Lynch denied transfer request

[BigGully]

Who's the prat - the player for sitting out his 4 year £40k a week contract (or whatever it was), or the pillock who signed him on those terms ?

I think Winston played a BLINDER there. His autobiography "This Negro Bows For No-one" is probably an interesting read...

If you accept that he could of made a few million even if he left on a lesser contract at another club, the 4 year absence from any kinda football might of cost him dearly in the longer term.

I am all for player power, but 4 years of not doing anything whilst in his prime is wasteful by any interpretation.

There would of been many many negotiations throughout that time and an agreement should of been made, but someone was being greedy no doubt, maybe it was the player maybe the club, who knows.

But as a player if you get to the point where the club wont budge and the option remains to stay inactive or move on to continue your career whilst losing only some of your vast wealth, I would grudgingly continue my career.

 

[Easy 10]

Absolutely. It's a bit like those posters that slag off John Terry or Frank Lampard for earning £150k a week. I'd like to know how many of those people that criticise them have gone into wage negotiations and said "no £x is far too much, I'll work for you for £x/2 quite happily".

Well...I think theres a slight difference. Bogarde just happily took what he was given. Lampard (the badge-kisser extraordinaire remember) was offered a monstrous amount of money but STILL demanded more to stay. And then he comes out with the usual tedious guff about his love for the club etc etc.

His "love" for Chelsea is only given on the provision of them tipping obscene amounts of cash into his bank account every week. It insults the intelligence when he dresses it up as anything else.

 

[BigGully]

Absolutely. It's a bit like those posters that slag off John Terry or Frank Lampard for earning £150k a week. I'd like to know how many of those people that criticise them have gone into wage negotiations and said "no £x is far too much, I'll work for you for £x/2 quite happily".

Hold on, I never critisise wages some players receive, although it all becomes a blur after say £20,000 a week.

You gotta remember that he might of lost out financially and I accept this is critical to anybody, but it wasnt a choice between wealth and poverty, it was choice between fantastic wealth and vast wealth, if you get what I mean !!

And he chose to nick another million quid whilst discontinuing his career as a professional footballer.

 

[Easy 10]

If you accept that he could of made a few million even if he left on a lesser contract at another club, the 4 year absence from any kinda football might of cost him dearly in the longer term.

I am all for player power, but 4 years of not doing anything whilst in his prime is wasteful by any interpretation.

There would of been many many negotiations throughout that time and an agreement should of been made, but someone was being greedy no doubt, maybe it was the player maybe the club, who knows.

But as a player if you get to the point where the club wont budge and the option remains to stay inactive or move on to continue your career whilst losing only some of your vast wealth, I would grudgingly continue my career.

A waste of a career for sure, but then it depends what you want from life. He was happy to trouser £8m, which on top of what he'd already earned, would presumably have been enough to make him and his family financially secure. He was 33 by the time his Chelsea deal ran out, so was never going to get another deal elsewhere on anything LIKE the kind of money Chelsea threw at him. He'd played for his country 20 times and appeared in a World Cup, perhaps his footballing ambitions ended there. Its not the case that all footballers want to play on for as long as they can. Bogarde had probably had enough, and was quite happy to take the easy life Chelsea so readily offered him.

 

[sten_super]

Well...I think theres a slight difference. Bogarde just happily took what he was given. Lampard (the badge-kisser extraordinaire remember) was offered a monstrous amount of money but STILL demanded more to stay. And then he comes out with the usual tedious guff about his love for the club etc etc.

His "love" for Chelsea is only given on the provision of them tipping obscene amounts of cash into his bank account every week. It insults the intelligence when he dresses it up as anything else.

Oh I agree with this. Posturing of players, and all this 'love' nonsense is horrific.

Hold on, I never critisise wages some players receive, although it all becomes a blur after say £20,000 a week.

You gotta remember that he might of lost out financially and I accept this is critical to anybody, but it wasnt a choice between wealth and poverty, it was choice between fantastic wealth and vast wealth, if you get what I mean !!

And he chose to nick another million quid whilst discontinuing his career as a professional footballer.

It wasn't aimed particularly at you, but there are people on here that criticise him merely for earning that much, and for negotiating. As I said, we all negotiate our pay to get the best deal we can for ourselves. Why should footballers be any different?

Of course at the level of salary they receive any meaningful comparison becomes difficult, but if you were say a high-level banker in the city (where the average length of career is probably somewhat similar to that of a footballer; people get out when they can 'afford' to, to get a less-pressured job), would you rather move to a different, smaller firm, where you would get a better job but say £150k a year, or stay in your current job on £300k? Knowing that you only want to work in the industry for another 5 years or so.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is; the career of a footballer is short, and they want to put themselves in the best financial situation they can for the long time they have after their career. If that means being a bit dissatisfied in the short term, then I think it's something some (probably most) of them are willing to accept.

 

[BigGully]

A waste of a career for sure, but then it depends what you want from life. He was happy to trouser £8m, which on top of what he'd already earned, would presumably have been enough to make him and his family financially secure. He was 33 by the time his Chelsea deal ran out, so was never going to get another deal elsewhere on anything LIKE the kind of money Chelsea threw at him. He'd played for his country 20 times and appeared in a World Cup, perhaps his footballing ambitions ended there. Its not the case that all footballers want to play on for as long as they can. Bogarde had probably had enough, and was quite happy to take the easy life Chelsea so readily offered him.

Maybe, but his decision to retire came when he was 29 and he took the money.

I have no doubt that maybe the club might of been unreasonable at times, clubs generally are with players when money is involved, but it seems to move on at 29 to another top league and similar riches might of been an option.

Or maybe Chelsea just agreed a contract so far overpriced for the player that they only have themselves to blame.