Footballers who just collect wages....

[Monsell1976]

3 hours ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Think Drinky had a bit of a chip on his shoulder at failing at one of the biggest clubs in the world and then being offered the chance to join the 2nd most successful club since 04 in the country, you can't really blame him for taking it. The people who bum kante to death but give Drinky's move stick are unbelievable. Shame how its worked out, but he's earning good money and he's already achieved a premier league title. 

 For me if I remember it right, he was forcing a move as city didn’t have time to replace him or want him to go, basically faked an injury, and once he got his own way, was shown in full training at Chelsea the next day.

 

 Kante is totally different, I believe he had a release clause, in hindsight a very low one, which was triggered and he wanted to go.

 

Mahrez nearly spoiled his time here with the sulk in the jan, but different again, he was according to him told he could move if the right money was offered, I believe 45 mil, it was and his moved was declined, but got on with it in the end.

 

 I have no problem with players leaving us for bigger clubs, but if the rumours are true of him forcing a move, he basically shat on the club, so he’s only got himself to blame, signing for a club who’s manager didn’t want him.

 

 There is a lesson for this new crop of our players, yes they could get move’s, they could be successful like kante, or there game time gets minimal and their career stalls.

 

[Guest Col city fan]

9 hours ago, Monsell1976 said:

 For me if I remember it right, he was forcing a move as city didn’t have time to replace him or want him to go, basically faked an injury, and once he got his own way, was shown in full training at Chelsea the next day.

 

 Kante is totally different, I believe he had a release clause, in hindsight a very low one, which was triggered and he wanted to go.

 

Mahrez nearly spoiled his time here with the sulk in the jan, but different again, he was according to him told he could move if the right money was offered, I believe 45 mil, it was and his moved was declined, but got on with it in the end.

 

 I have no problem with players leaving us for bigger clubs, but if the rumours are true of him forcing a move, he basically shat on the club, so he’s only got himself to blame, signing for a club who’s manager didn’t want him.

 

 There is a lesson for this new crop of our players, yes they could get move’s, they could be successful like kante, or there game time gets minimal and their career stalls.

 

Great post

[Rob1742]

On 30/05/2019 at 17:10, koop. said:

Oh Danny boy! 

 

Chelsea name a ridiculous amount of subs last night, 11 or 12? And Danny Drinkwater still cant get on the bench. 

 

Who ever advised him to move was purely thinking about his pocket

 

Drinkwater clearly thought he was either better than he is or just fancied collecting some money and couldnt be bothered to play anymore 

 

Why do players suddenly decide to collect wages over playing football? 

 

Baffles me 

Belief in himself that he could do well at Chelsea, together with what was probably a huge salary benefit.

 

Baffles me that people find it strange that anyone would have decided not to make that move. 

 

I certainly would have given it a shot. 

 

 

[Koke]

On 31/05/2019 at 14:24, surrifox said:

yes ol' Winston set the standard for this. I don't remember what he was pulling in  and its probably peanuts compared to the likes of Sanchez but it seemed obscene at the time

 

Bogarde was apparently on £50k a week which was a huge amount in the early 2000s for an average player. It'll be like giving Zappacosta £200k a week today.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

4 hours ago, Rob1742 said:

Belief in himself that he could do well at Chelsea, together with what was probably a huge salary benefit.

 

Baffles me that people find it strange that anyone would have decided not to make that move. 

 

I certainly would have given it a shot. 

 

 

Big money for old rope. He's doing nothing for that fat salary. Seems immoral to me, when many people have to flog their guts out, just to survive.

[Koke]

4 hours ago, Koke said:

 

Bogarde was apparently on £50k a week which was a huge amount in the early 2000s for an average player. It'll be like giving Zappacosta £200k a week today.

 

According to Bogarde, it would be next to impossible to find a team that would offer him a contract comparable to the one he had at Chelsea: he was astounded at the salary the club had agreed on, as his value depreciated severely due to lack of first-team action, and decided to stay and honour his contract to the letter and appear for training every day, despite being only rarely selected to play.^[15]Of his contract he said, "Why should I throw fifteen million Euro away when it is already mine? At the moment I signed it was in fact my money, my contract"; in the end, he only appeared 11 times during his four-year tenure, reportedly earning £40,000 a week during this period.^[16][17][18]

After playing as a substitute against Ipswich Town on Boxing Day in 2000,^[19] Bogarde only played one more competitive match before his contract expired in July 2004. This was from the bench, against Gillingham for that season's League Cup on 6 November 2002.^[20]

During his spell at Stamford Bridge, the club attempted to sell Bogarde due to his large salary, and demoted him to the reserve and youth teams in an effort to force him to leave. In response to press criticism, he responded: 'This world is about money, so when you are offered those millions you take them. Few people will ever earn so many. I am one of the few fortunates who do. I may be one of the worst buys in the history of the Premiership but I don't care.'^[21]

[sm1]

10/10 for honesty 

[Raw Dykes]

2 hours ago, Koke said:

 

According to Bogarde, it would be next to impossible to find a team that would offer him a contract comparable to the one he had at Chelsea: he was astounded at the salary the club had agreed on, as his value depreciated severely due to lack of first-team action, and decided to stay and honour his contract to the letter and appear for training every day, despite being only rarely selected to play.^[15]Of his contract he said, "Why should I throw fifteen million Euro away when it is already mine? At the moment I signed it was in fact my money, my contract"; in the end, he only appeared 11 times during his four-year tenure, reportedly earning £40,000 a week during this period.^[16][17][18]

After playing as a substitute against Ipswich Town on Boxing Day in 2000,^[19] Bogarde only played one more competitive match before his contract expired in July 2004. This was from the bench, against Gillingham for that season's League Cup on 6 November 2002.^[20]

During his spell at Stamford Bridge, the club attempted to sell Bogarde due to his large salary, and demoted him to the reserve and youth teams in an effort to force him to leave. In response to press criticism, he responded: 'This world is about money, so when you are offered those millions you take them. Few people will ever earn so many. I am one of the few fortunates who do. I may be one of the worst buys in the history of the Premiership but I don't care.'^[21]

I can't fault him, really. It's the club's mistake for offering the contract in the first place. I'm sure more than a few of us would do the same thing.

 

I know people will say that pros should want to be playing every week, but if someone gets a contract that will set them, their children, grandchildren, etc. up for life, then they'd have to seriously consider taking it, even if they know there's a good chance they'll be warming the bench for a few years. If that player has already enjoyed a good career beforehand, or still has time to establish themselves as first choice at another club after, then I think they'd be mad to turn it down.

 

If the club was in financial trouble, then that would muddy the waters somewhat, but it's still not the player's fault he was given more money than he's worth.

[Monsell1976]

11 hours ago, Rob1742 said:

Belief in himself that he could do well at Chelsea, together with what was probably a huge salary benefit.

 

Baffles me that people find it strange that anyone would have decided not to make that move. 

 

I certainly would have given it a shot. 

 

 

 I think all in all it was a great deal for drinkwater and city.

 

 If I remember right before the freak season a lot of fans on here where calling him average, and then the title winning season, when everyone played the best they ever will play for a whole season, he took advantage and set himself up for life, can’t blame the lad, and we made 34 million profit.

 

 Unfortunately for him it hasn’t worked because he isn’t any where near the standard of Chelsea’s other players in his position, and I struggle to see who pays a fee and massive wages, for a just above average player, he might just have to sit his contract out, and play again in a few seasons, or go on loan, but again wages becomes a problem.

 

 Can’t feel sorry for him, but don’t want him back either