So you think that it's moral for an employer to have unilateral and perpetual rights of someone's labour? And you also think that what you are exposing is footballer's greed and not football club's greed?
Paul Pogba / turned down United offer of 300k as “nothing”
- Thread starter MyOnlySolskjaer
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
I dont know. Surely in the real world you could agree to buy a person who wants to work for you out of their contract early. Youre basically paying someone to tear up their contract rights rather than the pre-Bosman system which was almost like a slave market. The way it works now seems fair enough. A player is contracted to you unless they or a club on their behalf pay compensation to tear up their contract.
Yes I did think about that in the past (can’t recall if it was a debate I was having or if I heard it on the radio); the idea being to abolish transfer fees and set maximum term contracts, say 3 years. Sounds like a form of Utopia but I’m sure would have shattering consequences for the space-time continuum.
Didn’t mean to give that impression at all. They’re all probably guilty. Just saying “contract” does not equal “moral”.
It's neither fine nor out of order, it is what it is: a player you are better off getting rid of. Cracking player when he turns up, but clearly until there's nowhere left to go, i.e. scope for better terms that's the deal with him.
Selling Pogba the project... bollocks.
Filling his agents pockets and offering a fat wad of cash more like.
Who cares, I’ll be glad to get this perpetually disrespectful tosser out of the club. As long as PSG pay up the market value it’s all gravy.
But that point makes no sense when we are talking about a contract having a term, the fact that you brought morality into it is pretty strange. So again is it immoral for a contract to have an end date and is it immoral for a player to only leave at the end date? It clearly isn't immoral, there is no argument to defend that idea outside of the fact that football clubs are so entitled that they demand to get a portion of a previous transfer fee back, in fact even when they get a player for free(for example academy players), they still feel that they deseve a transfer fee.
If you decide to only look at it from the greedy eyes of football clubs, then your point make sense but if you look at it from the outside, football clubs are despicable, their general behaviors border on lunacy. They are not entitled to transfer fees, transfers are the prerogative of footballers it's their FIFA registration.
Yeah that’s about the size of it. I don’t know if I really thought it was that out of order in the first place but I guess he just winds me up (which I suppose he wouldn’t if he wasn’t so talented).
I don't really follow your point because I don't think that it responds to my post. You are describing how it works today while I'm talking about the fact that transfer speculation and the fact that for example club owners funnel money out of football through transfer fees is wrong, it doesn't serve the players, doesn't serve the fans or the game in general.
PSG does lack the creativity from midfield. Pogba is simply perfect for them. Please, let this be true. £50m and I'd bite their hands off.
And we can’t wait to have a midfield that lacks creativity.
Before the UCL crucial game for the United his agent comes and talks that Pogba wants out out of nowhere affecting whole team morale, bullies Ole and Manutd. Who knows his agent has taken money from PSG to disrupt United qualification in second round. He is a great player but has good alternatives in market and has good value in market.
We have Bruno and Sancho and you think our midfield lacks creativity?
If anything we have plenty of that, what we actually need is someone who can control the midfield.
Yes I was responding to a point that said if a person follows a contract they cannot be immoral by definition.
The pre-Bosman era is interesting because at the end of a contract a player’s registration was still owned by his club. If I understand it, the player was released if not offered the same or better terms by the club who owned his registration. If offered a new deal but refusing it, in preference of a transfer, the player would be sold and the fee set by tribunal (in England at least). The immoral aspect there, I suppose, would be the club could, at the end of the contract, retain the player’s registration (for the purpose of selling the player) and it only had to match the existing contract terms to prevent the player being released, whereas the player could be “worth” much better terms, and the transfer fee eroded the terms he could get at his new club. There were good players on low wages and they couldn’t do too much about it.
No it is not immoral for a contract to have an end date (although many contracts are arguably immoral).
It also is not, in my view, immoral for a player to leave and sign with another club at the end of the contract.
However, there is a grey area in moral terms, when a player who is wanted by his club and is offered good terms which he refuses, declares he wishes to leave and then refuses to do so in the period which would enable the club to recover a fee (and reinvest that in another player to whom very good money would be paid) to offset the very considerable investment into said player.
It comes down to what you think is reasonable. Pre Bosman was clearly unfair to players but it’s really not a mad idea to consider that player and agent power may have gone too far the other way (whether it has is a matter of opinion and clearly players have no power if they aren’t any good).
The player-club relationship is complex but a staggering investment has been made by Utd into Paul Pogba. The club chose to do it but there is an expectation that the player will provide value - that concept at least is reasonable.
You then have to have an argument about value - has Pogba returned fair value on the club’s investment? You then have to have an argument about the aims and motives of both player and club in allowing the contract to run down to its final year and then whether the player and agent are abusing the power they have post-Bosman.
Certain behaviours are a clear abuse of power (such as going on strike to get a move etc). But if a player purposely seeks to erode the value he is returning on the club’s investment, despite the club’s best efforts (to extend his contract or sell), he can quite easily comply with his contract and be shafting the club at the same time. He’s contractually entitled but may not be acting morally; the concept, at least is reasonable.
And so you’re back to an argument about value and whether the player is responsible for deliberately returning poor value. If Pogba goes for free, I think he is deliberately returning poor value but I’ve never been happy about his behaviour or his agent so I am probably biased.
Good player sometimes, of course.
I class them as forwards, the base of our midfield in Pogba’s absence would have the passing range of a pub side.
Ok that’s an exaggeration but still, we definitely lack any kind of DM other than Matic and nobody that can spread the ball forwards or link defence into attack.
Personally I’m not desperate to see that although I’m sure many will be overwhelmed with relief to see the back of our most talented player and without doubt the best passer in the team by a country mile.
He's 28 and we're still trying to "get the best out of him". Its just boring now how inconsistent he is. By all accounts, selling him would the best thing to do because you just know Grima Wormtongue is in his ear telling him about the richies they could recieve if he leaves for free in a year.
If Varane costs 50m, then what would Pogba be worth? 60m?
More importantly, who replaces pogba in the squad and the 11?
More importantly, who replaces pogba in the squad and the 11?
Why on earth would they be stupid enough to do that?
Brazil's best midfielder
Andreas Pereira
It will be great to see the back of him and his agent. Really unpleasant personality and frustrating player.
Use the 50 million to bring in an actual midfielder with consistency please. No Raiola involved.
Bring in someone who loves being here.
Use the 50 million to bring in an actual midfielder with consistency please. No Raiola involved.
Bring in someone who loves being here.
@OrcaFat
The problem is that you treat the player's contract as an investment vehicle for the club when in reality it is just a labour agreement between the player and the club. And because you see it that way, you somehow completely overlooked the fact that the player added value is on the field and as a marketing asset, as far as I know Pogba contributed to our good performances the ones that saw us gain prize money and he has been used profusely as a marketing asset by the club.
And to illustrate how wrong your logic is, if Pogba extend his contract and retires at 33-34 years old, then by your logic he wouldn't have provided the expected value. By your logic players are wrong in all scenarios that do not involve a transfer benefit which makes little sense because that's not how football clubs make money(commercial deals, gate and prize money) and it's not how they win games either.
The problem is that you treat the player's contract as an investment vehicle for the club when in reality it is just a labour agreement between the player and the club. And because you see it that way, you somehow completely overlooked the fact that the player added value is on the field and as a marketing asset, as far as I know Pogba contributed to our good performances the ones that saw us gain prize money and he has been used profusely as a marketing asset by the club.
And to illustrate how wrong your logic is, if Pogba extend his contract and retires at 33-34 years old, then by your logic he wouldn't have provided the expected value. By your logic players are wrong in all scenarios that do not involve a transfer benefit which makes little sense because that's not how football clubs make money(commercial deals, gate and prize money) and it's not how they win games either.
Er you are talking about Raiola or Pogba there.
If Pogba goes, we will need to find a world class creative midfielder. Which will be difficult. I hate this never ending Raiola show but i hope Paul extend his contract.
I like Pogba but he frustrates the hell out of me. I think it would be best for all parties if he moved to be honest. The whole circus that surrounds him would be best away from our club as well. On his day he's fantastic but that day doesn't happen anywhere near enough in a Utd shirt.
Our options are to either pay him an obscene amount of money to get him to extend and risk unsettling other players like Bruno or lose him on a free next year (Which I think he will do unless a ridiculous new contract is put in front of him). The less said about his agent the better as well.
He simply just hasn't worked out at Utd. I'd be looking to take any half decent offer we get for him this summer and putting the funds towards someone like Grealish.
Our options are to either pay him an obscene amount of money to get him to extend and risk unsettling other players like Bruno or lose him on a free next year (Which I think he will do unless a ridiculous new contract is put in front of him). The less said about his agent the better as well.
He simply just hasn't worked out at Utd. I'd be looking to take any half decent offer we get for him this summer and putting the funds towards someone like Grealish.
It’s not a problem really, it’s just an opinion. And look we’re even debating whether he as offered fair value or not; I am including every contribution he has made by the way, not just transfer residual, but we don’t have to agree on that and it would be impossible to quantify. You might be right anyway.
I don’t think my logic is flawed, but perhaps I wasn’t clear: by value, I do mean everything he has given us, plus transfer residual. But whether you accept my logic or not, I am guided by how I feel about his behaviour in the past and how I will feel if he leaves for free. I will feel a bit shafted. I will, of course, get over it.
Some are scared to lose Pogba's talent. But what's the point of all that talent If we are not going to use it properly by playing him in the double pivot. Pogba at the double pivot is who we are replacing and that Pogba is very much replaceable
He has never played as a world class creative midfielder for us though. To do that he would have had to be consistent which he has failed to do. He also can't control the midfield or dictate play.
However, even if we disagree on that, we don't have to replace Pogba (or the player he is). In fact we shouldn't try as that player doesn't fit the rest of our team.
What would elevate us isn't a world class pogba staying but simply we just need a very good midfielder that can compliment the rest of the team and make up for any weaknesses.
I don't know why some are so reluctant to close this chapter. Him doing well for France is just another false dawn, he has never shown that class at United on a consistent basis. We're 5 years in, we're still waiting to see the best of him and we're still trying to shoehorn him into the lineup to somehow make it happen ... then you factor in Raiola and his antics and the wages they'd want for a new contract. This isn't a hard call in my opinion ... if PSG offer more than 50m, you take that and run.
Minimum 100 mil.
We're not getting 100 mil for a guy in the last year of his contract.
Not too fuss about this, he's no longer irreplacable and not really suit into our formation if he wants to leave then good riddance as long as we managed to get respectable fee from him.
This. sell him and get a Deep Lying Playmaker.
Last opportunity to sell him and recoup a fee. As talented as he is, he has simply not produced the goods for United on a consistent basis, plus his agent talking shite all the time is the reason he needs to be ridden of. Give VDB a real opportunity to replace him and buy a proper defensive midfielder to shield the back 4.
If we need McFred to exist just to compensate for him then what’s the point?
In the Rice thread someone pointed out we likely would still need someone with Rice to cover for Pogba.
We get to name 10 outfield players and we need to set aside three of those positions for him; his own place and two to babysit. It’s ridiculous.
In the Rice thread someone pointed out we likely would still need someone with Rice to cover for Pogba.
We get to name 10 outfield players and we need to set aside three of those positions for him; his own place and two to babysit. It’s ridiculous.
I don't get why teams aren't taking a risk on Pogba. He clearly is a Balon d'Or contender in the right setup, yet we don't receive any bids.
This line is going into Moneyball 2: M2nche$te2 United in a totally original scene where all the old scouts sit around the table and @jamesjimmybyrondean is trying to convince them that Jonah Hill's methods will work in football as well.
You could buy VDB again and have £10m left over. Great deal.
That's the sort of direction we should be going as a club, no nonsense players that play the simple pass and don't try anything fancy.
Or you could do due process on players and recruit properly like other teams do?
Leicester paid less than that for Tielemans, and about a third of it for Ndidi. Both of which would improve us massively as a team and could actually, you know, play in midfield
Or we could keep the overpaid megastar that doesn’t want to be here, makes countless errors, talks the club down in public, still doesn’t have a position at 28 and turns up every 7-8 games.