Lucas

[RedReet]

So why describe him as a highly paid International? Obviously he isn’t playing for free, but I’d guess he’s one of the lower earners in the squad. I certainly couldn’t imagine a replacement coming in for less wages.

[meffin]

He was joking mate.

Thank god, thought he was being serious

[Exiled_red]

The metro reporting the fee to be £3m

Palermo have offered £3million for Liverpool's Braziliam midfielder Lucas

Sorry I can't find a link it was just a snipet in the transfer talk section of the paper that quote is the whole thing. Not sure if it's accurate but £3m is a joke

[DannyMan2006]

The metro reporting the fee to be £3m



Sorry I can't find a link it was just a snipet in the transfer talk section of the paper that quote is the whole thing. Not sure if it's accurate but £3m is a joke

Lucas will not be sold for £3m.

[EwarWoo]

Obviously he isn’t playing for free, but I’d guess he’s one of the lower earners in the squad.

He's a regular first teamer so I can't see why he'd be one of the lowest earners in the squad.

Whatever we think of him he's worked is way into a position where he doesn't deserve to be anyway.

[SB]

Lucas will not be sold for £3m.

[Richey]

So why describe him as a highly paid International? Obviously he isn’t playing for free, but I’d guess he’s one of the lower earners in the squad. I certainly couldn’t imagine a replacement coming in for less wages.

Well that's kinda my point!

He won't be on the same as, say, Torres and Gerrard, but he is a regular in the first team and on the fringes of the Brazil squad. He will be on decent money.

My point was that if he stays we might not be able to afford a replacement. We might have to pay a bit more as a fee to replace him, and we would probably have to pay more in wages to a replacement, but if selling Lucas gets cash in for part of the transfer fee and the removal of his wages from the wage bill result in being able to pay more to a replacement then that would seem like a pretty good idea to me.

[RedReet]

He's a regular first teamer so I can't see why he'd be one of the lowest earners in the squad.
Whatever we think of him he's worked is way into a position where he doesn't deserve to be anyway.

Well that's kinda my point!

He won't be on the same as, say, Torres and Gerrard, but he is a regular in the first team and on the fringes of the Brazil squad. He will be on decent money.

My point was that if he stays we might not be able to afford a replacement. We might have to pay a bit more as a fee to replace him, and we would probably have to pay more in wages to a replacement, but if selling Lucas gets cash in for part of the transfer fee and the removal of his wages from the wage bill result in being able to pay more to a replacement then that would seem like a pretty good idea to me.

What has that got to do with anything? He signed three years ago and agreed a contract and as far as I know it hasn’t been renewed since. Bar appearance fees it doesn’t matter if he played every game for the first team (or won the world cup with Brazil) or played none, he’ll still be paid the same until he negotiates a new deal.

Even with Parry in charge I doubt we would have offered astronomical wages to a young Brazilian who we knew wouldn’t be a regular part of the first team for a few years.

[DannyMan2006]

What has that got to do with anything? He signed three years ago and agreed a contract and as far as I know it hasn’t been renewed since. Bar appearance fees it doesn’t matter if he played every game for the first team (or won the world cup with Brazil) or played none, he’ll still be paid the same until he negotiates a new deal.

Even with Parry in charge I doubt we would have offered astronomical wages to a young Brazilian who we knew wouldn’t be a regular part of the first team for a few years.

There are clauses where the wage goes up by a certain % every year, and the same that increase it dependant on appearances. But i don't know what clauses are in the contract of Lucas.

[RedReet]

There are clauses where the wage goes up by a certain % every year, .

Doesn't really matter, it's three years regardless.

and the same that increase it dependant on appearances. But i don't know what clauses are in the contract of Lucas.

They do increase depending on appearances or can increase?

[Richey]

What has that got to do with anything? He signed three years ago and agreed a contract and as far as I know it hasn’t been renewed since. Bar appearance fees it doesn’t matter if he played every game for the first team (or won the world cup with Brazil) or played none, he’ll still be paid the same until he negotiates a new deal.

Even with Parry in charge I doubt we would have offered astronomical wages to a young Brazilian who we knew wouldn’t be a regular part of the first team for a few years.

Okay, as you are sticking with pretty much the minor part of the argument we'll deal with that for now

Let us just say that he is not on too much money, and we keep him as a member of the starting 11. When that contract expires we will either have to pay him a lot more or lose him for nothing. I doubt that by then he would suddenly have become amazing, so what do we do? Get his (in your opinion very low) wages off the wage bill, let him go for nothing and still have to buy a replacement? Or give him a new contract with huge wages - which given that he will have been a first team regular he would be within his rights to ask for?

Is it not better to get rid now while we can still get a decent fee and put that money AND his wages (all 7 quid a week of them) TOWARDS a decent replacement??

[Exiled_red]

I think any attempts to suggest what's in a player or manager's contract is foolish, Our best chances are by reading what's reported in the press and anything else we just have to go off the general principles that seem to be applied.

[SB]

I think any attempts to suggest what's in a player or manager's contract is foolish, Our best chances are by reading what's reported in the press and anything else we just have to go off the general principles that seem to be applied.

That's way too rational an idea mate

[RedReet]

Okay, as you are sticking with pretty much the minor part of the argument we'll deal with that for now

Let us just say that he is not on too much money, and we keep him as a member of the starting 11. When that contract expires we will either have to pay him a lot more or lose him for nothing. I doubt that by then he would suddenly have become amazing, so what do we do? Get his (in your opinion very low) wages off the wage bill, let him go for nothing and still have to buy a replacement? Or give him a new contract with huge wages - which given that he will have been a first team regular he would be within his rights to ask for?

Is it not better to get rid now while we can still get a decent fee and put that money AND his wages (all 7 quid a week of them) TOWARDS a decent replacement??

Ahh sorry, I didn’t realise you were factoring in future wages when describing him as a highly paid International.

And I’ll take B please Bob.

[The Birdman]

It may go against the grain, but i think JAR was a class LB for the most part, bar the final season really.

I'm sorry but the 2 words Riise and Class should never ever be used in the same sentance.
He ran around a bit, was positionally suspect and shot from 40 yards at least 10 times a game instead of taking better options.

Having 1 speculative shot a season that goes in or gets close doesn't make him a class player.