Football Banter Thread

dannyjo22 said:
He will leave, he just want's what he was contracted in wages. I don't blame him.


Agreed and the fans want to hate on him because he won't do them a favour and leave while losing money. **** them. Perhaps they should chip in and pay some of it off, instead they want to bully him out of the club at his expense. He didn't chase Manu down, they chased him down and offered the contract, as they did badly with Sancho, Sanchez and countless other poor buys that then left at a massive loss. If they want him gone badly enough, pay him up.
Click to expand...
I see your point but he had the option to leave.
 
dannyjo22 said:
And that’s the point, we don’t know. Perhaps they just aren’t good enough, perhaps they have been demotivated by the manager and how he handled and spoke to and about them. They still shouldn’t just leave when the fans just want them too.

Who exactly has the manager made better in this squad? The list is not exactly long.
Click to expand...
Demotivated?
 
shipinabottle said:
Two points here for me that most people here seem absurdly to make...

Clubs can make decisions based on money, however players can't when they have a contract? Nonsense.

Abuse... being paid millions does not give cart blanche to persistent abuse through booing and derision.

It's 2023... kissing people unwarrantedly, causing mental distress over their work/career is not on. If this was any other job rather than a sport people would be facing police interventions for harassment. But because there's sense of ownership from the fans they feel it's 'okay' because they pay his wages and from other fans it's a value of 'well he can cry into his millions'.

There's a person here, millions don't block out emotions and how many tragic cases do we have to witness of spotlight celebrities breaking down before enough is enough. As dramatic as Shami makes it, it's true... you'll all be happy to take your laughs until some poor player who has too much going on, gets abused and then takes their own life.

Unfortunately you're part of the problem (along with the media) if you think the above is okay.

I'm not a fan of Maguire, I don't agree with his decision, but it's his at the end of the day. I can reflect on what I think he should do and what I think of his performances but calling him X and then harassing him is not on. It starts in here or in the conversations we have, it goes to the stands and then to attacks like threats etc.

Sod that, people should grow up and get with the times.
Click to expand...

If it was any other job surely he'd get sacked for underperforming? I would be sacked if I was put in a job on a high salary and if I couldn't then perform at the required level.

He turned down a £6m pay off apparently. If that's true then I will boo. You're allowed to boo at football matches.
 
Last edited:
sigma said:
If it was any other job surely he'd get sacked for underperforming? I would be sacked if I was put in a job on a high salary and if I couldn't then perform at the required level.

He turned down a £6m pay off apparently. If that's true then I will boo. You're allowed to boo at football matches.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter, firstly you can't be sold to somewhere you don't want to go. Even if they were giving him 6m. If that's even true then surely you should be saying good on him for not taking the money and fighting for his place? Secondly stop comparing it to your job. If Alex Ferguson behaved as he did in your job he wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes. Not that it's even easy to sack underperforming team mates in 'real' work anymore. Also your high performing job might have performances clauses in it, footballers don't. Perhaps they should but they don't and it would be an absolute minefield to argue out.

I get you don't want him in the team anymore, but because you gave him a long deal on good money doesn't mean he should move on just because you think he should. If you want better freedom over players, give them one or two year deals and see how that works out for you?
 
dannyjo22 said:
It doesn't matter, firstly you can't be sold to somewhere you don't want to go. Even if they were giving him 6m. If that's even true then surely you should be saying good on him for not taking the money and fighting for his place? Secondly stop comparing it to your job. If Alex Ferguson behaved as he did in your job he wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes. Not that it's even easy to sack underperforming team mates in 'real' work anymore. Also your high performing job might have performances clauses in it, footballers don't. Perhaps they should but they don't and it would be an absolute minefield to argue out.

I get you don't want him in the team anymore, but because you gave him a long deal on good money doesn't mean he should move on just because you think he should. If you want better freedom over players, give them one or two year deals and see how that works out for you?
Click to expand...

I don't dispute the failures of the club, it's all on them, it doesn't make me think players aren't greedy, as are the owners. Legally, he has every right to stay.

I hope he's benched forever, alongside Sancho et al. Regarding me not being sold, I thought players dont always agree 'personal terms' with other clubs, which is basically the same as saying they don't want to go?
 
Last edited:
Very sad :D

IMG-2617.jpg
 
dannyjo22 said:
I get you don't want him in the team anymore, but because you gave him a long deal on good money doesn't mean he should move on just because you think he should. If you want better freedom over players, give them one or two year deals and see how that works out for you?
Click to expand...

I guess the main thing is that by having accepted the pay off and the transfer, he'd likely have been able to get himself out of the intense spotlight and potentially resurrected his career. Instead he chose to "stay and fight" but when you're then putting in awful performances when you are given the chance of gametime you're leaving yourself very open to abuse.
 
sigma said:
If it was any other job surely he'd get sacked for underperforming?
Click to expand...
Plenty of underperforming people don't get sacked. And when they do, it's usually at the end of a long drawn out process following a PIP etc.

It's extremely rare for footballers to get sacked unless they breach policies like drug taking and stuff.

As for him refusing a £6m payoff, he had another 3 years left on his contract which pays about £10m a year. Nobody in their right mind is going to swap £30m earnings over 3 years for £6m up front unless they can get another job paying enough to exceed the difference. AFAIK WHU were only going to pay £6m/year so he'd earn £18+6 = £24m over 3 years instead of the £30m he gets at MU for sitting on the bench.
 
Last edited:
HangTime said:
Plenty of underperforming people don't get sacked. And when they do, it's usually at the end of a long drawn out process following a PIP etc.

It's extremely rare for footballers to get sacked unless they breach policies like drug taking and stuff.

As for him refusing a £6m payoff, he had another 3 years left on his contract which pays about £10m a year. Nobody in their right mind is going to swap £30m earnings over 3 years for £6m up front unless they can get another job paying enough to exceed the difference. AFAIK WHU were only going to pay £6m/year so he'd earn £18+6 = £24m over 3 years instead of the £30m he gets at MU for sitting on the bench.
Click to expand...

I just checked Linkedin and my old boss is still there despite his entire managerial team leaving including myself. That was two years ago. Was in the business 15 years and he was by far the worst boss I ever had. Not because he was horrible or anything but he was completely useless and we were doing his job for him. We used to call him Ostrich because he always had his head in the sand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom