Contentious? Laudrup interview

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
He doesn't mention carrying it out, just offers his opinion on the matter.
 
All this seems to suggest that many footballers, despite their very high wages, aren't professional enough to give 100%, and need to be further motivated with extra cash.

But it does seem kind of cheating in a way, as the richer clubs can pay more to teams they want to do well. The results should be decided on football, not who pays the biggest win bonus.

This doesn't do much for the image of football.
 
swans-m said:
I wonder what shefflied fans would say about this. Last game of the season in 2008, Manchester united have already won the title and face West Ham at home. West ham need to be win to survive. Manchester United field a weakened team, West Ham win, Sheffield get relegated. Now they are plying their trade in league one. I wonder if they would have payed Manchester United to field a full strength team if they were able.
What Michael Laudrup says actually makes a lot of sense. It would make football more even rather than advantage the teams who are playing against under strengthens sides.
Click to expand...

I totally agree!

Its a cash incentive to win doesn't mean that they actually are going to win. But if at the end of the season we have nothing to gain or loose I would hope that we go for a win every time for pride so if some team wants to throw some money our way then thank you very much!

If you do think its cheating then explain how because I cant see it.
 
ShanghaiSwan said:
All this seems to suggest that many footballers, despite their very high wages, aren't professional enough to give 100%, and need to be further motivated with extra cash.

But it does seem kind of cheating in a way, as the richer clubs can pay more to teams they want to do well. The results should be decided on football, not who pays the biggest win bonus.

This doesn't do much for the image of football.
Click to expand...

Your missing the point. It's not to do with the players giving it their all, it's to do with the manager picking the strongest team. The reserve team may give it their all every game, doesn't mean they will win. It's an incentive for the club to play their best players and keep it a more even playing field for the third party.
I'm baffled by your last point. Results should be decided on football, not who pays the biggest win bonus. If that's the case then why does any player join another club? Why doesn't everyone play for their local teams? Perhaps because the bigger clubs can offer more money?
 
Maybe he was too honest for his own good. But he was asked the question & answered it honestly. I watched & listened to the interview & as I listenened to the question being asked I thought. What the feck as it got to do with Swansea City or the next match with Everton?? To$$er of a journalist looking for a juicy tit bit & boy did the w@nker get it!!!!...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back