Emre Can

[Red_Polo]

Fair enough to a point but you are missing one big point, he and 30 of his fellow football playing compatriots on his agent's books have all ran their contracts down. I have an issue with this. He'll probably do the same at Juve. Anyways a game of opinions etc

Yes because it's a chosen strategy. That in itself doesn't make it Machiavellian.

[memzey]

Honesty counts for a lot. Mickey Owen kept reassuring everyone he would sign, let his contract run down then jumped in a surprise that cost us millions.

Emre Can made it clear right at the start that he wants to be 1st choice. As he isn't, he'll only sign a new deal that had an exit clause that would enable him to leave for the sort of suitor that would make him first choice. Also that as he'd been on low wages for a while he felt it was fair that he got a big pay rise and a low(ish) release clause. He did all this with 2years on his contract.

i.e. "Ball in your court LFC, you know what the situation is, you can sell me now for good money, next year for some money or let me go for free at the end. Whatever you choose, I'll still give my best in training and on match days, I wont bitch or moan and I wont unsettle anyone."

Moneyball analysts, I suspect looked at the reduced fee we paid for him, saved wages by having him as a squaddie versus signing anyone and offset that against the fee for sales and risk of change. We had cheap cover for 2 years and a good pro, he got a move to a biggish club who really want him and the chance to win things sooner rather than later.

I cant fault Emre, whether the club made the right decision we will see but I cant fault the overall logic if you look at it all in context.

memzey likes this.

[Patricks_Berger]

Emre is good in tight games (second leg at Anfield v Dortmund stands out). Ironically I think - had he been match fit - the CL final was the type of game he would've been effective in.

Problem is we don't actually have many games like. 90% of our games are against teams sat deep, and Emre *chews the ****ing ball*.

Not the end of the world he's leaving.wish him well, and I think he will do well at Juve.

[Patricks_Berger]

Or a desire to live in and experience different cultures, or a desire to have a change of scenery. When I was in my 20s I used to change my job every 18-24 months. I know lots people in their 40s with multiple simultaneous jobs (for variety, not just for money).

I don't know why this notion of loyalty is something that footballers should be subjected to when we don't practice it ourselves.

I couldn't give a **** about my employer. There are days when I wish them actually bankruptcy. Why should I be loyal to them?

I get your point, but it's not exactly the same.

Footballers earn vast sums of money, they receive (often regardless of whether they deserve it) massive loyalty and adulation from the supporters (which is a wonderful thing by itself, but also commercially very valuable). This ought to come with some degree of moral responsibility above what us lesser mortal owe to our employers.

[ChesterDave]

The same employers who would cast them aside in a heartbeat if a better player was available?

[dom9]

I get your point, but it's not exactly the same.

Footballers earn vast sums of money, they receive (often regardless of whether they deserve it) massive loyalty and adulation from the supporters (which is a wonderful thing by itself, but also commercially very valuable). This ought to come with some degree of moral responsibility above what us lesser mortal owe to our employers.

So what would you define as moral?

I'm labouring a boring point admittedly (sorry everyone), but I don't understand how money has anything to do with it.

Why would somebody working in a sweatshop be any more or less morally responsible to their employer than a millionaire? A job is a job is a job. Regardless of what those who aren't doing that job might think (be it admiration or pity).

People do what they have to and / or do.

You do, right?

[Fosterbloke]

So what would you define as moral?

I'm labouring a boring point admittedly (sorry everyone), but I don't understand how money has anything to do with it.

Why would somebody working in a sweatshop be any more or less morally responsible to their employer than a millionaire? A job is a job is a job. Regardless of what those who aren't doing that job might think (be it admiration or pity).

People do what they have to and / or do.

You do, right?

It's an equitable swap - skills and commitment of time (in a time limited career) in exchange for a lot of money.

I don't see a problem with running down a contract as long as the commitment is shown for the full duration (which I believe it has).

Getting money for a transfer is on the club, they can sell him whenever they like but they decided not to so this isn't on Can in any way.

[Saveloy]

The same employers who would cast them aside in a heartbeat if a better player was available?

[Nicey]

Yes because it's a chosen strategy. That in itself doesn't make it Machiavellian.

Perhaps, yet for the longest time, it seems when the time is right we will sit down and talk about contracts but surprise surprise, that never lead to anything, like all of the other players in this agents books. I am surprised people are ok with this. I'm pretty sure our scouting dept are no mugs so highly likely expected as much but it does not make it any more palatable.

Am I right in thinking he had a verbal agreement with Bayern as well to return to them, which he broke.

[Darkon]

This is the anti-Fabinho of transfer sagas. Juve: just ****ing complete the deal already, it’s been fair game since January ffs!

[kubrickscube]

Has he gone yet?

[Nicey]

Unfortunately not yet

[Patricks_Berger]

So what would you define as moral?

I'm labouring a boring point admittedly (sorry everyone), but I don't understand how money has anything to do with it.

Why would somebody working in a sweatshop be any more or less morally responsible to their employer than a millionaire? A job is a job is a job. Regardless of what those who aren't doing that job might think (be it admiration or pity).

People do what they have to and / or do.

You do, right?

I don't actually have any problem with what he's doing.

My only point is that it's not a straight comparison between a top level footballer and an average joe. They should have more responsibility, one aspect of that is loyalty. Not absolute unlimited loyalty, but a degree of it.

It's not just money either, it's the position they are in and the pedestal they are on.

[Kenneth]

Football is very different to IT and accountancy, it has its own culture. The entire economy of football is based on tribalism and blind loyalty and it's embedded in the culture of the sport. There's always been a transfer market but there has also always been at least a pretence that players are on the side of their fans, not just paid with money generated by them. Fans expect some loyalty, appreciate it when they get it and feel hard done by when they don't, tis the way of professional team sport. Maybe there's no right to expect players to sign up to all of that, but i think it's reasonable to expect it, it's what you buy into when you decide that a career in football is for you. Or at least you have signed up for the backlash. But it only goes so far of course, family and personal desires rightly play a part, and in this case I don't think can has done much to break the trust between player and fans (apart from faking a back injury of course )

But Dom's sweatshop examples are wide of the mark.

[Snigger]

Sweatshop vs £50K a week basically doing a hobby - can't see the similarities.