After apparently turning down a 100,000 pound a week contract Raheem Sterling has the audacity to say he is not a money grabber because his mind is not solely on the riches being offered. Give me a break, and it is exactly what I predicted when I knew his contract was up for renewal. My cynicism about his kind of mercenaries is beyond what some might call irrational thinking but the question that is really at stake here is who is to blame? I truly believe that the whole escalation of salaries is now beyond redemption and the owners have to shoulder most, if not all, of the blame for what has become beyond a joke, especially when you consider the rest of the leagues wanting to hold on to their top players. How can you possibly compete with the ridiculous salaries being offered when you are bordering on the edge of extinction and live day to day hoping the financial fair play bureau don't show up and tell you that your books are out of whack and you will be punished severely for your misdeeds. Oh how quickly I forget that if you are a multinational football owner who has clearly passed whatever test is needed to assure that you are O.K. the same rules might not apply, as long as your team of financial wizards come up with the footballing version of hide the sausage. Not interested in the money - pull the other one my friend.
Sorry Mike I disagree. Rumour has it he doesn't want to stay up north and wants to either return to London or move abroad. Liverpool aren't what they used to be and if it wasn't for Suarez and Sturridge last season they wouldn't have finished top 4, as is being showed this year. He just wants to make a name for himself on the big stage (champions league) and he knows Liverpool won't be able to guarantee that every year. He's on 20k a week at the moment and still has 2 years left. I doubt he would reject 100k because he wants more. More to do with the fact he probably doesn't want to play at Liverpool next year.
Yep completely disagree. 100k per week or 180k per week, the difference mathematically is massive but to a footballer's life it is nothing. He says he's waiting until the end of the season before discussing a new contract, that's clearly so that he can see if Liverpool achieve CL status, I genuinely believe it's because he wants to be successful and win trophies. Let's face it, if he was looking for more money and accepted the new deal he'd be on 100k+ per week NOW, rather than having to wait until the end of the season on 35k per week.
Compared with many other footballers he seems quite well adjusted. He is entitled to work for whomever he wants. Its the press coverage which causes all the problems. Bolaise was the same he wanted to return to the bright lights
Used to support Liverpool as my premier league team as a kid, stopped when I turned 11 and I relised that they were ****e and I might as well just support city. They have flopped since they won their fifth champions league
I disagree with Mike also, I dont think Sterling is going for the money either but even if he was I woudn't burn him at the stake for it either. A vast majority of us would do the same thing if someone was willing to pay us more money for doing exactly the same job. A football career is a short one and you are always one bad injury away from it being ended.. I dont think we can blame footballers for the money in football they are just taking what they are offered. I admire the likes of Matt Le Tiss who stayed at Saints but you just need to look at the likes of Christian Riberio who was supposed to have such a bright future before his injury with rumours of big money transfer to see how it could turn sour. . Also with the managerial merry go round you could find yourself signing a contract with one manager and then finding the next manager doesnt want to play you so make your money while you can if people are willing to pay you for a job I would love tto have..
Oh dear I hit a nerve there and I discontinued my burning at the stake a few years ago. I have to defer to your more on the scene knowledge and I will agree that someone else, whoever that may be, is responsible for the mess that football salaries are in right now creating the huge gulf between us and them. I still offer a note of caution for your comments and would suggest that events in this saga before the end of summer might temper your thoughts - beware the Ides of March. Until then I accept your comments as being valid and based on a lot more information than I have daily available. Laters.
Can I ask.... Why is it so wrong for a footballer to demand more money yet nobody cares when an actor earns 5-10 million for being in a 2 hour film?
Or for being a model and getting millions, it's not hard to wear clothes and walk about for a bit. Footballers work hard for years and there is a very large failure rate. I blame Sky and TV rights for most of it as well!!
Jury is out for me, easy for him to say now after the event, that he would have signed a contract this time this year for much less!! The proof in the pudding will be if he leaves Liverpool, if he stays in England, there are only currently 3 teams who will win the League, Chelsea, and the 2 Manchester clubs, other than that he will need to go abroad, Arsenal are no more likely it win the league than Liverpool, so if he goes there it will only be for money!! For me Sterling is far from the finished article, his finishing and final ball still require a lot of work, so is nowhere near a £100+k a week player. Typical of what happens when a young player is overhyped, he will be a big big player in 2-3 years when he has fully developed, and then he should be looking to get this level of wage.
The difference is that we are helping to pay for the footballers demand ..simple as. As such we are entitled to an opinion. Having said that from my point of view the industry in general pays more attention to the players rather than the supporters. In this respect they are the same as the banks and look what happened to them
We are also paying for the actors demand as well, if Tom Cruise, ask for 3-4 million for mission impossible 5 and it rakes in a fortune in the cinemas then if asked to do mission impossible 6 he will demand 5-6 million. As Shiny says there isn't much difference in actors to footballers, you pay for the in person to get the fans in through the door. The only difference at the moment is big actors are now asking for a percentage of the films gross profit, making even more money than before and the best thing about that is no one apart from the accountant or tax man actually knows how much they've earnt.
also movie stars have longer careers if successful. to be fair to him he has gotta pay for his 9 kids or what ever it is. if clubs want to pay the money and can pay the money then players will ask for it would you want more money if it was available to you for the same job
Tom Cruise, love him or hate him is a world class actor with a string of super successful movies, what has Sterling done??? NOTHING!!!!!
He's done enough to be offered a big money contract and to have a choice on whether to take it all not,
Really ? A short arse that needs to stand on a box and has all the on screen charisma of a wet Banana ?
