful to read.

Erm, he's giving away 99% of his wealth.

 

[caught]

How do you think Fellaini would react if the richest club in the world bid for him but David Moyes was insistent on blocking the deal? Would he not kick up a fuss and force the club to sell him, as you put it? Or do you think he would ignore it and continue on as normal? I mean, after all, Fellaini 'Can't be blamed' for wanting to move to a bigger club, can he?

What type of moron selects a player who has handed in a transfer request and was desperate to move to the richest club in the world anyway?

I'd agree with this if not for two caveats: Lescott's performance on the day wasn't as bad as people make out; and it seems fairly clear Moyes starting him was a tactic to imply City would have to up their offer to get him. Lescott's partial responsibility for that 1-6 embarrassment probably earned us another £1m-2m.

 

[Brennan]

You know there is no smoke without fire right? That when there is "sustained and persistent links" or "mere interest" it's not like either way the player is sitting back uninvolved in the process. "Mere interest" often evolves into "sustained and persistent links" when the player and his agent tell the other club "we're interested ... get on it." The players who end up leaving with always have heavier media ahead of it because they are encouraging it -- your example is self-fulfilling. The players who aren't interested (or maybe float some vague interest to get an idea of an offer then retreat when they think about it and talk it over) never encourage that much hype from the bidding club.

Two good posts in quick succession.

 

[Brennan]

Your basing your whole argument on rumour, its only rumour he wanted parity with the top earners and its only rumour that that is why he even left, as far as anyone knows he may of just been waiting to see who comes in for him and jumped ship earliest possibility.. What we do know for sure is that Pienaar got us a couple of mil, Lescott got us full price so from a club perspective its far worse.
However they go its better the club gets what the player is worth. If they all went the way you suggest, leaving us guessing as to whether he will sign, constantly telling us talks are close, then going for almost nothing.... you seem to forget he didn't see out his contract either and left for Spurs with time remaining.. then we would be without any means of making money as none would go on a transfer.
But there you go, I guess it depends how much contract is left when the team comes in.. if its only a few months and the club have no choice but to take it then its okay, if its a few years and the player has no choice but to force it then it isn't.
Personally I prefer Lescotts because we got money for it.

BECAUSE THE CLUB SOLD HIM. Pienaar had no obligation to do anything other than play out the contract he signed to the best of his ability. He tried to sign a new deal but the club are a bunch of belters and refused to give him the pay rise he most certainly deserved.

The amount of money we got for him has nothing to do with anything.

The Pienaar stuff is not rumour, it's a well known and commonly accepted fact, and as Steken says his own agent said as much.

 

[Royal Blue Jersey]

Two good posts in quick succession.

Be real, Fellaini has been whoring himself out for months with his various 'misinterpreted' quotes he is definitely the worst for it. Sadly for him, his dear dad, and more importantly us, no-one is interested.

 

[Ihaters]

He essentially quit on the pitch in the middle of a game -- if I were City I would have pulled my offer right there on the basis that such a deep lack of character would likely hurt my club one day.

No he didn't, he took the whole brunt of the blame for that team performance which was woefull.

 

[Ihaters]

Be real, Fellaini has been whoring himself out for months with his various misinterpreted 'quotes' he is definitely the worst for it. Sadly for him, his dear dad, and more importantly us, no-one is interested.

Yeah but it would be better if he just runs out his contract and leaves for free apparently