StDunko

Ok lets say Morgan Schniederlin has an identical twin brother called Jorgen Schniederlin with identical football skills etc. They are thought to be of identical value to a team. At present they are both on £40k per week. However Morgan has 4 years left on his contract and his club is willing to sell him for £27m, but Jorgen has allowed his contract to run down and has just become a free agent. Both Arsenal and Spuds are desperate for a defensive midfielder. Arsenal sign Jorgen "on a free" and double his wages to £80K p/w. Spuds have missed out on Jorgen but are still keen on Morgan, so they pay the £27m and sign him. Morgan's agent points to the fact that Jorgen (an identical player) is on £80k p/w and say they will only agree personal terms if Morgan also commands a wage of £80k p/w. Spuds pay the "going rate". Just beacuse Arsenal didn't have to pay a transfer fee for Jorgan, it didn't result in him getting more wages than a comparable player... Who knows if such a scenario would play out the same way in real life? I guess one advantage of players ensuring they are perpetually "under contract" rather than being "free agents" is that, if a bigger club wants to buy you, you would expect them to offer you improved wages over your current contract, otherwise why leave. However if you see out a contract and become a free agent, then you will only be able to earn what the highest offer is from any interested clubs, this may (or may not) be more than your previous contract. I know of no evidence to suggest that if there is no transfer fee to be paid, a players wages will be higher. I stand by my assertion that market forces set the level of wages a player can command. This is seemingly pretty independant of whether a transfer fee has been paid for the player, or if they were a free agent, or if they are just re-negotiating a new contract with their current club. Players will always demand to be paid the same as their peers, regardless of whether their peers have been transferred to the club for a high fee, arrived as a free agent, or have just renegotiated a new contract with their existing club... It's not just "the overall cost to the club of the transaction (transfer fee plus wages)" that determines wage level. You hear stories of players demanding to be given a wage that matches the current highest earner at the club...

Because signing a new contract can only ever be a good thing for a player. As usual this comes down to wages, who doesn't want to get paid the maximum amount possible? Importantly, I'm not sure there is a direct correlation between transfer fee and wages. Players will command a certian level of wages regardless of whether they arrived at the club on a Free Transfer, are signing a contract extension at their current club, or arrived after commanding a large transfer fee. For example say Rooney and Van Persie are both represented by the same agent prior to Van Persie's move to ManU. Rooney signs a contract extension at £150k p/w. Van Persie now knows the club are willing to pay top level strikers £150k p/w, therefore he will only sign for similar wages, despite there being a £28m transfer fee to pay to Arsenal to secure his services. I think clubs have to view the two pots of money, as independant of each other. The club will set their own salary ceiling, and will have a seperate transfer kitty. If you can accomodate the transfer within both, it goes ahead. Who is to say RVP could have got a higher wages if he was a free agent, I don't think there is any evidence to support that? Market rate is market rate. So if transfer fee does not have much of an impact (if any) on wages, then there is no reason not to sign a new contract (with increased wages) with your current club, if offered. As a player, you will only be offered a new contract if you are playing well (in comparrison to how much you are earning). Only poorly performing player's contracts are allowed to "run down". This is because no other clubs will "turn their heads" by trying to sign them, by offereing higher wages. Their current club is stuck (over)paying them for the remainder of the contract. At the end of the contract they will then most likely move elsewhere for lower wages. (Tommy Forecast, Billy Sharp Jonathan Forte etc.) However, if you are playing well (in comparison to how much you are earning) your current club will want to secure your services for a longer term, by offering you a pay rise, (there current club will also benefit from the additional bonus that if another club tries to sign you, long before you are due to become a "free agent" you will command a higher transfer fee). (Jose Fonte, Jay Rodriguez) Because of how the transfer system works, if your current club will not match how much you feel/know you can earn elsewhere (regardless of how recently you signed your most recent contract) you can just agitate for a move (Adam Lallana, Luke Shaw, Dejan Lovren, Morgan Schniederlin). Generally as players are too expensive an asset to let "rot in the reserves" you will get your way and the transfer will happen. So basically, signing a new contract gives you an immediate pay rise and guarenteed employment for a longer period, but it still does not prevent you getting a transfer to an even bigger richer club on even higher wages, if they come calling. So why wait to become a free agent?

Made a last minute decision to go to the match yesterday. Ended up in the queue pictured above, when a nice old fella came up and gave me a spare ticket, as one of his group couldn't make it. He wouldn't even take any money for it, said he was just happy for it to go to a saints fan. We really do have some great fans! Many thanks if it was you and you post on here.

I really don't know why Poch didn't seem to rate him, and now, if it is true that he has not been offered a new contract, it would appear that particular view is still held by those in power at the club (Les?) Odd because every Saints fan I know think he is a great player. What is it the management of the club see, that we the fans don't? I wonder if he doesn't perform well in training, or is not great at following a manager's instructions?

Redslo, read your blogs, very impressed. I really hope you are right (and that our board is as switched on as you appear to be)! As a big baseball fan (as well as Saints Fan) I have often wondered how much of a "Moneyball" approach could be applied to football. I wouldn't mind us being the Oakland A's of the Prem. Perhaps Ralph should have made that analogy, rather than the GB Packers one?

Did I hear their commentater say that more and more teams are coming down from the premiership these days?

Nice work, thanks.

"a chat with Martinez on deadline day..." Surely this is a quote from when he went there on loan last year, not a recent one from his perm move.

So if he really wants to leave, Morgan just needs to bite someone!

Cheers MLG

Any links to highlights of the game?

Many thanks Becks and nta!

Am I right to assume that was the final score? Plus who scored the 3rd goal?

But their new manager is the former Itallian manager that did not even have him in his WC squad.

Tommy Forecast was English, should we therefore never sign any more Englishmen too?

Yeah, exactly. I have bought tickets under my ST/Customer number for all the home cup ties and I have also bought some additional tickets under my customer number for friends (who rarely come to games, so don't have their own customer numbers) for games such as Fulham home league game. Therefore my ST/customer number qualifies for Man U tickets. Obviously this system means that I can purchase tickets for a "mate" of my choice, who may or may not have any purchase history, ahead of others that do have a purchase history. I just see this as a reward for how much money I spunk on SFC each year. I can see how some people would prefer an alternative system, that does not allow ST holders to purchase a second ticket, before regularly attending non ST holders get a chance to buy a 1st.

Where did it say that?, I just went ahead and booked, it gave me the option of buying a single ticket against my ST/Customer number, but there was no option of tickets next to any of the friends and family numbers that I'm linked to.

Just got through online too. Purchased a ticket using my ST customer number, so that answers the question about whether ST holders with enough qualifying additional purchases can get extra tickets...

I'm a (weekend) biker and riding like that should be reserved for the track. No regard for the lives of other road users.

Cheers GB

Can anyone suggest a good stream please?

Squawks sounds the same when you read the word spelt either forwards or backwards despite not being a palindrome.

Got mine from Elford's in Chichester, fantastic shed and fantastic service. They might add a little extra charge as you'd be outside their "free delivery area", but I think they'd still take the business. I recommend a small terrier to stop rats setting up home underneath.

Seems like fraud to me, perhaps send him a letter saying that you will go to the police if he continues with the insurance claim?

Yeah deffo "dickheads"! I thought that was why this had been posted. I spent a few months in the Cook Islands about 12 years ago, it must be the most beautiful place on earth.