Ulloa

[Babylon]

39 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

 

Well personally he seems to me to be reasonably honest as a footballer, he kept his mouth shut when brighton kept turning down perfectly reasonable bids for him, he's played his bit part last season. It's all well saying it's what's best for us now he's stuck here but if situations have changed and he has been given assurances we've not followed up on that's poor management by the club. I admit this is me reading between the lines without opening the book but that's what are lot of us are left doing both with this current situation and the wider situation at the club.

 

Ultimately I don't see how keeping him here is best for us, even if we can force him to play I don't want a player who has done what he's done here any longer, think it's safe to say he's not going to even come close to trying.

 

it basically comes down to not wanting Sunderland to have him and much like the Jeffrey situation if we are that worried about Sunderland and a player of Ulloas limitations coming back to haunt us to the extent we are willing to turn down 7 million and continue to pay his wages for six months at least I am very worried about where we are at.

I am worried about where we're at, we're that bad it's going to the wire and a single point could do us.

[MC Prussian]

13 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

It's obvious that Ulloa didn't play as big a part as some of the star names but I think he's got a stronger case than a lot of people on here are saying. Don't forget that we brought in someone who is naturally going to jump above him in the pecking order as a panic buy on deadline day.

 

I hate agents but Ulloa's was being truthful and at least you can say it's for footballing reasons rather than money.

 

Now Ranieri's telling Ulloa again that he wants him to stay?

 

It's not an isolated incident either. For all the stick Schlupp gets, he got the exact same treatment and he ended up being kept here against his will.

 

I don't have a jot of respect for players who take the piss out of their clubs because they want a bit more money, but both Ulloa & Schlupp I think just wanted games and we were denying them that. I cannot fathom why we didn't sell Schlupp in August.

I mean the money part is just an aspect of it - I can understand a footballer trying to pursue his ultimate goal and the main reason most of them start such a career - they want to play football and they do it for the love of the game.

 

In Ulloa's case, the sportive argument is certainly stronger than with others. He played a big part in us staying up and has up until now or up until recently never come out with anything negative or disrespectful aimed at the club or his teammates. Nobody has.

 

From his perspective, he must feel very hard done by, seeing that he once managed to score eleven goals in one PL campaign - and now, sitting on the bench, he can watch Okazaki fall on his behind more often than he hits a ball at the opposing keeper and marvel at a so far underwhelming Slimani ahead of him in the pecking order - a player that cost four times his amount, but one that has not fulfilled the expectations or his promise and who is on course for less than 10 goals this season.

 

Our man management is getting out of hand and it's sad to see it's gotten to this point. It's just a complete shambles, and I'm not talking about the Ulloa situation here only.

[funkyrobot]

3 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

That's irrelevant. He wants to play regular football and we don't give him that despite our other strikers playing like crap and now we won't let him leave because we can't get any other mugs to join us

It's purely because the club who are interested and who have offered the least derisory offer is a direct rival to us (Sunderland). If Alaves or Galatasary offered £9 million I think the club would be fine to let him go as he's unhappy and we aren't strengthening a rival. It's basic stuff and I'm surprised Ulloa and his agent can't understand this. It's standard practise to not sell to a rival and rarely occurs unless money is urgently required by the selling club. Disappointing reaction by Leo. Man up and take a leaf out of Schweinsteiger's book of how to deal with being benched in a classy manner that endears you to the fans! 

[foxfanazer]

3 minutes ago, murphy said:

If you can defend a player that has gone on strike against your own club then I can't understand that.  He has crossed the line.

 

By the way, if you had read my post properly you might have understood that I was saying that I would like to be as hard done to he has... oh never mind.

I did read it but didn't find it interesting enough to reply to. You're not on the same money as he is so of course you would. Doesn't mean he should watch his career dwindle away just because the club chose to pay a player they don't want 40k a week

[Innovindil]

What a pathetic little bitch. If ANYONE but a relegation rival had come in with an acceptable offer we'd have let him go. You can't do anymore than that, we're not going to sell him for £1.7mill are we ffs.

 

Absolutely pathetic.

[nnfox]

I think this has been fed to him by his agent. We are getting towards the end of the window and Leo wants out which is understandable.  If there is an agreement with the club that he can go for 4-5m then that's fine too.  The problem is that the only acceptable bid that has come in is from a bottom 6 rival and we quite rightly don't want to sell to Sunderland.  If say, Everton, Stoke, WBA or similar came in with the same bid then he'd be off I'm sure.

 

Unfortunately though he has gone public in a classless way which harms his reputation as a classy pro.  Effectively what he has done is issue a "Come and get me" plea to every club in Europe outside the bottom 6 and put a price tag on his head.

 

We'll probably accept 3m tomorrow from Brighton of something like that.

[NewEnglandFox]

Some real Ostriches in this thread. Have you all been on holiday for 6 months? Have you not realized we were already in ****ing shambles.

[MPH]

3 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

In your opinion. Sounds to me like he's been promised a lot of things that have turned out not to be true. Think it's easier to jump on the 'modern footballers are only in it for the money' bandwagon. Has he ever struck you as a trouble causerie before when he's been stuck on the bench for months

 

 

 

 

Never said he was only in it for the money, Simply said hes being paid a fair wack and has signed a contract. Why give footballers special treatment? If i had signed a contract at work i would be expected to see it out. thats why its called a contract!

 

 

And this 'sounds like he has been promised lots of things.  Should maybe hear Ranieri's side of things before jumping to conclusions. Two sides to every coin and all that.

[murphy]

1 minute ago, foxfanazer said:

I did read it but didn't find it interesting enough to reply to. You're not on the same money as he is so of course you would. Doesn't mean he should watch his career dwindle away just because the club chose to pay a player they don't want 40k a week

err... But you did reply.

 

[foxfanazer]

4 minutes ago, murphy said:

err... But you did reply.

 

Because you whined 

[BenTheFox]

I'm so disappointed in him. We're currently in a relegation battle and he's still valued by the club enough that we won't sell him to a relegation rival or sell him for a cheap fee. He's always came across as an honest professional so it does make you wonder what is going on at the club. Having said that, he can surely understand why the club haven't accepted any offers yet. 

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

Sad that it's come to this.

[murphy]

1 minute ago, foxfanazer said:

Because you whined 

Nope, still wrong, you just replied.

 

Anyway, talking of whining, we can agree to differ on whether you think he has been treated badly or not and whether you think it is a good idea for us to strengthen direct relegation rivals.  The point is the way that Leo has behaved - like a spoilt little bitch.  You can try and defend the indefensible if you want.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Sad that it's come to this.

That much i think we can all agree on 

[chapero82]

14 minutes ago, NewEnglandFox said:

Some real Ostriches in this thread. Have you all been on holiday for 6 months? Have you not realized we were already in ****ing shambles.

I did but I was accused of being somebody who was about to slit there wrists ... literally 

[Salieri]

He should never have been considered a 'legend' before this sorry saga and certainly shouldn't be now 

[foxfanazer]

Just now, murphy said:

Nope, still wrong, you just replied.

 

Anyway, talking of whining, we can agree to differ on whether you think he has been treated badly or not and whether you think it is a good idea for us to strengthen direct relegation rivals.  The point is the way that Leo has behaved - like a spoilt little bitch.  You can try and defend the indefensible if you want.

And you can blindly defend the club

[FoxyPalace.com]

Going to be great atmosphere on the coach to Burnley tonight/tomorrow.

 

Ranieri is going to go berzerk.

[Tielemans63]

Don't have a problem with him wanting to leave, don't have a problem with him requesting a transfer, but to refuse to play for the club again is completely unacceptable IMHO. There are no circumstances under which that's okay, even if you have had promises made and broken. Refusing to play for your club is a cancer on the game. 

[MPH]

 

 

Its also mildly amusing that a player , who isnt being picked for the team, has said he is refusing to play..

[Great Boos Up]

But I've only just learnt to sing the last line of his chant without getting tongue tied....and now this!

 

For two years it came out "But he saw Scholes.."

[brucey]

reckon Hernandez had something to do with this? They were best buddies

[char123]

I strongly suspect he did it without the club's permission.

he did according to rob dorsett

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[yorkie1999]

29 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

 

 

Never said he was only in it for the money, Simply said hes being paid a fair wack and has signed a contract. Why give footballers special treatment? If i had signed a contract at work i would be expected to see it out. thats why its called a contract!

 

 

And this 'sounds like he has been promised lots of things.  Should maybe hear Ranieri's side of things before jumping to conclusions. Two sides to every coin and all that.

Players are going to get ever increasing powers, which is wrong as it's the club that pay and develop them. There should be a rule saying OK you can leave, but the new club pays your wages and you can't play until your contracts up. Give the buying club the problem, not the club that has invested time, money and made that player part of their plans.

[Ikon_Klow]

I would love to say that I am surprised by all this but I am not. Sadly, the club's management have disappeared up their own behind. This is really bad man management that will continue to erode team spirit further. Claudio's CV seems to show that he turns up, makes an impact and then gradually goes down hill before getting sacked (Greece apart where the impact never happened). The owners need to realise that they are surrounding themselves with 'yes' people. Fingers crossed for the next 24 hours.