Stevie might be off
- Thread starter Modo
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Furry muff, but Li'l Luis did at least apply the finishing touch then.
Main thing is it was a Liverpool player. 😎
Main thing is it was a Liverpool player. 😎
why are you talking about yourself in the 3rd person?
Gerrard to stay..
Its like when you play football manager and you get to 2019 and you have no players you recognise and you think this is not Liverpool any longer, what am I doing with my life.
Gerrard is Liverpool.
We support Liverpool for the little things, like watching a scouser play his 800th game for Liverpool. I do anyway...otherwise id support Chelsea or some shit team like that...
Its like when you play football manager and you get to 2019 and you have no players you recognise and you think this is not Liverpool any longer, what am I doing with my life.
Gerrard is Liverpool.
We support Liverpool for the little things, like watching a scouser play his 800th game for Liverpool. I do anyway...otherwise id support Chelsea or some shit team like that...
This is from the Star,so it's probably just speculation, but...:
Liverpool want Steven Gerrard to take a 50 per cent wage cut before they allow him to see out his career at Anfield.
Reds captain Gerrard went public last week saying the club he has stayed loyal to throughout his career need to come up with a new deal before the end of the season.
But the American owners are not prepared to match his existing £180,000-a-week terms - believing he is not worth superstar wages with age now seeing his influence on the pitch reducing.
Instead they have put on the table a two-year-contract that will pay £90,000-a-week for the first season, dropping to £60,000-a-week in the final 12 months.
Built in with the offer is an option for Gerrard to either take up a coaching role in 2017 or become a club ambassador should he decide against staying in the game in a hands on capacity.
Liverpool want Steven Gerrard to take a 50 per cent wage cut before they allow him to see out his career at Anfield.
Reds captain Gerrard went public last week saying the club he has stayed loyal to throughout his career need to come up with a new deal before the end of the season.
But the American owners are not prepared to match his existing £180,000-a-week terms - believing he is not worth superstar wages with age now seeing his influence on the pitch reducing.
Instead they have put on the table a two-year-contract that will pay £90,000-a-week for the first season, dropping to £60,000-a-week in the final 12 months.
Built in with the offer is an option for Gerrard to either take up a coaching role in 2017 or become a club ambassador should he decide against staying in the game in a hands on capacity.
The man who carried us over the last decade deserves far more respect than this tripe.
So what? Anyone who doesn't have trouble letting go of a diamond like Stevie G should probably find some other way to spend their time. Besides, whether you like the idea or not, he's an icon and his departure will shake the club. It's not something to be treated as offhandedly as you're doing.
I'm sorry did Chelsea give Lampard a candlelight vigil?
Cole?
It's business. Gerrard got his testimonial. What else can we do? Suck him off?
Did people care this much when Barnes and Rush left, if I remember it correctly the general feeling was that it was time. They knew it, we knew it.
Now Mark and Jules want us all to cry about it.
Cole?
It's business. Gerrard got his testimonial. What else can we do? Suck him off?
Did people care this much when Barnes and Rush left, if I remember it correctly the general feeling was that it was time. They knew it, we knew it.
Now Mark and Jules want us all to cry about it.
Just negotiate with his representatives as in every other branch of business.
Avoid becoming emotional and disrespectful.
Exactly, if he doesn't accept our terms then so be it.
Let's not make it about loyalty. I want Gerrard to stay, but he's in no position to demand 180k.
You're the only one blabbering about "crying" and a "candlelight vigil". Unfortunately for your obsession with discarding club legends, Stevie's importance to LFC is far from over and he still occupies a very important position within the club's structure (a point which, of course, you've ignored because you have no answer for it). Digger and Rushie had passed that point. Stevie hasn't.
I'd gladly pay Gerrard whatever he wanted over the next couple of years because he's given the fans some of their best ever footballing memories and epitomises everything great about this club.
This situation has been badly handled by the club by letting it get to this point where it's become a talking point in the press.
This situation has been badly handled by the club by letting it get to this point where it's become a talking point in the press.
I'd like him to stay, but he has £30m in the bank as compensation for the incredible memories and 'sticking' with the club, if he can make even more then good luck to him, but the last person who should using the press for a bit of contract negotiation is the captain of the club, if that was his intention then it was just wrong and a terrible example to set for others.
I am glad you don't negotiate our players' wages.
I think the offer is fair, next season he wont be a starting player and the season after that he will probably not really feature at all. To be honest he is lucky to be offered 2 years, most players at his age move onto 12 month contracts. Id like to think he will take it but if hes looking for one last payday before he retires then he will probably move on as I dont think the club will be inclined to meet his demands.
I notice you blatantly ignored the Rush and Barnes comment, again. They were well finished by the time they both left. The only real argument against Gerrard at the moment is that he's being used too much, it's a hard habit to break and one that we have to, but he's not "finished" by any stretch and is still integral in many ways. Do you think the likes of Henderson, Coutinho etc haven't learned from him? Of course they have. He was up there in the league in the assists charts again and was a major contributor to our setpieces and penalties. He might be playing the wrong role (we all know that) but he still gave more from midfield than anyone else, including your beloved Lucas and Joe Allen.
JJ is right, this obsession with playing the detached realist is doing you no favours, because you take it to extremes (as per) with snidey arsed comments (as per). It's why people think you're a troll, because the way you do it is exactly like one.
"Candle lit vigils", do fuck off. As for Chelsea, haven't they just resigned Drogba? Oh.
Surely you see the paradoxical stupidity of your approach here Modo.
You're really trying to use the example of a nonsense of a club like Chelsea to argue against Liverpool supporters wanting to treat a Kop legend with respect.
It's like a ritual for you to try and find new ways to demonstrate a lack of connection to the greatest club in the world. We don't need to look for examples from some plastic play thing.
Next you'll be saying things like the fans should only sing when the team wins.
Great, then he should accept a massive pay cut for playing less.
Unless you think it's Ok for him to command that massive wage for ultimately being a figurehead.
And Barnes continued playing at top level for at least 3 more seasons after he left.
Like we resigned Fowler to be a our 3rd or 4th choice.
You think Drogba is getting paid the same. You think Fowler got paid the same?
Then you're missing the point. He was given a testimonial wasn't he?
Jules and Mark are saying that we can't just let him leave if he doesn't accept a pay cut.
I'm asking what else can we do and neither you or those other two have answered that question.
Instead all I've been reading is how criminally disrespectful I am.
So do tell, how should it be handled? Let's say Gerrard wants 180k, we want to pay him half.
And yes I am detached because football has changed, money is a big factor and if it wasn't, Gerrard would voluntarily accept a pay cut.
I'd be surprised if many really think that A) we're in a position to pay it or B) he's in a position to command it. The papers are full of shit, we've heard similar guff before in the press, only for the player to come out and sign, every contract negotiation attracts speculation, so I'm fucked if I'm going to read too much into this, especially when the guy is playing week in, week out, it doesn't smack of us wanting shut of him and it doesn't mean that a lame interview saying he might go means anything, Carragher said similar about "if the club didn't want him".
The reaction, as usual, is to you compounding each point with a thinly veiled dig that unmasks your real feelings on the player. "People have trouble letting go" - to compound your point that he's a "legend but we shouldn't pay him too much" - which is it? Is he a legend you want to keep at the right price, or is he a player only you wants shut of, while the rest of us sentimentalists can't let go? Make up your mind Modo.
"so how should it be treated? Candlelight vigil?" Like I said, are we sentimentalists who can't see through the rose tinted glasses, or are we fans who think one of our greatest ever players deserves to be rewarded for his loyalty with the ability to see out his career here? Think about it and try admitting what you really feel for once, instead of burying it in bullshit.
How does "people have trouble letting go" contradict "legend but we shouldn't pay him too much"?
I've read comments about how Gerrard is Liverpool, hence people have trouble letting go.
Also from my stand point, I'd be happy if he stayed but on the clubs terms.
One thing we keep forgetting is that, maybe just maybe his wages and others like Johnson are making it difficult for us to sign a top class player?
Right back at you.
- Status
