wayne bridge - mancini is my only handicap

[GStar]

Don't see how anyone can have a bad word to say about Bridge on a personal level.

This is clearly a piece that has been set up to help engineer him a move and highlight his availability. The club want him to move on (Mancini interview) as does Bridge.

He needs to put it out there that any potential suitor isn't getting a journeyman and he's hungry to keep playing. Giving an 'exclusive' is probably the quickest and easiest way to get his profile raised.

People might not rate him, he might not be the calibre of player we are currently looking for, but he's done nothing wrong. Our club offered him those wages - so you're a bit dim if you're using that as a stick to beat him with. He's never 'whinged' until this (agenda driven) article - so you're plucking the fact he's a 'twat' etc out of thin air.

He needs to ensure clubs don't get the wrong idea of him, journalist has an opportunity to make a story. Nothing more to it

 

[Wheelsy]

Surely the people who expect City to keep paying £90k a week to Bridge for fuck all, would also expect a player to stay out the full length of his contract no matter what the wage, and never request a transfer?

"But he said he'd play with us for the next three and a half years!"

 

[GStar]

Surely the people who expect City to keep paying £90k a week to Bridge for fuck all, would also expect a player to stay out the full length of his contract no matter what the wage, and never request a transfer?

"But he said he'd play with us for the next three and a half years!"

How are those two scenarios comparable at all?

Your boss gives you a contract, it stipulates a wage the company are willing to pay you over a set number of years, you sign it. City (or any other club) shouldn't be able to rip up a contract because a player is no longer the flavour of the week.

The Tevez stuff shows that ultimately the contract is worth more the the player or the club's wishes. There's protection for both parties, which is the way it should be.

 

[Breaker]

hang on a minute, 9 pages in and not one of you have paid reference to the fact that apparently WENGER is sniffing round him on loan????!!!!!!! Surely this has got to be complete and utter bollocks?!!!

Exactly, It's almost as crazy as Almunia being at Arsenal. Also heard PSG and Juventus are interested, give me a break, the guy's about the standard Portsmouth.

Well Mourinho thought he was good enough to play 20+ games a year so there must be something there.

 

[MC ID]

You would think someone in the PL would be willing to give him a loan, or maybe even move if they could lower his wages especially when it will be a half decent deal for a time of year when players are usually overpriced.

For all we say it's a shame we pay him 90,000 a week it's the contract we asked him to sign and he's done everything we've asked of him.

 

[mcfc2009]

he proberly was good enough 7-8 years ago to play 20+ games for chelsea, doesn't mean he could play for us now tho. watching him last year for west ham, somebody would have to be crazy to pay even half of what he earns now.

 

[Corky]

He may be waiting for Monaco to call.

 

[bono]

maybe wayne Bridge was planning on sitting out another transfer window
maybe Mancini,s comments have backed him into a corner
maybe at last we have a leader who is shrewd, intelligent,and hard as nails
maybe its part of the reason mcfc are where we are now.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

How does this sound....

FUCK OFF BRIDGE YOU COMPLETE TWAT!

 

[bondsman]

I

City has honoured every contract it has signed. You could argue that Bridge is dishonouring the contract by not making any attempt to play football, by not trying to improve his game.

When City signs a player, for better or worse, they should see it thru. And treat the players properly, like the decent human beings most of them are. Funny how it was the biggest dick of all Tevez, that we made a poster of, gave an armband to, allowed to travel to his country whenever he pleased, and put in a request- Yet most were fine with him. But Bridge gives an interview wishing he played more, and suddenly this is a sin. But making him go train with kids, train alone like a pariah, and all the other crap shaite management does is okay. All these humiliating attempt to force out a guy who did nothing wrong but sign a contract to come play for City is embarrassing. The club and some of its fans are embarrassing. In the past many have pretended it was coz these players were unruly or dicks! But all along, I always knew the only dicks were the organizations. It is always the case. Bridge is a great example of a non-confrontational, professional. Who comes in when told, trains daily, never complains, but simply just isn't good enough.
Yet he is disrespected on purpose. Mistreated, by management, and roundly insulted by fans who have somehow convinced themselves that a man who chooses to collect on a promise made, is somehow without pride. Laughable really. Personally, I think it would show no pride at all if he gives up what is duly and rightly his, to satisfy a bunch of dicks and their fans who have spent the better of 1 year insulting and degrading him.

City bought an England international. The player should have strived to maintain that level of play. Instead, he turned his back on an England career, refused to improve his game, and regressed as a player, whilst earning four times as much in seven days as the average Bluemooner earns in a year. He's been at this for two years (minimum) now, pocketing around £5,000,000 after tax. No complaints from City though, the manager just responded to a question about what Bridge did on a Saturday. Strange that Bridge comes out to defend his actions when he should be nicely set up financially for life.

Bridge has not gotten worse as a player. He simply hasn't. Fans say that partly to convince themselves he is a greedy only after the money guy who doesn't care about football. This is a false claim. In his one game this season, he looked as good as he ever did playing for Chelsea or City early on. He just is not in the plan.

I can think of 90,000 reasons each week.

That is his money! Not City's. His money. It is time everyone gets that. My question is why shpuld he give up his right to HIS money to help City?

quote]No business writes off assets like this. City will pay him while they have to, but try to sell him at the same time, or try to loan him so someone else can pay what they can afford of his wage.

Bridge is fine with that. So long as his paycheck reads 90grand a week, it is all good. It could be, Winthrop FC paying 1% for all he cares. But for the 3 years of his already signed contract, Wayne Bridge MUST, and should recieve 90K a week unfailingly. Whether CIty want to pay it all or get someone else to do part paying for Bridge's services, is all up to City.
But those asking for a paycut are silly and irrational.

[

-- Sat Dec 24, 2011 8:02 am --

What the hell does "Pride" have to do with this? Bridge should stay and collect every penny he is contracted to get. If City wants him out, fire him and pay the rest of his wages.

Don't know why everyone is so much on the back of players who came to City in good faith. No one put a gun to CIty's head when they doled out these deals. So City should stand by the deals. And City fans should stop acting like 4 year old pricks who can't see beyond their infantile positions.

Just like many before him, Bridge has done nothing wrong. He was courted by City, contracted by City, and promised to be paid by City. That City has now gone on to find others who are better is not Bridges fault. Bridge never advertised himself as the best player alive. If CIty was poor in its evaluations of worth, that too is City's fault. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Which is what City and infant-like section of our fanbase want.

The reason Bridge is on 90k a week is coz City wanted to make it hard for other teams to compete with the advantages of coming to City. But we should also realize that these also has its downsides. As in players we deem unfit or not good enough too will be hard to discard once we have signed them. This attitude that said players should now help us out, is as stupid as it is laughable.

Why should Bridge work in the interest of Manchester City. I say City pay off the contracts of players they don't want, or let them off on a free. And can we stop with the pride argument. It is annoying!

It goes deeper than that. Last week there was a thread on here entitled "Classic Bobby Manc" in which Mancini was applauded lauded and hailed a genius for publicly taking the piss out of Bridge to the press.

Yet if you read this thread every other post is about what **** Bridge is for going to the press.

I've not read the Mail version because frankly, I'm sure it's full of tabloid sensationalist language and overblown rhetoric. The Independent interview I've just finished reading and it's an ok read. Bridge clearly feels that since he's kept his own council over the last year or so, even after being made to train with the kids, that Mancini shouldn't have so publicly tried to humiliate him. It happens, there's no winners, but I certainly don't see Bridge as anything other than another footballer City signed when Sheikh Mansour first came in, who they know want rid of solely on their own terms.

City fans often bend over backwards to give management a break :( They can't seem to differentiate between the club they support and the organization behind it. I make that distinction all the time. Love City First, it's players 2nd, it's coach 3rd, it's owner 4th. But dn't give a fuck about management![/quote]

Dax I sorry you talking Bollocks bridge has got worse as a player the club has not disrupted him nor has mancini he just isn't good enough end if. He knows it himself I'm sure.