Reply With QuoteAt least by signing a contract he can't go for nothing, so if some other team comes in for him we get a fee.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Personally I do think he was hoping for another euro 16 performance and a bigger club would come in for him, like I've said he's been a great servent to the club but is very limited ASA footballer and we need betterOriginally Posted by Watamistakatomaka
At least by signing a contract he can't go for nothing, so if some other team comes in for him we get a fee.
Good point, and as Jamie said we deffo need better if we are to survive.
Didn’t Warnock say he’d given him his word before the world cup he’s sign but just wanted to concentrate on playing got Iceland ?
Even if he was looking for a better offer there’s nothing wrong with having ambition, calling him a wanker is just stupid.
What a lovely coming together of opinions,its like a Friday at Chequers
Good, now he can grow the hair on his head and shave that gruesome beard off
how do you know he hasn't already got parity - - or better???
Ive heard him and Warnock say he gave his word before the World Cup. It’s a good deal for everyone.
I'm speculating it but a number of our squad signed new contracts last season (Morrison, Peltier etc) and have got renewals. I would suggest that now we're in the Premier League, we could afford to offer more money that we could last autumn.
Haven't read this thread so the point may have been made but a 1 year contract really taking the piss. I posted about a month ago that in my opinion it was understandable him not signing whilst going for promotion and a world cup coming up but once we went up he should've put pen to paper.
Now we'll have a few months of will he/wont he sign towards the end of the season. Warnock should've called his bluff and told him it's 2 years or nothing - as he certainly wouldn't have had another offer from a PL club after two big injuries in the last 12 months and a mediocre world cup.
Why is it taking the piss? He doesn't want to play 46 games a season any more. He's done it for 9 years out of 10, so I can't say I blame him. If we go down, he's 100% leaving. If we stay up, we might keep him but we might agree that a move is best for him. It gives both parties flexibility and we've kept a hard working, leader who cares about the club for another year.
If it was just about not playing 46 games he'd have signed a one year deal the day after we got promoted.
He's waited to see if he has a stormer of a world cup and gets a top notch contract from elsewhere and now he's doing the same but waiting to see if he has a good season in the PL. Doesn't strike me as throwing himself into the team ethic/spirit that Warnock has instilled.
Why do grown men act like kids when it comes to football? He’s been at the club for almost 10 years and has contributed massively. He’s at an age where this or the next one will be his last biggest contract and wanted to see what’s best for his family. Footballers are just like you and me and want to see what the best opportunities are and have ambitions.
He'd verbally committed 6 weeks ago, and then he's stayed true to his word. He even signed it in Iceland. Shockingly, contracts aren't as simple as you may believe them to be and he's got to have a sit down with his family and discuss things. He's stayed, Warnock is happy and I'm happy. Warnock's comments on Gunnar in March:
"We have missed him," said Warnock. "I've fobbed it off and said others have done well and I know he wasn't in the team when I came, but since my day one here, he's been my number one midfielder so I have missed him.
"We'll cross that (his contract) when it comes to it, but one thing I do know is with nine games to go, you need to know who is in those trenches with you and I would like Gunnarsson alongside me because he's a top man and a top player."
Who's acting like a kid? Because I think he's taking the mick by signing a one year deal?
He's contributed for eight years but he's also been very well rewarded for it. I don't have a problem with people having ambition but when it's at the cost of the club it's a bit crap. If he'd signed a two year deal the club could've let him go for a couple of million next season. The will he/won't he sign was boring last season and it'll be the same next year. He's never made it in the Premier League so it's no surprise to me that he had zero offers from the PL and decided to give it another year.
He may have been here for seven years but I don't think that's through choice. Compare his attitude towards interest from other clubs and whitts' and they're worlds apart.
First of all, how could we get any money for Gunnar next summer if, as you say, he's had no contract offers this summer, when he's on a free? You say he's only stayed because he had to, so why would we get offers next summer when we've not had any of 7 seasons before. You've contradicted yourself.
Also, Gunnar has turned down offers to leave before, that's fairly common knowledge I thought. He's been a great servant to us and has played over 250 games. He doesn't want to play in the Championship, it's 8 games more than most leagues and he's nearly 30. Warnock has heaped praise on him, "a top man and a top player" and I've not seen anything to suggest otherwise.
How’s it at the cost of the club though? It’s been negotiated with both him and the club in mind. How do you know he’s had zero offers?
Also I imagine he’s looking for something abroad, he’s not British what reason would he have to stay here after this year?
Why would we sign someone who's had two big injuries and a mediocre world cup for two years?
^^this^^
Never dis the man as he's been a great servant and his experience will be invaluable but I don't think he's automatic choice in the mixer.
Places up for grabs and good competition.
Ok, I must be wrong and he must have turned down several offers to finally decide to put pen to paper on a one year deal (which is virtually unheard of for a 29-year-old player in the PL extending his contract.)
All hail the loyalty
Well done on missing the point entirely thoughOk, I must be wrong and he must have turned down several offers to finally decide to put pen to paper on a one year deal (which is virtually unheard of for a 29-year-old player in the PL extending his contract.)
All hail the loyalty
The sooner people grow out of thinking any player has “loyalty” to a club which they have no real connection to the better. Players have a short career and either want to win something or make as much money as possible.
What do you think about the loyalty of Reid or Murphy leaving their boyhood clubs?
If Gunnarsson/Zohore/Ralls had moved on last season for 3-5m I wouldn't have had an issue and I'd wish them well. But to run down your contract, wait for better offers through the WC, wait a further couple of weeks once out then sign for just a year when no decent teams came in, before being quoted as saying "never in doubt, I love this place, representing the capital of Wales" etc is poor imo but we'll agree to disagree.
Reid had a year left on his contract and let the club receive a very good fee. So he's shown ambition and ensured they receive a decent fee. Why would any club keep someone who's got a year on their deal, it offers the club absolutely nothing. That's why you see clubs shifting players on who have a year left on their contract unless they're worth very little like Greg Halford.
The club would keep someone with a year on their deal so they can play in matches for that year.
Why would the player care what fee the club gets? Other than the "loyalty bonus" cut they get off it, and why should they care?
Why is running down a contract seen as a bad thing? The club and player have agreed to that length of contract, surely there is nothing "disloyal" about honouring that contract.
And why is it ok for the club to shift a player on with one year left on his deal so the club can make money, Doesn't seem very loyal from the club towards the player. Or does loyalty only work one way?
I think most people are of the opinion that a 12 month deal is the best outcome for both parties - it's not about loyalty. Tying him down for longer than a year may not be ideal (given his recent injuries and his relative age) but should we wish to, we will always have the option to offer him a new contract down the line - should we deem him worth it.
Plus, should he feel like he's had enough of the UK after another bash at the PL and wants to ply his trade abroad after 12 months - he won't have to worry about transfer fees etc playing a part - possibly giving him greater options.
I think a 1 year deal is sensible.
Posting Permissions