Ross Barkley

[MACCA75]

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.

Where is the dislike button? Koeman has said countless times they are in a different situation.

 

[bazzer25]

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

Precisely, if Ross cares for the club he would sign the deal and then move on not leaving the club with nothing after all these years, even Stones signed a new contract that allowed us to dictate terms to would be suitors. I see no loyalty here.

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

Would love Ross to stay, he's a blue and still has potential to be a solid player for us, but if he chooses to go and we get Glyfi in as a replacement I don't think I'll be too upset.

 

[BlueToff]

Barkley has been dropped twice this season, has been extremely poor in 90% of our away games, has not had one good game against a top team, not good enough to get a game for a poor national side, yet is holding out on a new deal?
The game has gone mad!
As much as we want this lad to be great and a club hero, the simple facts are he is not quite good enough, shame, but get the money and let him go!

Don't re-write history either though. The lad has had a great second half of the season and will be a miss.
If he does go though, we'll move on.

 

[4737carlin]

I think he is gone, personal not bothered at all but I don't think Koeman/the club are either

 

[coollino]

Koeman probably knows what going on behind the scenes a little more than us.

 

[Jacko93]

OK, so leave Barkley "unsaid" in public too and get on with it behind the scenes. What's to gain from publicly doing what Koeman is doing, unless you are that ruthless across the board?

All I see is a hypocrite; I'm not a davek-ish Koeman basher either - just puzzled by the positive response to that from Koeman when, for me, all it does is highlight how much they see their arse with Raiola.

And all I see too is terrible man-management if he does want the player - way to treat a valued member of the squad.

Silence is sometimes the best policy - I understood it with Lukaku until this, but now it's clear that Koeman has a big gob when it suits him to have a big gob.

They are two different situations though, as he has said in the past. If Barkley had 2 years left on his contract, I very much doubt we would even be hearing his name.

I agree with what Koeman is doing here, as he is leaving the decision up to Barkley/Barkley's agent. He is basically saying, if you want to stay, we want you to, but on our terms, which after the majority of performances this season, and last, is a fair stance to take imo.

Lukaku is very different, as he will not necessarily drop massively in value this summer, Barkley will only have to hold on to 12 months more and he'll be able to go for free and have a much greater wealth of suitors for his services. I would hazard a guess that Lukaku would be handled in a similar fashion if he was in the same position. that's all it is though, a guess.




On another point, I wonder if he's been told/advised to move from Everton to increase his chances of international appearances.......

 

[BlueToff]

It's simple. If Ross thinks he's better off elsewhere then he needs to say it. And we need to get him out the door asap. Should not play tomorrow. But if he does then he deserves whatever comes his way.

He should and will play tomorrow.

And nobody should be having a go at him either, that's utter ted behaviour.

Barkley has every right to take his time, but Koeman also is right to point out that a decision needs to be made, soon.

 

[longers]

Precisely, if Ross cares for the club he would sign the deal and then move on not leaving the club with nothing after all these years, even Stones signed a new contract that allowed us to dictate terms to would be suitors. I see no loyalty here.

If he wants to leave signing a new contract is suicide, it inflates his price and now the clubs previously interested no longer care.

 

[IlliniToffee]

Koeman has said on the record before that the difference between the Ross and Rom situations was the contract length. There's no need to say it every time; it's understood.

I think Koeman sees Ross as a useful squad member and not much more, similar to Mirallas. He's already here and a replacement would cost money (on top of the additions already needed), so might as well keep him, but not at the expense of letting him move on a free transfer in a year. Or maybe I'm attributing to Koeman my own thoughts.

 

[bazzer25]

If he wants to leave signing a new contract is suicide, it inflates his price and now the clubs previously interested no longer care.

If he's that good it won't hurt him, clubs will want him. Stones did the same thing and still got his dream move. And you have to ask the question is playing for Everton that bad as an alternative to not getting your dream move?

 

[Barnfred 55]

Me

Was actually convinced he would stay - even more so after his reaction to the Burnley "goal" at the Gwladys - but I've flipped now. He's gone IMHO.[/QUOTE Me too. Totally gutted tbh. My absolute favourite player but I've finally accepted there's a very good chance he's leaving.

Gotta say though I'm 100% behind Koeman with his comments today. Ross has to commit now.

 

[nsno-chris]

It's simple. If Ross thinks he's better off elsewhere then he needs to say it. And we need to get him out the door asap. Should not play tomorrow. But if he does then he deserves whatever comes his way.

No Tim, we need to move past this moronic behaviour, we support him until the day he leaves not hurl abuse at him and make his decision easier.

The same with trampoline shins

 

[kenada_blue]

Precisely, if Ross cares for the club he would sign the deal and then move on not leaving the club with nothing after all these years, even Stones signed a new contract that allowed us to dictate terms to would be suitors. I see no loyalty here.

The club didn't wind Stones' contract down.

Where was Ross' offer when he had 2 years left like Rom?

 

[Milkman]

SELL