pascell
Full Member
27, locked into a contract for 3+1 years, played 100 games in 5 season and he's injury prone. Well done for all involved in getting him to sign, major coup.
g = window.googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; window.googletag = googletag; googletag.cmd.push(function() { var interstitialSlot = googletag.defineOutOfPageSlot('/17085479/redcafe_gam_interstitial', googletag.enums.OutOfPageFormat.INTERSTITIAL); if (interstitialSlot) { interstitialSlot.addService(googletag.pubads()); } });
The ironyThis is the most stupid thing since Jones was given a long term contract. I said it back then and I'll say it now. The club had learnt nothing from Jones's and Sanchez saga. It also reveals what I always feared...ie Jon Murtough is just a moron. He's been involved throughout this 8 tragic years and despite all of that he was still promoted.
So what? Both are incredibly injury prone and quite frankly they are not good enough. Why should we keep on giving long term contracts to protect the value of players no one would want to touch even with a barge pole? This is no different to when we gave a long term contract to Jones. How that worked out for us?There was a genuine risk we’d lose both him and Axel this summer which would have been too much for uncertainty so happy he’s signed.
Don't you think that giving Bailly and Jones long term contracts as a mistake?The irony
He’s had his best season in years this year. You say so what - both Axel and Bailly had 1 year left on their deals. Replacing both whilst also signing the other players we need was going to be very difficult. He’s going to be 4th choice unless he finally steps up - everyone fecking chill.So what? Both are incredibly injury prone and quite frankly they are not good enough. Why should we keep on giving long term contracts to protect the value of players no one would want to touch even with a barge pole? This is no different to when we gave a long term contract to Jones. How that worked out for us?
No one wants injury prone players unless they're brilliant. So what will happen now is that Bailly will sit on his contract just as Phil Jones is doing. When Ole asks for a new CB that he's already have 5 CB (Maguire, Lindelof, Tuanzebe, Jones and Bailly) and he won't be allowed to buy unless he sells first. Good luck finding buyers for the likes of Jones or Bailly.I used to think we’d only take such decisions to protect any resale value, but I know better these days
Don’t actually mind Bailly as a player but he’s not fit often enough imo.
Yep, I agree, hence the smiley in my post, mocking that sentiment. Especially when a player is mostly injured.No one wants injury prone players unless they're brilliant. So what will happen now is that Bailly will sit on his contract just as Phil Jones is doing. When Ole asks for a new CB that he's already have 5 CB (Maguire, Lindelof, Tuanzebe, Jones and Bailly) and he won't be allowed to buy unless he sells first. Good luck finding buyers for the likes of Jones or Bailly.
He played just 17 games for us this season and he has an injury history which is as long as an arm. We've got Lindelof, Maguire and 3 crocks who quite frankly are nowhere near as good to play for this club. If this club is so skint not to add a CB then we should get one on the cheap or give Bailly a short term contract. How many years must pass before players will be stopped from taking us for a ride?He’s had his best season in years this year. You say so what - both Axel and Bailly had 1 year left on their deals. Replacing both whilst also signing the other players we need was going to be very difficult. He’s going to be 4th choice unless he finally steps up - everyone fecking chill.
Bailly played only 15 matches this season including only 8 in the league. He doesn't need replacing. He barely even plays anyway. A CB from the academy will probably be more useful at this point.He’s had his best season in years this year. You say so what - both Axel and Bailly had 1 year left on their deals. Replacing both whilst also signing the other players we need was going to be very difficult. He’s going to be 4th choice unless he finally steps up - everyone fecking chill.
I’d prefer Axel stay too but unfortunately we need an upgrade on Lindelof which would keep Axel 4th choice. He needs to leave for the good of his career.Bailly played only 15 matches this season including only 8 in the league. He doesn't need replacing. He barely even plays anyway. A CB from the academy will probably be more useful at this point.
What people fail to appreciate is that our wage budget has a limit. We already have 5 CBs, 3 of which are basically useless. Ole will probably not be allowed to buy the CB he needs unless he sells first. Good luck getting rid of Jones and Bailly after signing those long term contractsThe people defending this decision are the same sort of people who defended Jones's contract in 2019. They look stupid now and nothing different will happen here.
The manager doesn't rate him, doesn't play him and even if he's got a good game or two, he's straight out of the team. This is more Glazernomics for gullible fools.
But I'm not talking about Axel. I'm just saying giving a new 3+1 contract to Bailly is dumb. We don't need to replace him, he barely even plays, it's like saying we'll need to replace Jones when he leaves or something.I’d prefer Axel stay too but unfortunately we need an upgrade on Lindelof which would keep Axel 4th choice. He needs to leave for the good of his career.
its like rojo and phil jones all over again. Just as you think you can cut the deadweight crock loose they do this. Might make it to 150 games by the next renewal27, locked into a contract for 3+1 years, played 100 games in 5 season and he's injury prone. Well done for all involved in getting him to sign, major coup.
But but but we've got Jon Murtough as DOF now. He's a proper football man and not David Woodward's stooge.its like rojo and phil jones all over again. Just as you think you can cut the deadweight crock loose they do this. Might make it to 150 games by the next renewal
And of course we'd be asking for some stupidly unrealistic fees for Bailly (sell Jones for a packet of gummie bears). But we don't appreciate that what we'll 'lose' on the fee, we'll save on wages.What people fail to appreciate is that our wage budget has a limit. We already have 5 CBs, 3 of which are basically useless. Ole will probably not be allowed to buy the CB he needs unless he sells first. Good luck getting rid of Jones and Bailly after signing those long term contracts
Right. Except that’s wrong isn’t it? He’s played whilst Lindelof has been injured numerous times this year. So he has been important. He’s also been very good in most of those games. It is very likely Axel is leaving this summer. He will be replaced by a first choice CB. This will make Bailly 4th choice. We don’t need a world class 4th choice Cb. When fit he’s usually very dependable. He gets on with the squad and is good for the dressing room. Keeping him provided he’s happy to be 4th choice is a no brainier. This entire forum is a moan fest. Two weeks ago we had people moaning Bailly wasn’t first choice now we have people moaning he isn’t being released on a free. Moan. That’s all you feckers do.But I'm not talking about Axel. I'm just saying giving a new 3+1 contract to Bailly is dumb. We don't need to replace him, he barely even plays, it's like saying we'll need to replace Jones when he leaves or something.
I don't think it's his agent's good work, if that were the case then Phil Jones must have the best agent known to man.If he gets himself fit and stays fit then I’m actually good with this but still, fair fecks to his agent.
Struggling clubs might consider giving Bailly a second chance if he was a free agent and he is desperate enough (as a free agent) to lower his salary demands. They wouldn't want to pay a fee for an injury prone player whose quite frankly is not a very good player. Also why should he lower his salary demands now that he's got a long term contract? The only reason why we give these players long term contracts is to shut the manager's mouth up. He won't be able to complain about lack of bodies in defence since he's already got 5 CBs.And of course we'd be asking for some stupidly unrealistic fees for Bailly (sell Jones for a packet of gummie bears). But we don't appreciate that what we'll 'lose' on the fee, we'll save on wages.
This is not a football club any more, it's a badly run public company for billionaires to drain as a cash cow.
He's never fit though. You want your backup defenders to be reliable and he isn't in any way shape or form.Some people in here!
It's not like he's a first choice CB and can do more than a job when he plays, in fact we've looked our best with him in and around the squad this season.
Sounds like a top personality in the changing room, and will be a great help for someone like Amad. Chill.
Agreed but jones axel and bailly are all made of weetabix. We have 2, really. None of those 3 could play 10 consecutive matches without a long term injury, they are all crocked. And what fergie said with crocked players is their mentality goes and every knock makes them want to have 2 months out when others in the team would just run it offStruggling clubs might consider giving Bailly a second chance if he was a free agent and he is desperate enough (as a free agent) to lower his salary demands. They wouldn't want to pay a fee for an injury prone player whose quite frankly is not a very good player. Also why should he lower his salary demands now that he's got a long term contract? The only reason why we give these players long term contracts is to shut the manager's mouth up. He won't be able to complain about lack of bodies in defence since he's already got 5 CBs.