Jump to content

[Archived] Lucas Neill


Recommended Posts

I've heard that the figure is more around 40,000 a week, thats what some westHam fans are saying on another board.I'm not sure.I mean 70/60 thousand a week, then you start hearing 40,000 a week.All you seem to hear anymore is them words"undisclosed fee"

So,with Lucash gone and Savage injured,who will be captain ,now. Nelsen is mean't to take the role when he returns.Will we give it back to Ooijer, he did ok last time he did the job.

Edited by ewoodblue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Australians of his generation grew up watching Craig Johnstone score in the FA Cup back in the mid 80's.

Perhaps Lucas is smart enough to realise that he'll never make at a 'top' club as a player, so he's better off earning the cash to run his own club to make his other football dreams come true.

If he ends up bankrolling an Australian team that wins the Asian Champions League in 10 years time, does that mean he is ambitious enough and you'll all forgive him?

He almost bought the sydney team before the start of this season, and when that failed he almost bought a licence for a another a-league team. I think it was with cahill, or another socceroo.

All the best lucas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's arrogant, but their point is valid. They just lost a player to a side in the relegation scrap, as a team playing in the Champions League they were bound to make a big deal out of it.

It's not valid though...they offered half (if that - the Daily Express yesterday suggested they would only pay £25,000 a week) the salary West Ham offered. Is Champions League enough for that? I'd suspect that the majority of people would look after number one and go to West Ham. As for the relegation scrap - well, it's not permanent. If West Ham stay up then they will most likely continue spending in the summer and be in a good position to really challenge next season.

Liverpool need to get over themselves as their name alone cannot get them players on the cheap. Man Utd don't need to get players on the cheap (Ronaldo is being offered a new contract over £100,000 a week despite his current having three years left) and maybe that is why are top and Liverpool aren't. You can't scrimp and save to win the Premiership anymore...it's all about throwing money around.

I would have rather gone to Liverpool for less money than West Ham for more and I can understand where they are coming from. I don't know why people think it is pure arrogance that they think Neill has made the wrong decision. We would all be saying the same thing if a player turned us down and went to Watford for more money.

I disagree with all that and unless you were actually faced with a decision which could cost you potentially £35,000 (or whatever) a week then you are just second guessing yourself. It's all very easy to say on a message board but when that contract is offered it may well be a whole new ball game. If Rovers lost out on players to Watford I would have to ask why it is that we cannot compete for signings with a club that will be playing Championship football next year. At least West Ham seem to have pots of cash and (possibly) a very bright future financed by a very rich man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liverpool need to get over themselves as their name alone cannot get them players on the cheap. Man Utd don't need to get players on the cheap (Ronaldo is being offered a new contract over £100,000 a week despite his current having three years left) and maybe that is why are top and Liverpool aren't. You can't scrimp and save to win the Premiership anymore...it's all about throwing money around.

probly the most truest thing ive read this week...its a scouse thing up their own arses and living in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm willing to give Benitez the doubt and assume he wanted Lucas as back up only, and a reliable utility player. If he really wanted him surely they would have paid up.

Don't tell me Steven Gerrard didn't move to Chelsea because of his loyalty to Liverpool....

How's his WAG going to feel when they're sunning themselves on the Cote d'Azur this summer and Frank Lampard sails up on his yacht? "What's the matter Stevie, not got yourself one of these yet? You're a better player than me too."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't tell me Steven Gerrard didn't move to Chelsea because of his loyalty to Liverpool....

Quite right DP........... but I think death threats toward his family from some of Liverpools 'finest' didn't help in his push for his preferred move to Chelsea. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite right DP........... but I think death threats toward his family from some of Liverpools 'finest' didn't help in his push for his preferred move to Chelsea. :unsure:

To be fair to him you have to say that he would more than likely have been paid better at Chelsea. WHat made him stay more than anything else imo was the CL win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with those saying that Lucash was right to look after his interests and take double the money. Yes, to the average person it would be a no-brainer say to take £50k a year instead of £25k A YEAR.

But for the sort of money involved i.e £25k/£50k A WEEK I personally think that if you can't be happy on £25k a week playing in front of the Kop in the Champs League -then your not going to be happy at all.

Would Lucas give a million to go down in the history of the game and (potentially) have some medals to show his kids? Or would he rather be forgotten about but a bit richer??

Edited by OJRovers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would Lucas give a million to go down in the history of the game and (potentially) have some medals to show his kids? Or would he rather be forgotten about but a bit richer??

Rich and anonymous every time, mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like Phil Thompson but I think he summed it up on Gilette Soccer Saturday.

He said "Neill claimed it wasn't about money it was about playing regularly. If that's the case, why didn't he stay at Blackburn?"

Yes, Neill said he wanted a new challenge, but then says all he wants is to play regular football. He signs a deal that gets him out of a club if it's relegated.

So what he really meant was he wanted twice as much money as he was on, he didn't care who paid it, doesn't fancy the challenge of earning a place in a start up line (even for the team he 'supported') and is happy to bugger off from his new paymasters if things get really tough.

Still, don't really care. He's a Hammer now and hopefully will be a free agent at the end of the season as they get relegated. Will be funny if he tries to go to Liverpool ona free...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably a mix of things. The money is obviously important but there is also the chance to live in London and I don't think Benitez particularly valued Neill. In the summer he wasn't prepared to swap him for Warnock or really offer Rovers a good deal. They tried to get him on the cheap like with Bellamy whereas it seems West Ham really wanted him. Then even if relegated Neill will be on a free and able to command a big signing-on fee and someone will pay him a lot of money.

Of course money is a huge part in this but he's hardly likely to say that is he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One could argue he wanted a fresh challenge.

He probably would have preferred Liverpool but needs regular games. He is the current captain of Australia and wouldn't want part time performances affecting his selection.

Australia are also planning on basing their next few matches in London. That, coupled with allure of living in London, may well have influenced his decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hes tarnished his reputation with whole of the football world and fans with his greed though. He will now be known as a player with no ambition, and any of those reckless tackles he makes now will be magnified a whole lot more then they were while he was at rovers.

It'd be interesting to see what Sparky really thinks of Lucas's move I bet he's disgusted with the guy, and its good to see that Lucas wasnt one of Brett best mates at the club!

To any australians, What has the australian media made of Mr.greedy's move to West ham?

Edited by todd_could_take_tyson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hes tarnished his reputation with whole of the football world and fans with his greed though. He will now be known as a player with no ambition, and any of those reckless tackles he makes now will be magnified a whole lot more then they were while he was at rovers.

It'd be interesting to see what Sparky really thinks of Lucas's move I bet he's disgusted with the guy, and its good to see that Lucas wasnt one of Brett best mates at the club!

To any australians, What has the australian media made of Mr.greedy's move to West ham?

Ste B Jan 23 2007, 10:44 Post #150

Group: Administrators

Posts: 4382

Joined: 14-July 01

Member No.: 256

QUOTE(AxesFirstTouch @ Jan 22 2007, 19:54 )

--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ste B @ Jan 21 2007, 22:42 ) </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->

Couple that with members who create 5 different accounts so they can post sh1te and then have the cheek to take a pop at mods/admin when they get pulled up on it.

Mods who lick Lee's asshole and ban people who Lee dont like

People who bitch about the rule, but will ultimately be get banned for.

1) Multiple accounts, one of which has already been banned.

wakefieldrawks, todd_could_take_tyson, Mortens_leftpeg aka Morten is God, judasmoreloyalthanneil, RobertsBanjodoor spring to mind.

todd-could-take-tyson are you AxesFirstTouch?

How do you keep creeping back on?

Edited by SouthAussieRover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.