Ross Barkley

[kithnou]

Which is fine, if he set the same deadline for Lukaku.

As it stands, it's just hypocrisy. Come out and say you're selling Lukaku because he didn't sign then.

Thank you! About the post the same.
Total hypocrisy.

 

[JLW]

Which is fine, if he set the same deadline for Lukaku.

As it stands, it's just hypocrisy. Come out and say you're selling Lukaku because he didn't sign then.

I think he's told Rom your going nowhere, until next summer.

 

[Tubey]

Again, contract length. If Lukaku is still here next summer and it's the same situation the same words will be said.

Contract length not mentioned; only the offer of the contract itself. That's moving the goalposts.

The reality - Koeman/Everton won't mess with Raiola. Weakness.

 

[mahermi1]

They still put a contract on the table.

His own words - 'If you take so much time (in signing) you have doubts (about staying). The board has worked a long time' - so what's the difference? Lukaku has doubts about staying obviously, so hold him to th e same standards.

In 12 months time Barkley walks for nothing, in 12 months time we will still get a sizeable fee for Lukaku.

 

[Nymzee]

That's not mentioned.

All that is said is "contract on table, sign it or we'll sell you as if you don't by this arbitrary time limit, you obviously have doubts about staying so leave."

That applies to Lukaku.

He's saying that because if we don't sell Ross this summer he lives for nothing next year or pre-contract in January.

Why would he say "if the boy doesn't want to sign the contract we'll sell" regarding Lukaku when we're not in a position where we HAVE to sell him.

Pretty simple scenario you're just coming across a tad bitter.

 

[Niapper]

Koeman doesn't fancy him for his 'pressing' me thinks

 

[ijjysmith]

Contract length not mentioned; only the offer of the contract itself. That's moving the goalposts.

The reality - Koeman/Everton won't mess with Raiola. Weakness.

You don't need to mention the length because everyone already knows the situation.

It's more that Koeman is not arsed if Barkley leaves.



And I'm getting very near that feeling too.

 

[Tubey]

In 12 months time Barkley walks for nothing, in 12 months time we will still get a sizeable fee for Lukaku.

Again, not mentioned, not the issue. Koeman has set a time limit and has indicated if he goes beyond that time limit, that will mean the player has 'doubts' about staying and will be sold.

Lukaku has actively rejected a contract and clearly doesn't want to stay - come out and say you're selling Lukaku as a result.

 

[ijjysmith]

That's not mentioned.

All that is said is "contract on table, sign it or we'll sell you as if you don't by this arbitrary time limit, you obviously have doubts about staying so leave."

That applies to Lukaku.

It's not the same situation in a few ways though.
The main one being he doesn't care if Ross leaves but does if Lukaku leaves.

Nothing wrong with that.

 

[kenada_blue]

They still put a contract on the table.

His own words - 'If you take so much time (in signing) you have doubts (about staying). The board has worked a long time' - so what's the difference? Lukaku has doubts about staying obviously, so hold him to the same standards.

Sun shines out of Rom's arse for him

 

[longers]

Yup, don't think Koemans arsed in the slightest. Which is a shame.

 

[Tubey]

You don't need to mention the length because everyone already knows the situation.

It's more that Koeman is not arsed if Barkley leaves.



And I'm getting very near that feeling too.

Fine, he's allowed that view - he's the manager. But in that case say he's surplus to requirements and, you know, don't offer an unwanted player a contract. Don't be a hypocrite in your treatment of him in public when set against another player in the squad.

 

[ijjysmith]

Fine, he's allowed that view - he's the manager. But in that case say he's surplus to requirements and, you know, don't offer an unwanted player a contract. Don't be a hypocrite in your treatment of him in public when set against another player in the squad.

We won't agree on this it I'm feeling pretty certain that if Rom had 1 year left he'd be getting the same treatment.

Seems pretty obvious to me.

 

[Nymzee]

Yup, don't think Koemans arsed in the slightest. Which is a shame.

Maybe he's seen enough of Ross to think he can't improve in a way the benefits his Everton team going forward? He's definitely not got irreplaceable ability and about 1,000 players out there are smarter on the pitch.

 

[Tubey]

It's not the same situation in a few ways though.
The main one being he doesn't care if Ross leaves but does if Lukaku leaves.

Nothing wrong with that.

So don't offer him a contract...

Am I missing something here?