Ian Holloway on the Bosman and Wayne Rooney.

[lyonhibs]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/9116212.stm

I couldn't agree more, with every word. The Bosman ruling, whilst good in principle, has gone way too far.

Not to mention the overall point of the nitwits in charge of the game living in some sort of parallel universe.

Love managers like Holloway that just say what they feel, and often say exactly what your average Joe in the stand is thinking as well.

GGTTH

[CropleyWasGod]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/9116212.stm

I couldn't agree more, with every word. The Bosman ruling, whilst good in principle, has gone way too far.

Not to mention the overall point of the nitwits in charge of the game living in some sort of parallel universe.

Love managers like Holloway that just say what they feel, and often say exactly what your average Joe in the stand is thinking as well.

GGTTH

His rage is misplaced, though. The Bosman ruling isn't an invention of FIFA or UEFA, it was the result of a Court case. Like it or not, fitba isn;t above the rule of law.

[LancashireHibby]

His rage is misplaced, though. The Bosman ruling isn't an invention of FIFA or UEFA, it was the result of a Court case. Like it or not, fitba isn;t above the rule of law.

Did the courts or FIFA come up with the under 24 rule?

Pretty much agree with all that Holloway is saying, though he's largely pishing in to the wind as either a) people won't listen or b) "isn't that Holloway hilarious?"

[HibeePaj]

Did the courts or FIFA come up with the under 24 rule?

Pretty much agree with all that Holloway is saying, though he's largely pishing in to the wind as either a) people won't listen or b) "isn't that Holloway hilarious?"

just watched his interview..

Ian Holloway , take a boo son..

[matty_f]

Players should be taking more of a responsibility in all of this though. There is a chronic lack of understanding of the wider world around them and for someone like rooney to take a wonderful living from man united and then have no loyalty to them its pretty disgusting. Kenny miller spitting the dummy at rangers over a new contract is just as bad imho he's been offered what most people would consider a fantastic wage from a club with well publicised financial problems but rather than accepting it and acknowledging it's a sign of the times, he refuses til they stump up more money.
Imho, footballers need to recognise that their over inflated opinions of themselves are slowly but surely killing the game. I think wage caps are the way forward, and are probably football's best chance of sustaining itself.

[just_joe]

Sadly Football is no longer a sport but now a business .

[Matty_Jack04]

the bosman ruling has been terrible for football no doubt all we need is the 'webster rulling' to catch on and contractual agreements between player and clubs are worthless.
Rooney has 6months to wait then he can 'buy' himself out his current contract for £5million (annual salary) pretty disgraceful that loop hole hasnt been closed if u ask me, all it would take is a quiet word in his ear from say man city u pay the 5million we'l give u 15million straight up and 120k a week. :grr:

what chance u got, clubs cant miss out on transfer fee's like that no matter how big the club

[Expecting Rain]

I don`t particularly like Rooney based of course on what i`ve seen and read but is he not being demonised here, it is his perogative not to sign a new contract and either leave early or run down the contract with Man United recieving nothing, if he did the latter he would be savaged, as Roy Keane rightly said he is not a piece of meat, i think Ferguson`s stance is that of easing the blow for the fans, getting them used to the idea that he won`t be around for ever.

[blackpoolhibs]

I don`t particularly like Rooney based of course on what i`ve seen and read but is he not being demonised here, it is his perogative not to sign a new contract and either leave early or run down the contract with Man United recieving nothing, if he did the latter he would be savaged, as Roy Keane rightly said he is not a piece of meat, i think Ferguson`s stance is that of easing the blow for the fans, getting them used to the idea that he won`t be around for ever.

:agree: We are all happy a **** when a crap players contract runs out, and we can get him out the door. As much as i dont like the man, he's not doing anything wrong imho, much like Riordan did nothing wrong when he left us for the smellies.

[SquashedFrogg]

:agree: We are all happy a **** when a crap players contract runs out, and we can get him out the door. As much as i dont like the man, he's not doing anything wrong imho, much like Riordan did nothing wrong when he left us for the smellies.

But even pre-bosman we could do that? Release them at the end of their contract if we didn't want them anymore.

But back then the club had the strength of position to hold onto the player, even when the contract had run out, they could still command a fee if they felt the player was of value.

[blackpoolhibs]

But even pre-bosman we could do that? Release them at the end of their contract if we didn't want them anymore.

But back then the club had the strength of position to hold onto the player, even when the contract had run out, they could still command a fee if they felt the player was of value.

Why should they be able to discard the crap players, but keep the ones they think will make them money? Rooney is willing to honour his contract, nowt wrong in that. These are the rules.

[Expecting Rain]

:agree: We are all happy a **** when a crap players contract runs out, and we can get him out the door. As much as i dont like the man, he's not doing anything wrong imho, much like Riordan did nothing wrong when he left us for the smellies.

BH, i`m honestly shocked at the reaction by the media and the fans to the Liverpool,Rooney and probably imminent Man U situation should their empire crumble, as long as the status quo was maintained i didn`t hear too much criticism, these teams have been saturated with success over the years and their fans threaten not to go back because of the lack of quality, what planet are they on and then they have the cheek to have a go at Man City and how they are spending their money, i think Holloway`s rant is one of convience, if some sheik decided to invest £20000000000 into his club you wouldn`t hear a squeak from him.

[blackpoolhibs]

BH, i`m honestly shocked at the reaction by the media and the fans to the Liverpool,Rooney and probably imminent Man U situation should their empire crumble, as long as the status quo was maintained i didn`t hear too much criticism, these teams have been saturated with success over the years and their fans threaten not to go back because of the lack of quality, what planet are they on and then they have the cheek to have a go at Man City and how they are spending their money, i think Holloway`s rant is one of convience, if some sheik decided to invest £20000000000 into his club you wouldn`t hear a squeak from him.

:agree: Man United have been stealing players from other clubs since i can remember. Berbatov being a prime example. Tottenham did not want to sell, but Man U forced their hand. He was not given permission to even talk to them, yet we could all see him at the club on deadline day through the windows clear as day at old trafford. United can see the power drifting away from them.

They cant buy the players they want anymore. They cant keep the ones they have. Its actually quite funny imho watching them squeal and whine. They always say what goes around comes around, now for the old firm.:greengrin

[SquashedFrogg]

Why should they be able to discard the crap players, but keep the ones they think will make them money? Rooney is willing to honour his contract, nowt wrong in that. These are the rules.

I inderstand that's the rules but I think the whole point of this discussion about Rooney is that the rules need looked at.

Sure, when the bosman ruling was first made it made sense. Why should a player be refused his right to leave a club when he no longer had a contract? He shouldn't.

Greedy players like Rooney are exploiting this as they know fine well that they can now command huge signing bonuses and wages if their new club doesn't have to shell out for them.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, Man U get the square route of bugger all.

I see you mentioned Riordan earlier. Prime example. Hibs spend thousands of pounds on wages, resources, coaching over a number of years. Take him from being a promising wee laddie and give him the opportunity to make it as a pro footballer.

He then repays the faith put into him by the club and all the coaches who have coached him by refusing to sign a new contract so he can leave for penny's.

That can't be right surely?

[Hibs7]

They are all greedy bar stewards who think they are better than they are, Tevez mouthing off to Rooney to come to Man City, now there is a perfect example of a mercenary @rsehole with a big gob. Rooney should be in hiding for all his antics and be thankful that Man U are sticking by him, a disgusting little turd who thinks because he has money he can do what he likes. I have seen more principles in a tramp than what Rooney and Tiger woods have together.

[Sir David Gray]

:agree: Man United have been stealing players from other clubs since i can remember. Berbatov being a prime example. Tottenham did not want to sell, but Man U forced their hand. He was not given permission to even talk to them, yet we could all see him at the club on deadline day through the windows clear as day at old trafford. United can see the power drifting away from them.

They cant buy the players they want anymore. They cant keep the ones they have. Its actually quite funny imho watching them squeal and whine. They always say what goes around comes around, now for the old firm.:greengrin

They might not have wanted to sell him but they got £30 million for him, I would hardly call that stealing. That money has allowed them to go out and buy Robbie Keane, Wilson Palacios, Jermain Defoe, Roman Pavlyuchenko, David Bentley, Peter Crouch and Rafael van der Vaart, which has now allowed them to qualify for the Champions League for the first time in their history.

I wish Rangers and Celtic would "steal" our players for that kind of money.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

Greedy players like Rooney are exploiting this as they know fine well that they can now command huge signing bonuses and wages if their new club doesn't have to shell out for them.



When I first heard about this I thought Rooney was greedy and out of order. However as I don't care about the EPL or Man U, I can see Rooney's point in this.

He has come out and said that he doesn't think Man U will match his ambition and there is a good chance this is genuinely true. An £80M loss this year so there'll be a limited transfer budget and having seen the mess that Liverpool are in I can see Man U being out the top 2 or 3 in a few years.

If this is about money then he's being an erse but... players want to be as successful as they can and if this involves moving then fine. Can anyone on here honestly say they wouldn't want to leave a sinking ship to join a more successful club for triple the money?

Don't get me wrong, I can't stand Man City and what money has done to football. But Man U of all people can't complain.

[WindyMiller]

What happened to Bosman couldn't have happened in Britain as there was a Transfer Tribunial in place, therefore he couldn't have been dropped to the reserves and had his wages cut.

The EU went way over the top and we now have a system whereby Clubs are held to contracts but players are not.

[blackpoolhibs]

They might not have wanted to sell him but they got £30 million for him, I would hardly call that stealing. That money has allowed them to go out and buy Robbie Keane, Wilson Palacios, Jermain Defoe, Roman Pavlyuchenko, David Bentley, Peter Crouch and Rafael van der Vaart, which has now allowed them to qualify for the Champions League for the first time in their history.

I wish Rangers and Celtic would "steal" our players for that kind of money.

They got all them for £30m? Well done Harry. :thumbsup: The way United went about signing him was wrong, but it seems to me you dont see that. Or is it ok for the big clubs to run all over those they deem smaller?

They pressurised Tottenham into selling their best asset, yet are now whining when their own main asset wont sign a new deal as he wants to play for a bigger club. :faf: Oh the irony. :top marks As i said, what goes around comes around. Their demise is iminent, and i think its fantastic.:top marks

[joe_hfc]

I see you mentioned Riordan earlier. Prime example. Hibs spend thousands of pounds on wages, resources, coaching over a number of years. Take him from being a promising wee laddie and give him the opportunity to make it as a pro footballer.

He then repays the faith put into him by the club and all the coaches who have coached him by refusing to sign a new contract so he can leave for penny's.

That can't be right surely?

Yes is is right IMO, Riordan was a contracted individual - signed on a temporary basis for a specific period of time by Hibs. Hibs ploughed in their resources and Riodan produced the goods on the field, so their opportunity cost was minimal. When the AGREED contracted time period was near finishing, one of the parties (Riordan) decided not sign a new contract. Riordan did absolutely nothing wrong, he abided by a contract which both he and hibs agreed up on. If Hibs gave him a 3 year deal, that means you play for us for 3 years, not you play for us for 3 years and if you like you you BETTER sign a new one because if not that's unfair on us. Surely it was HIBS fault for failing to see his potential and offering him a 6 year deal?

[blackpoolhibs]

Yes is is right IMO, Riordan was a contracted individual - signed on a temporary basis for a specific period of time by Hibs. Hibs ploughed in their resources and Riodan produced the goods on the field, so their opportunity cost was minimal. When the AGREED contracted time period was near finishing, one of the parties (Riordan) decided not sign a new contract. Riordan did absolutely nothing wrong, he abided by a contract which both he and hibs agreed up on. If Hibs gave him a 3 year deal, that means you play for us for 3 years, not you play for us for 3 years and if you like you you BETTER sign a new one because if not that's unfair on us. Surely it was HIBS fault for failing to see his potential and offering him a 6 year deal?

What he said. :agree:

[SquashedFrogg]

Yes is is right IMO, Riordan was a contracted individual - signed on a temporary basis for a specific period of time by Hibs. Hibs ploughed in their resources and Riodan produced the goods on the field, so their opportunity cost was minimal. When the AGREED contracted time period was near finishing, one of the parties (Riordan) decided not sign a new contract. Riordan did absolutely nothing wrong, he abided by a contract which both he and hibs agreed up on. If Hibs gave him a 3 year deal, that means you play for us for 3 years, not you play for us for 3 years and if you like you you BETTER sign a new one because if not that's unfair on us. Surely it was HIBS fault for failing to see his potential and offering him a 6 year deal?

But Hibs did offer him new deals. He refused to sign them. Not really sure how the club can be blamed?

I'm all for these guys moving on to treble their wages elsewhere, secure their future etc. I just think a wee bit more loyalty could be shown. He knew fine well that if he never signed a new deal he and not the club would get the lions share of the transfer value.

We got something in the region of 100k for a player worth around 1000k.

Riordan would've got his move, regardless.

Fletcher, O'Connor, Brown etc proved that to be the case.

[joe_hfc]

But Hibs did offer him new deals. He refused to sign them. Not really sure how the club can be blamed?

I'm all for these guys moving on to treble their wages elsewhere, secure their future etc. I just think a wee bit more loyalty could be shown. He knew fine well that if he never signed a new deal he and not the club would get the lions share of the transfer value.

We got something in the region of 100k for a player worth around 1000k.

Riordan would've got his move, regardless.

Fletcher, O'Connor, Brown etc proved that to be the case.

Because Riordan was under no obligation to sign a new deal. He got offered a contract and he fulfilled that contract. He showed loyalty by abiding by that contract. He got what the club promised, and the club got what he promised.

[BEEJ]

Because Riordan was under no obligation to sign a new deal. He got offered a contract and he fulfilled that contract. He showed loyalty by abiding by that contract. He got what the club promised, and the club got what he promised.
That's not loyalty. It's responsibility.

It's driven by legal parameters; not by some bond of faith or affection for the other party.

[snooky]

Sadly Football is no longer a sport but now a business .
:agree:
Alas the Pink and Green has been replaced with the Financial Times.
Is nothing sacred?

[LancashireHibby]

Having thought a little more in to the situation, might this be one of the few occasions where we can be glad that the SPL is far from awash with money? I'm sure we can get more of a 'proper football' angle with players wages being far more relative to your average fan, albeit still well paid.

[Irish_Steve]

just watched his interview..

Ian Holloway , take a boo son..

Is Holloway becoming our manager??

[Speedy]

What happened to Bosman couldn't have happened in Britain as there was a Transfer Tribunial in place, therefore he couldn't have been dropped to the reserves and had his wages cut.

The EU went way over the top and we now have a system whereby Clubs are held to contracts but players are not.

Is it not the same as any emplyment contract?

[NAE NOOKIE]

Football as usual made a rod for its own back by having a wage cap until the English players threatened to go on strike in the 60s lead by non other than Jimmy Hill.

Players ran out in front of 30 or 40,000 every week paying lets say £1 a head, but the players were on about 30 quid a week or something, which was hardly fair seeing as how the punters were paying to see them not the bloody board.

Now of course its gone in totally the other direction, the players and their agents are squeezing every last cent out of clubs, to the extent that gate money comes nowhere near covering the cost and most clubs rely on TV money and filthy rich owners to cover transfer fees and wages.

The trouble is that financial lunacy like that can only end up one way and eventually there will be come back on the Real Madrids and Man Citys of this world and even worse for the smaller clubs who spend way beyond their means in a vain attemp to compete with them.

Its time for a Europe wide wage cap of lets say £30,000 a week, with a back up pension plan for injured players. That would stop cash greedy players from warming the bench at the big clubs, when they can get into the first team at lesser clubs knowing they will be on the same money.

The players call the shots just now, but a simple system like that agreed by all the clubs would spike their guns.

I dont disagree that talented sportsmen & women should be paid what they are worth, but not if they kill their sport doing it.

[Sir David Gray]

As far as I'm concerned, the responsibility must be on the clubs to ensure that they do not overspend on wages and transfer fees. I am not in favour of wage caps because I think that if clubs can afford to pay a player £100,000 a week then they should be able to do it, even if it is a disgusting amount of money. If they do it but can't afford to pay it then they should face the consequences and Hell mend them.

[The_Todd]

Is it not the same as any emplyment contract?

Pretty much. It was absurd that a player couldn't leave at the end of their contract unless the club (ie employer) got a transfer fee. Imagine if that was how the "real world" operated? You couldn't leave your job even when out of contract because any new employer would need to compensate your old employer.

I agree it's had an impact on football, but footballers are just employees at the end of the day - not objects.

[heretoday]

It's one of these questions that has two sides to it depending on circumstances. What I object to in the game is the way the agents are working the players from behind.

Rooney's agent is one of the worst.

[joe_hfc]

That's not loyalty. It's responsibility.

It's driven by legal parameters; not by some bond of faith or affection for the other party.

loyalty; responsibility - blah blah

He could have been responsible for not breaching his contract by giving 50% in training, and not gving a damn on the pitch - he gave 100% loyalty to hibs. Balde abided his contract and have 100% responsibility and no loyalty through clearly not wanting to be Celtic and showing no intent to play - that's the difference. If deek did that, or tried to manufacture a move else where he'd have shown no loyalty. he didn't. He's got nothing to be blamed for.

[AgentDaleCooper]

:agree: We are all happy a **** when a crap players contract runs out, and we can get him out the door. As much as i dont like the man, he's not doing anything wrong imho, much like Riordan did nothing wrong when he left us for the smellies.

nothing legally wrong, sure. but what does it say of someone's standards (i'm talking about rooney here) when they are earning 7x the normal punter's annual wage EVERY WEEK, and that isn't enough for them?

is this greed not killing the game? are players above such knowledge?

clubs pour an awful lot of money into developing players, and fans, who ultimately are paying the wages, invest a great deal emotionally in their team. clubs are more than just "businesses" or "franchises", and fans are more than just "consumers" (god, i hate that word), and it's about time the players stopped treating them as such.

[Big Frank]

There is quite a lot of rubbish on this thread, so I'll add to it :greengrin.
The talk of a wage cap is nonsense. Players should be paid as much as what some mug is prepared to pay for them!

But we are all feeding the beast. The majority of us have SKY TV and ESPN, and we are paying TV companies hundreds of milions of pounds. They are paying the EPL hundreds of millions. Clubs can pay these nonsense wages. (no **** sherlock I hear you cry :greengrin).

The debt rules coming in is the first step though.....

[blackpoolhibs]

nothing legally wrong, sure. but what does it say of someone's standards (i'm talking about rooney here) when they are earning 7x the normal punter's annual wage EVERY WEEK, and that isn't enough for them?

is this greed not killing the game? are players above such knowledge?

clubs pour an awful lot of money into developing players, and fans, who ultimately are paying the wages, invest a great deal emotionally in their team. clubs are more than just "businesses" or "franchises", and fans are more than just "consumers" (god, i hate that word), and it's about time the players stopped treating them as such.

Aye very good, very sentimental. Then we come back in the real world and see threads on here virtually every week telling us we are skinflints, and Petrie wants hanging for not paying more for players. Perhaps players are getting paid too much, but we the fans are driving their wages up by demanding we pay more for even the most moderate of players.

[AgentDaleCooper]

Aye very good, very sentimental. Then we come back in the real world and see threads on here virtually every week telling us we are skinflints, and Petrie wants hanging for not paying more for players. Perhaps players are getting paid too much, but we the fans are driving their wages up by demanding we pay more for even the most moderate of players.

so, in the real world, you think rooney is doing a good and honest thing by trying to squeeze more money out of man utd?!

[blackpoolhibs]

so, in the real world, you think rooney is doing a good and honest thing by trying to squeeze more money out of man utd?!

If they are daft enough to pay him, i see nothing wrong in it. They dont have to pay him that amount, they can say no. Man United make around £8m a year just from his image as a United player. They sell £8m worth of strips posters and the likes, so in effect are paying him £4m more to have him play for them.

I'm not convinced they will keep him for the remaining time of his contract, and will sell him before it ends, and make a profit on him. United wont lose money, and Rooney will become richer. Its win win for both.

[LancashireHibby]

Rooney's looking out for number one, can't blame him for human nature. It's the clubs who are at fault for giving in to the demands of the players.