Given the shenanigans going on with so called professional footballers who think they can go on strike and claim to be no more than slaves whilst being paid millions of pounds per annum. Being able to breach their contracts with apparent immunity and only having selfish regard to the consequences. What exactly have the PFA said or done? As per usual it is only the very small number of top tier players who can afford to do this but ultimately it works out worse for the majority of players who aren’t in that privileged position of being able to go on strike. Of course it’s only the very small minority of players who behave in this manner and the vast majority of players don’t deserve to be tarnished with the same brush. But what exactly have the PFA done to condemn the blatant breach of contract? What have they done to try and mediate a resolution between the Club and the rat like players behaving in this manner? As Edwin Starr almost once sang, “PFA what is it good for, absolutely nothing.”
As a man who works in the middle between unions and employers, the PFA silence doesn’t surprise me; they won’t come out and criticise a fee-paying member publicly. I’d really like to think that some PFA activity went on behind the scenes, but even then they’d have backed their man, right or wrong, when engaging with the employer side of the table - it would only be in very dark and sparsely populated rooms that any honesty would’ve been shared, and zero record would have been allowed. We’ll have to live with that one I think…. and also hope that clubs get far smarter with the convos/promises stuff so that if this happens again then the player can eventually be exposed for the utter liar and charlatan that he is
Ah, it's all making sense now. You are that man in the middle who charms those on either side of you, making yourself their best friend, while also stirring things up and playing them off against each other. Hence your flounce off to the Liverpool board a couple of weeks ago when you didn't get your way. I will reread some of your posts through a new lens.
Agree, that's why I didn't just refer to isak. Its not just him. But given that what do you think of the PFA remaining silent or were you just posting to try and be clever but sadly failing?
Just a bit of friendly banter tbh! But in all seriousness I think it's just the way the game is now, don't blame either Wissa or Isak, they did what they felt was necessary to get the move they wanted. At the end of the day, it will all be covered in their contract, no doubt they will both have been docked wages in line with their contracts but they both considered it worth the sacrifice to force through their moves. Just the way it is, unfortunately...
To be fair to Wissa he only ended up in that position because Newcastle wouldn't pay £45m in July. So he went on strike, we fcked about for 8 more weeks then had to pay over £10m more, three games into the new season and with a 25% sell on clause. Great work, transfer team.
And to put that into context you were obviously in full agreement for the purchase to proceed at the price of £45M back in July.
Well of course not! I thought £45m for a 28 year old in the last year of his contract and off to the AFCON was overpriced. Newcastle instead decided to up the offer by £10m after three games have passed. Liverpool have paid £35m for Guehi, last year of his deal, blah blah. However we paint it, it’s not been a great window let alone “transformational”.
Yeah... not just saying this as a Sunderland fan (I'm not from the area so have no animosity towards you) but from the outside looking in, it seems like your club hasn't handled things well at all this summer. The Isak situation looks like a bit of a farce, trying to hold a player against his will almost never works out. If you contrast it with how we handled the Jobe situation (and Clarke before that), it's night and day. As soon as we knew the player's intentions we worked to arrange a move that benefitted all parties, feels like you could have been in a much better position if you'd done similar with Isak early doors...
We were scuppered by PIF's complete inability to replace a seriously ill CEO, which has had a detrimental impact on literally everything else. Been operating with a Championship level 'board' at best.
Liverpool were the only Club who lodged a bid to buy Isak. The first one was for £110M. The second one which was yesterday was for a £130M. The second bid was for £20M more than the first one. Holding a player against his will! Are you serious? He signed a 6 year contract. He was being paid £6M a year. He had a job to do and he was not doing it. Which bit exactly is the farce? Should we have sold him for £20M less than we actually received? If we were right not to sell him at £110M then who should we have sold him to in the absence of any other bids from any other clubs? Usually its quite helpful to become aware of some facts before pontificating on what you clearly know nothing about. Better to remain quiet when people think you are stupid rather than open your mouth and prove it.
