Another Bellamy thread

[Swamp]

Are there any parallels with the goran pandev situation when he was
At LAzio? They froze him out of the first team and he ended up tearing his contract and getting comPensation from LAzio. What is going on with CB at man city is scandalous and shows the dark side of having a club with more money than sense.

 

[Swamp]

Lazio have been ordered to release striker Goran Pandev from his contract by the Lega Calcio.


GettyImages
Macedonia striker Pandev will be available on a free transfer in January
Pandev has been trying to terminate his stay with the Biancocelesti since the summer and has not played for the club all season. The decision by the Lega Calcio's contract dispute resolution chamber means the FYR Macedonia frontman can leave on a free transfer in January.

"Pandev's appeal to the Lega Calcio's arbitration board was welcomed and they said we were in the right," the player's lawyer, Mattia Grassani, told reporters. "So Goran's contract has been resolved and the club have been ordered to pay 160,000 euros in punitive damages as well as the legal costs."

Reports suggest a return to Inter Milan is the most likely prospect for Pandev, although Juventus and Tottenham are also said to be interested.

Pandev was under contract with the Nerazzurri for three years but was shipped out on loan twice and never played a game for the Italian giants. Speculation is also rife that the 26-year-old could further anger Lazio fans by moving to bitter city rivals Roma.

Pandev has been at Lazio since 2004 and quickly became a firm fans' favourite at the Stadio Olimpico. However, matters turned sour last summer when Lazio revealed that they would not accept a bid of less than 19 million euros for Pandev after he filed a transfer request.

The Macedonian was branded a "rebel" by club president Claudio Lotito and frozen out of the squad, as well as being forced to train separately from his former team-mates.

But Lotito insists he will not give up on his battle over Pandev's contract.

"I'm calm,'' he told Radio Radio. I can only say that it doesn't end here. I have already showed people that I don't give up. It doesn't end here. We'll see then who wins.''

Pandev's contract with Lazio was set to expire next summer.

source: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=717212&sec=transfers&cc=5739

 

[Blue Prophet]

Are there any parallels with the goran pandev situation when he was
At LAzio? They froze him out of the first team and he ended up tearing his contract and getting comPensation from LAzio. What is going on with CB at man city is scandalous and shows the dark side of having a club with more money than sense.

Seems very similar, although it might be different as Pandev never actually played for Lazio, I don't know if this changes the situation.......but it might set a precedent similar to the Bosnan situation, but even if Craig gets out of his contract, will his wage demands fit in with the clubs wage structure, maybe if the club assisted with funding his foundation, with the tax concessions they would get, perhaps it could be doable, CB has said he would be prepared to be flexible if something could be done, but a drop of £50K+ is a lot of flexibility, not a dead deal certainly, but looking more and more unlikely IMO.

 

[Swamp]

Seems very similar, although it might be different as Pandev never actually played for Lazio, I don't know if this changes the situation.......but it might set a precedent similar to the Bosnan situation, but even if Craig gets out of his contract, will his wage demands fit in with the clubs wage structure, maybe if the club assisted with funding his foundation, with the tax concessions they would get, perhaps it could be doable, CB has said he would be prepared to be flexible if something could be done, but a drop of £50K+ is a lot of flexibility, not a dead deal certainly, but looking more and more unlikely IMO.

i'd be very surprised if CB is still a man city player by the end of the transfer window. it may well go to the wire but i very much doubt he'll stay where he is because in the current situation no-one is benefitting.

also, pandev was at lazio for 6 years, and made 159 appearences for the club.

 

[Blue Prophet]

Pandev was under contract with the Nerazzurri for three years but was shipped out on loan twice and never played a game for the Italian giants. Speculation is also rife that the 26-year-old could further anger Lazio fans by moving to bitter city rivals Roma.

Swamp sorry M8 took this bit to read as if he'd never played for them

 

[jck200]

Well it is going to be fun finding out exactly what does happen. We are used to players causing trouble to get a big money move but this takes the biscuit.

 

[WarwickshireBluebird]

Hello all! Thought it's about time I broke my not606 virginity, some of you might have known me as Bluebirds07 on our dearly departed BBC friend.

Anyway, back on topic. I'm a little surprised at the overwhelming desire to get Bellers back on board. The truth is he's 32 years of age now, fragile, will be very expensive whatever kind of deal we get him on, and I also fear that he may be a hindrance to Mackay's desire to get the boys working as a team, not a 1 or 2 man show as we had last season. Also, where would he play, and who would you take out of the side? I didn't like Bellers on the wing, and I don't believe that Mackay would entertain/has entertained for one moment the idea of having Earnie/Miller as back-up players - and I don't see either of those 2 alongside CB (personally, Gestede starting is a must, but that's another story...). Furthermore - and this may be the crux - when Bellamy signed last season he said that owing to his lack of pre-season and match fitness/sharpness, he would be aiming to get to his best at around January time. And so it turned out. But can we really afford to give him another incubation period for so long? Not really. I'm a massive fan of Bellamy, and he had some terrific games for us (Barnsley A, Leeds A, Leeds H, Coventry H, QPR H, QPR A to name a few). But I can't help feeling that our money could be better spent on other, younger players who may have even more of an impact - someone in the mould of Wes Hoolahan, or Scott Sinclair.

To end on a sidenote: Mackay likes his full backs to get forward and attack - a philosophy I am 100% behind. But it seems like McNaughton is expected to take the right wing all on his own! While Taylor links well with Conway on the left flank, Cowie (terrific though he is) is usually behind and/or inside McNaughton, who is expected to get the balls in the box when that has never been his strong point. And while he's more than capable of taking on players, he can hardly be relied upon to do so. I noticed this in the Bristol game, and thought it was completely exposed against BHA on Wednesday night. Anyone agree? Otherwise, good start to the season!

 

[TaffyTuck (LLF)]

Then lets offer £3M and get it sorted !!

It's not that simple tbh. Craig needs his contracted wages. If we pay £3m to Man City then we'll still need to pay Craig what he is getting at Man Ciity - just not viable. If Craig's contract gets bought out by Man City then he will use that money to subsidise his wages with us - meaning that then and only then will we be able to afford him.

 

[TaffyTuck (LLF)]

Are there any parallels with the goran pandev situation when he was
At LAzio? They froze him out of the first team and he ended up tearing his contract and getting comPensation from LAzio. What is going on with CB at man city is scandalous and shows the dark side of having a club with more money than sense.

I agree! Man City are contracted to pay him his wages for the duration of his contract. If they don't want him then give him the money that they have agreed to and let him go. All of these "greedy player" and "rebel" comments that come from the Ethidad Stadium are just politicle statements to get the fans behind the club. Either that or the are just so naive that they don't believe that they are in the wrong with the player.

 

[Oldsparkey]

There's nothing new in club/player disputes - they've been going on since well before Jimmy Hill got the maximum wage abolished.

What is different this time is the sheer financial muscle put at the club's disposal allowing them to hoover up top class players and offer them mega-contracts.

Morally indefensible, but at the moment the system allows it. I don't see the players moaning much when they sign up, but can understand their frustration when they are denied the opportunity to display their skills.

In the meantime the contracts in place will dictate the outcome unless Man City are prepared to write off some serious cash to cancel them.

 

[TaffyTuck (LLF)]

How do you work that out? Both parties are subject to an agreed contract that nobody forced either to sign.

Sparkey - you know better than that!

A club approaches a player and offers a contract that includes an agreed salary for the term of the contract. The player may barter a little in order to improve the offer but ultimately the club then presents the contract (that they are happy with) to the player. From that moment onwards they have agreed to pay the player x for x period of time.

You are correct that nobody has forced anyone to sign anything; as this is an agreement and one cannot be forced to sign an agreement if they do not agree.

Man City should pay Craig's contract if they do not want him as Craig is quite satisfied to honour the agreement until the end of the contract and remain on Man City's books. At this stage of his career he does not wish to be shipped of to other areas of the UK & Europe to play for clubs that he has no affinity with. Ultimately he signed an agreement with Man City to finish his career with that club. The contract signed would financially set him and his family up for their future.

If we sit and think about it; what I am saying can only be correct.

 

[TaffyTuck (LLF)]

Sparkey, We were both posting that the same time then. I didn't see your reply until I reviewed my last post.

 

[Oldsparkey]

No probs Taffy - a very interesting subject that hopefully can lift this board above the moron level to which it's sometimes reduced by visiting wums.

 

[TaffyTuck (LLF)]

 

[Heaton Mess]

When a manager is sacked they pay up his contract they do not insist he sits there for the rest of the term of the contract.

IMHO this isn't the case. Clubs have sent managers on "gardening leave" on several occasions. Admittedly not for the remainder of a contract. There
usually is a financial package agreed eventually.

 

[Heaton Mess]

Anyway, back on topic. I'm a little surprised at the overwhelming desire to get Bellers back on board. The truth is he's 32 years of age now, fragile, will be very expensive whatever kind of deal we get him on, and I also fear that he may be a hindrance to Mackay's desire to get the boys working as a team, not a 1 or 2 man show as we had last season. Also, where would he play, and who would you take out of the side? I didn't like Bellers on the wing, and I don't believe that Mackay would entertain/has entertained for one moment the idea of having Earnie/Miller as back-up players - and I don't see either of those 2 alongside CB (personally, Gestede starting is a must, but that's another story...). Furthermore - and this may be the crux - when Bellamy signed last season he said that owing to his lack of pre-season and match fitness/sharpness, he would be aiming to get to his best at around January time. And so it turned out. But can we really afford to give him another incubation period for so long? Not really. I'm a massive fan of Bellamy, and he had some terrific games for us (Barnsley A, Leeds A, Leeds H, Coventry H, QPR H, QPR A to name a few). But I can't help feeling that our money could be better spent on other, younger players who may have even more of an impact - someone in the mould of Wes Hoolahan, or Scott Sinclair.

To end on a sidenote: Mackay likes his full backs to get forward and attack - a philosophy I am 100% behind. But it seems like McNaughton is expected to take the right wing all on his own! While Taylor links well with Conway on the left flank, Cowie (terrific though he is) is usually behind and/or inside McNaughton, who is expected to get the balls in the box when that has never been his strong point. And while he's more than capable of taking on players, he can hardly be relied upon to do so. I noticed this in the Bristol game, and thought it was completely exposed against BHA on Wednesday night. Anyone agree? Otherwise, good start to the season!

Totally agree with both these points. (thought I was in a minority of one) While Bellers is a class act no doubt. I felt that he had to be shoehorned in to the team, at the expense of Burkie, until Chops was injured and he was put up front with Jay. Just wondering if that was the underlying reason why Burke moved on?

If Bellers is going to cost £3m + high wages, I think Malky could use that amount picking up 2/3 younger players with more potential and a longer life span.

As for McNaughton, his distribution has always concerned me. No fault in his defensive role or commitment but when he's got the ball you can see he's a fullback not a creative player. See first goal v Brighton.

 

[Hit The Road]

"I doubt if the owners want to break the manageable financial structure we have in place." The same sort of structure that we've had for years and had the majority of you lot calling our Chairman 'skinflint' last season you mean? Lesson learned at long last, we hope.

Also, it's a bit rich talking about the "morality" of Man City's decision when you had 8 players, most of them Prem quality on loan last season; when you had the vast majority of a world class player's wages paid by another club. Perfectly legal of course, but morally right? Don't think so, so cut the hypocrisy. It's very unattractive.

 

[GLAMorgan]

Hello all! Thought it's about time I broke my not606 virginity, some of you might have known me as Bluebirds07 on our dearly departed BBC friend.

Anyway, back on topic. I'm a little surprised at the overwhelming desire to get Bellers back on board. The truth is he's 32 years of age now, fragile, will be very expensive whatever kind of deal we get him on, and I also fear that he may be a hindrance to Mackay's desire to get the boys working as a team, not a 1 or 2 man show as we had last season. Also, where would he play, and who would you take out of the side? I didn't like Bellers on the wing, and I don't believe that Mackay would entertain/has entertained for one moment the idea of having Earnie/Miller as back-up players - and I don't see either of those 2 alongside CB (personally, Gestede starting is a must, but that's another story...). Furthermore - and this may be the crux - when Bellamy signed last season he said that owing to his lack of pre-season and match fitness/sharpness, he would be aiming to get to his best at around January time. And so it turned out. But can we really afford to give him another incubation period for so long? Not really. I'm a massive fan of Bellamy, and he had some terrific games for us (Barnsley A, Leeds A, Leeds H, Coventry H, QPR H, QPR A to name a few). But I can't help feeling that our money could be better spent on other, younger players who may have even more of an impact - someone in the mould of Wes Hoolahan, or Scott Sinclair.

To end on a sidenote: Mackay likes his full backs to get forward and attack - a philosophy I am 100% behind. But it seems like McNaughton is expected to take the right wing all on his own! While Taylor links well with Conway on the left flank, Cowie (terrific though he is) is usually behind and/or inside McNaughton, who is expected to get the balls in the box when that has never been his strong point. And while he's more than capable of taking on players, he can hardly be relied upon to do so. I noticed this in the Bristol game, and thought it was completely exposed against BHA on Wednesday night. Anyone agree? Otherwise, good start to the season!

Excellent post.

 

[Blue Prophet]

Take on board the points raised, and tend to agree with them, however if we can get Bellers back without seriously breaking the bank I think we should grab the opportunity with both hands. As was pointed out many times last season CB far from being a disruptive influence was an inspirational leader, both on and off the pitch, he brought professionalism and passion. Bellers would be a force on the pitch at championship level, but he brings as much to the club off the pitch as on it.....he would be great for the club, and give the whole place a lift (as he did last year ) If a deal can be done, lets go for it.

 

[H bomb]

"I doubt if the owners want to break the manageable financial structure we have in place." The same sort of structure that we've had for years and had the majority of you lot calling our Chairman 'skinflint' last season you mean? Lesson learned at long last, we hope.

Also, it's a bit rich talking about the "morality" of Man City's decision when you had 8 players, most of them Prem quality on loan last season; when you had the vast majority of a world class player's wages paid by another club. Perfectly legal of course, but morally right? Don't think so, so cut the hypocrisy. It's very unattractive.

Another desperately insecure attempt to include your club into a conversation that doesn't involve them...

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt"