nomorethaksintimes
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 1,008
He's definitely going now. Liverpool haven't handled it particularly well.
Football clubs have to realise they can't treat 20 year old men like kids and patronise them for their own selfish agendas, Carragher's quote last night sums up this attitude.
'For a 20-year-old kid to be taking on Liverpool Football Club over a contract - to the pit of my stomach that just winds me up, it angers me.'
Sterling is a professional and is entitled to consider all his options, exactly the same as Gerrard or any other 30 year old veteran is. If I was 20, I wouldn't have been very happy with all those 'greed' accusations earlier on in the season just because I wanted to play alongside better players - no wonder he did that press conference without the club's permission. All this talk of him owing Liverpool something is nonsense - if he had failed at their academy they wouldn't have given him a job in the club office would they? In fact, Sterling is going to make Liverpool a lot of money. Sterling is far too young to remember Liverpool being a genuine force (:D) so why should he show deference to the hallowed 'Liverpool Football Club' and not just view it as a normal employee/employer contract. If Liverpool feel they gave him additional protection during the laughing gas/shisha videos - then that was their mistake, a steep fine and a warning not to do it again - the same as you'd give a 25 year old pro- would have sufficed.
We made a similar mistake ages ago when we went Sturridge go because he wanted 60k a week - was this greed or just a young man and agent acting in his best interests who knew his worth in a free market? - I'd argue it's more of the latter.
As for Sterling, he's not an idiot and won't care one jot that the likes of Rodwell, Sinclair and Johnson (now all at midtable clubs) failed at City. He's much more likely to look at the likes of Barry, Lescott, Milner and Hart who have generally thrived on the competition for places.
Football clubs have to realise they can't treat 20 year old men like kids and patronise them for their own selfish agendas, Carragher's quote last night sums up this attitude.
'For a 20-year-old kid to be taking on Liverpool Football Club over a contract - to the pit of my stomach that just winds me up, it angers me.'
Sterling is a professional and is entitled to consider all his options, exactly the same as Gerrard or any other 30 year old veteran is. If I was 20, I wouldn't have been very happy with all those 'greed' accusations earlier on in the season just because I wanted to play alongside better players - no wonder he did that press conference without the club's permission. All this talk of him owing Liverpool something is nonsense - if he had failed at their academy they wouldn't have given him a job in the club office would they? In fact, Sterling is going to make Liverpool a lot of money. Sterling is far too young to remember Liverpool being a genuine force (:D) so why should he show deference to the hallowed 'Liverpool Football Club' and not just view it as a normal employee/employer contract. If Liverpool feel they gave him additional protection during the laughing gas/shisha videos - then that was their mistake, a steep fine and a warning not to do it again - the same as you'd give a 25 year old pro- would have sufficed.
We made a similar mistake ages ago when we went Sturridge go because he wanted 60k a week - was this greed or just a young man and agent acting in his best interests who knew his worth in a free market? - I'd argue it's more of the latter.
As for Sterling, he's not an idiot and won't care one jot that the likes of Rodwell, Sinclair and Johnson (now all at midtable clubs) failed at City. He's much more likely to look at the likes of Barry, Lescott, Milner and Hart who have generally thrived on the competition for places.