bigmick wrote:Well for me you might as well bang your head against a brick wall, because you are talking utter nonsense. There is barely a word in your post I agree with, it is mis-informed, incorrect and demonstrates a total lack of knowledge about the modern game and the way it works. I don't do forum rows so I will say my piece and then let you have the last word, but this in a nutshell is why I disagree with your post.
On the question of players "earning" their money, it depends which way you look at it. You could actually make the case that none of them "earn" their money purely on the grounds that they get paid such an obscene amount. Even the less glamorous types, the likes of Finnan ("who does the job with little or no reward") would be on considerably in excess of one million pounds a year. Does he earn it when the Prime minister gets about half that, or a surgeon about a tenth of it? It is of course not about "earning" it, (and you could of course argue that as 40,000 people turn up to watch eleven blokes every week and pay £35 and upwards to get in, then maybe they do earn it) it's actually about the going rate. If you pay it, you keep your best players, if you don't then you don't. That is the simple law of modern football economics.
On your assertion that key players have come before and been replaced. While it is true to say that Keegan, Dalglish etc were major players who took some replacing, Hunt to a lesser extent and Clemence being frankly a silly comparison, I think it is fair to say we had a better team overall then so the load wasn't quite so heavy. Also, when Keegan left we were able to buy Dalglish who I think most people would agree was a better player anyway, replacing Gerrard may not be so easy I wouldn't have thought.
Next is your question about Shankly. If he was around today of course he would have given Gerrard a new contract, because he was football man who understood the importance of good players. Modern day managers who are from the Shankly, no nonsense mode still pay top money. Ferguson would be the modern manager closest to Shankly and he hardly baulks at paying players top dollar if they are top performers.
As for letting top players contracts like Gerrard and Alonso run into the last season, I can only assume you don't remember the Steve Macmanaman fiasco, or more recently the Michael Owen robbery. With the greatest respect, to state on a Liverpool forum that this is what you would do demonstrates that you have a lack of understanding of the situation. Even if we were thinking of selling Gerrard anytime soon, you STILL give him a new contract to tie him in for longer and get a bigger transfer fee. That's just the way it is as the song goes.
Lastly, you imply that Gerrard has had a massively disappointing season and doesn't really care about the club. Well in my opinion he is, and was, our best player in practically every single game he played in, and as he has never kicked a ball for another club I wonder what you base the last bit on.
I'm sorry but the whole post is nonsense. You have the last word mate and I'll take over from you on the brick wall head banging.
you keyboard gangsta mick !!!
good post.
, it is simply to make sure that should we fail to win the premiership, at least we have compensation. And that to me isnt good enough, If I want a bright future, I want to see progress being made, and in Rafa it has, but all the board has been seen to do is make sure the current set of key players are secured, Carra will never leave, he deserves his contract, what of the rest?
