Crazy, crazy, crazy. And now i guess this is another 'vieled threat' punishment to KLP. Whatever the rights or wrongs, just split the difference, settle half way and move on. Currently a lose lose, and at risk of going totally pear-shaped.
His agents are MLS, they're also agents for Lewie Coyle and Liam Cooper. The Henriksen farce ended up costing City over £2m, if we end up forcing out KLP, this one could potentially cost us even more. It's rank stupidity.
In as much as Ehab has not budged on accepting the shorter contract terms,it would also be fair to say that KLP and his agent haven't budged on accepting the longer contract terms. The end result ,whoever may be to blame,is that our Club is suffering on the pitch which should concern is all...I agree entirely with your last sentence as he could add so much more to our game in 90 minutes than is possible in 30-40 but I'm not for speculating on who's causing the delay or how this will end.
Agree Ric, so why hasn't anyone suggested, sign for two years with an option of another one tacked on the end ?
KLP and his agent have agreed a reduction in his wage clause, that's precisely why he's not agreeing to the contract being extended.
Bloke get his nob out...big deal. I used to be in the army and participated in many a naked bar. It's pretty simple, someone declared naked bar...you were naked! Childish, yes!
I won't lie, this made me chuckle more than a bit. Was always highly likely to be him, done well in Norway in the past and still got 18 months on his deal
Whilst I've no sympathy with the clubs owners, you cannot back down on contract negotiations with agents otherwise they'll do that to the club every time. Its not immediately obvious why there's an impasse, as club wants longer than player, exactly the opposite to what usually occurs, so it has to be detail of clauses. If contract ends up more player focused, then every other player learns and expects the same. A bigger problem to resolve when the club is working to such a tight budget and owners no longer willing to invest.
The guy has a contract which the club agreed to, part of that contract is a pay rise after so many starts. Now the club is blackmailing the player to sign a new contract in order to honour the existing one.
It's even worse than that, the new deal doesn't even include honouring the last one... 'As it stands, the teenager is due an appearance-based wage increase after one more start with another due later in the season. That was a clause which Lewis-Potter agreed to remove from the terms of his deal, but remains unwilling to add the extra year and until such time as he does, the club's hierarchy are refusing to allow him to start games for Hull City'.
He's prepared to sign a new contract, so not sure it's "blackmail".... What do you think is motivating the club to take this stance?
Ten years, eight loans, three senior first-team appearances. When most players leave a club after a decade, the talk is of testimonials. When Lucas Piazon departed Stamford Bridge on Thursday, Chelsea fans could be forgiven for barely noticing. The 26-year-old Brazilian, remarkably, was the longest-serving player in their current squad, having joined in 2011 and, in theory at least, worked under eight different managers. In reality, though, that work usually amounted to a bit of pre-season training followed by the news he was being shipped off elsewhere for the season. The attacking midfielder's transfer to Braga means that, at 26, he finally has a permanent home, having played in Spain, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Portugal while on Chelsea's books, not to mention spells in the Championship with Reading and Fulham.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the KLP fiasco, I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds it depressing that we are (presumably) paying the wages of a lad who couldn't make it into Cardiff's team to play for us, because we can't agree a deal with the best home grown striker we've produced in years.
He's young and looks like he'll have a good future so that's why he wants a shorter contract. It's usually older players who want longer contracts.
The club want to tie him down to a longer contract rather than having to offer him more. He's supposed to be on very little considering he signed his present contract when very young. He doesn't want the same thing to happen again.
I would expect they will be happy to pay him a lot more than he is on presently. That's still not as much as he could get if he was free to negotiate the extra year at the time.
