Cocker Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Fantastic, he really does think he is the best player in the world Obviously I cant say for sure but the figure I heard banded about for the contract we offered was about 35k a week so surely Liverpool could offer more than this. I just wonder how much he has turned down
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Backroom trueblue Posted January 17, 2007 Backroom Posted January 17, 2007 Serves the greedy barsteward right The only problem would be that we would be left until the end of the season with a player who doesn't want to be here
OscarRaven Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 What a Joke this transfer is becoming. Lucas wants to move - clear, but no-one in the world matches his agents and his own valuation. So he walks out in June, signs a similar deal to the one he was offered here at Newcastle (assuming they haven't found anyone better). In the meantime we keep him as club captain - that annoys me, its supposed to be an honour not a sweetner for an average player to stay! Saying that Hughes stalwart support of the player may yet pay dividends. I for one would still be dissapointed though if he stays.
roversmum Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Well I should have thought it would be obvious - if Bellers had to take a pay cut to go to Liverpool and Lucas will be nothing more that a squad player, they are not going to pay him fancy wages.
ace Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Well I should have thought it would be obvious - if Bellers had to take a pay cut to go to Liverpool and Lucas will be nothing more that a squad player, they are not going to pay him fancy wages. IF neill does go to Liverpool or Newcastle or West Ham ( he does so love a "challenge") and ends up with lower salary than he had or could have had at Rovers..does his Agent take a fee???????
den Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 I said they only wanted him because he was cheap.
Eddie Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 If this is true and we do really want to keep him (and I'm sure that we do), then I think now would be the time to put another offer on the table.
Backroom trueblue Posted January 17, 2007 Backroom Posted January 17, 2007 If this is true and we do really want to keep him (and I'm sure that we do), then I think now would be the time to put another offer on the table. How many offers does he need to reject before you accept he doesn't want to play for us anymore
Brownie Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Lets cut out the ignorance and realise that this is Lucas Neill's agent trying to get the best deal he can for the player. It appears he wants to sign for Liverpool and like any agent would he's trying to match the offers he already has on the table from other clubs. Why slag Lucas for negotiating his salary with his prospective employer ?
yoda Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Lucas Neill's much-mooted move to Liverpool may be off because of his wage demands. The Daily Mirror claims that the Australian is asking for £30,000 a week because the Reds will get him on the cheap just months before his Rovers contract ends. That figure is deemed too much for a squad player at Anfield and Neill will now have to decide between Champions Leeague football with Liverpool or higher wages elsewhere. Newcastle and West Ham are thought to be interested in the Blackburn captain. Put him in the reserves or less until the end of the season, thats a new challenge
Esulx Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 If my understanding of the Bosman ruling is correct, Lucas Neill has been able to speak to other clubs since the beginning of January. Surely the subject of his personal terms have come up in conversation before now!!!
thenodrog Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 (edited) That figure is deemed too much for a squad player at Anfield and Neill will now have to decide between Champions Leeague football with Liverpool or higher wages elsewhere. Only one option there then for a player entering the final years of his career. If my understanding of the Bosman ruling is correct, Lucas Neill has been able to speak to other clubs since the beginning of January. Surely the subject of his personal terms have come up in conversation before now!!! I suppose it's probable that someone else might just be pulling the strings from behind the scenes at Anfield now. Edited January 17, 2007 by thenodrog
Lee Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Players who are out of contract in the summer are free to negotiate contracts for the summer in January to clubs from another football federation. Neill wouldn't be free to disuss a move to another English club be it January or June without BRFC's permission
James No. 7 Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Lucas Neill's much-mooted move to Liverpool may be off because of his wage demands. I'm lovin' it.
RovertheHill Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 I wouldn't say I'm lovin it. I like Lucas a lot as a player and think we'll struggle to replace him with the money we've got - hence I wanted him to stay. However, once he decided to go I didn't agree with him being captain because whatever anyone says it is sending the wrong message - whether he is completely professional about it or not. Similarly, I don't think his last couple of performances have been great - sub-consciously he does not have skin in the game as players who are staying becuase he knows he won't be here. I don't begrudge him going - it's his career after all - but the time has definitely come to get rid and move on, and anything that delays that is not good for BRFC
Bazzanotsogreat Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 I might leave a team in Europe and possible top 6 for a Relegation dogfight
roversmum Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Been chatting to Lucas this morning. Some interesting snippets He laughed at the prospect of West Ham - " No way mate" Sky Sports: West Ham have leapt to the front of the queue for Lucas Neill and are close to tying up a deal for the Australian star, skysports.com has learnt. :ph34r:
Daje Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Konchesky in part ex? Not according to Sky: Should West Ham finalise the transfer it is not thought Paul Konchesky will be heading in the opposite direction as part of this deal.
G Somerset Rover Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 (edited) I think Neil told Brownie a few whoppers. Anyway...I think Konchesky is slightly better than Warnock...but not much. As long as Newcastle don't hijack the deal with a swap for Moore and Bramble we shouldn't worry! Edited January 17, 2007 by Somerset Rover!
Bobby G Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Best case is about 1.5 million for Neill with Nescmachny coming in, but Id take Konchesky too ahead of Warnock for sure.
Macky Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Best case is about 1.5 million for Neill with Nescmachny coming in, but Id take Konchesky too ahead of Warnock for sure. Don't want Konchesky or Warnock.... both very average footballers. I think we should just keep Lucas till the end of the season.
Brownie Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 This would definitely be an agent inspired move if it came off. He rolled his eyes and actually said "No chance" when I mentioned West ham to him. Looks like they are offering him the money we wouldn't even consider and his agent has recomended the move to him
Bobby G Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 How could a guy who says no way to such a move be convinced 3-4 days later? Either he was led to believe bigger fish would be after him this month by his agent, or I cant explain it.
Recommended Posts