Mangala joins Valencia on a Permanent deal

[Henkeman]

Yeah I’m not in favour of players running their contracts all the way down and depriving the selling club of a fee in order to get more for themselves. If they are at the end of their career that’s different.

I think City were great with Milner but he pretended he would negotiate with City right till the end when Liverpool had long had an agreement that if he ran it down and there was no fee to be paid to City then Milner would get a big signing on fee. If every player did that it would be far from ideal. It’s a tactic that Bayern in particularly go in for and they call it “respecting a players contract” and they continually rip off clubs like Dortmund with it.

Imagine if we had told Sterling to do the same...the uproar!

What players say is less important to me than what they do. Tevez was no City fan but I loved how hard he worked. But at least you are applying your personal preferences fairly when applying them to different players.

If clubs don't want to risk players running down contracts, then they can give them a pay as you play contract. They don't do that because they want to retain a saleable asset over a period of time. All contracts are done for the benefit of both sides, it's not reasonable to think it should be about the advantage to the club alone. If a player is given a contract, they're totally entitled to run it down, that's the nature of it.

For Milner, I should emphasise that I don't suddenly have a hatred of him for what he said, it was just lacking in a bit of class and dignity. His choice, and I don't lose any sleep over it.

I just can't get upset in any way about a player adhering to the terms of the contract the club offered them. They're done nothing wrong, and I don't believe we should expect anything different of them.

 

[Cobwebcat]

If clubs don't want to risk players running down contracts, then they can give them a pay as you play contract. They don't do that because they want to retain a saleable asset over a period of time. All contracts are done for the benefit of both sides, it's not reasonable to think it should be about the advantage to the club alone. If a player is given a contract, they're totally entitled to run it down, that's the nature of it.

For Milner, I should emphasise that I don't suddenly have a hatred of him for what he said, it was just lacking in a bit of class and dignity. His choice, and I don't lose any sleep over it.

I just can't get upset in any way about a player adhering to the terms of the contract the club offered them. They're done nothing wrong, and I don't believe we should expect anything different of them.

That’s well argued but the fact is that the vast majority of players don’t do it for whatever reason. Think of the times when we have gone in for a player with not long to go on his contract and the club suddenly extends the contract, with the players agreement, so the club gets more.

 

[Henkeman]

That’s well argued but the fact is that the vast majority of players don’t do it for whatever reason. Think of the times when we have gone in for a player with not long to go on his contract and the club suddenly extends the contract, with the players agreement, so the club gets more.

Sure. And that's fine - that's their choice too.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Sure. And that's fine - that's their choice too.

Correct and I think more of the players that don’t run their contracts down rather than those that do particularly ones that don’t play.

 

[Henkeman]

Correct and I think more of the players that don’t run their contracts down rather than those that do particularly ones that don’t play.

Fair enough, your call. I don't think more or less of either - players do what works best for them. Aaron Ramsey would quite like a new contract with Arsenal, but they aren't giving him one. So the club has the choice as well as the player. Many a player would love to stay at the club they're at and don't get that choice. Both sides take decisions in their own interest.

 

[BlueSkyBlue]

If I am under contract to a company on £100k a week and they tell me "You are redundant and you have two choices: a) stay til the end of your contract and earn what we promised you, or b) you could find another club, they probably won't pay you as much" - I'd choose A).

We expect footballers to be different because of the passion involved.

 

[MeatHunterrr]

Zero sympathy for Mangala. He has had multiple opportunities to go and rebuild his career. He has only himself to blame that he has to face 90% wage cut in his next deal.

This is why I don't understand why some say "but he doesn't cry to rhe press" well, hes not even in a position to cry because he has had offers to go and play.

 

[Henkeman]

If I am under contract to a company on £100k a week and they tell me "You are redundant and you have two choices: a) stay til the end of your contract and earn what we promised you, or b) you could find another club, they probably won't pay you as much" - I'd choose A).

We expect footballers to be different because of the passion involved.

Redundancy is quite a good way of looking at it. Good call.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Redundancy is quite a good way of looking at it. Good call.

Really?

Redundancy does not describe Mangala’s situation at all. I think there might be a few people that have experienced that in real life that might take exception to that comparison.

That’s a step too far for me. I’m not even going to argue the point it’s that ridiculous.

 

[Henkeman]

Really?

Redundancy does not describe Mangala’s situation at all. I think there might be a few people that have experienced that in real life that might take exception to that comparison.

That’s a step too far for me. I’m not even going to argue the point it’s that ridiculous.

Don't care if they do. The principle is the same, he's being paid up to the end of his contract and is no longer required as an employee. Just because the numbers are bigger doesn't change that. If people want to be offended, that's their decision.