Gary Cahill

[ulsterchelsea 3,221]

  On 14/01/2012 at 14:52, Kostas said:

Couldn't such an approach be extended to all aspects of football? From tactics and players to quality and style of our football.

yep but noone seems to get half as animated about those things as they are about how much an incoming player is going to be paid

[Peace. 4,352]

  On 14/01/2012 at 14:55, ulsterchelsea said:

yep but noone seems to get half as animated about those things as they are about how much an incoming player is going to be paid

Money is the sinews of war.

[ulsterchelsea 3,221]

  On 14/01/2012 at 14:58, Peace. said:

Money is the sinews of war.

How thoughtful of you

[Fernando 6,534]

  On 14/01/2012 at 14:35, ulsterchelsea said:

simple answer , because you nor i can effect anything by worrying about it so why bother

It's the same as spending our time writing here.

We can't effect anything the club does, what AVB does and such.

So why do we do it?

Same reason as to why people discuss about finances....

[Spike 12,049]

I've said some negative things about him and well I have to like and respect him now as he is a Chelsea player.

As long as doesn't do what the Dutch guy did and soak up wage while never playing.

[NiclasCFC 2,582]

All who watched the Sunderland game saw him on Stamford Bridge so its a done deal :blue scalf:

Welcome to CFC Gary Cahill! :blue scalf:

[MGuerreiro 252]

And AVB confirmed in a interview after the match. So this is finally over.

[Wilson 358]

Hopefully he's unveiled tomorrow.

[francozola 2,040]

^ I believe he's being unveiled on Monday

[Sheva. 5,373]

If Ivanovic is not back for Norwich, Cahill should start.

Luiz at RB.

[xPetrCechx 13,565]

I think that Luiz-Cahill-Terry-Ashley is better than Iva-Luiz-Terry-Ashley...

[Laylabelle 9,453]

Horray!!! Mini transfer drama over!Surprised it didnt last the whole window and ended up with him going elsewhere...

But all good!

[nullabletype 987]

  On 14/01/2012 at 15:57, Fernando said:

It's the same as spending our time writing here.

We can't effect anything the club does, what AVB does and such.

So why do we do it?

Same reason as to why people discuss about finances....

I think the difference is that we can all see what's good or bad with tactics, play etc. It's out there for all to see. We have enough information to actually generate a meaningful discussion. When it comes to the likes of contracts and so on, not all the relevant information is disclosed. All the information we have is based on paper speculation and hearsay.

Talking about tactics and play is something that directly effects the game, where as how much a player earns is virtually meaningless. It's even more so meaningless when you consider most of the conversation is worrying about the state of the clubs finances. The club is unlikely to make financially unsound decisions (you don't make the money Roman has by doing as such) , especially as we approach FFP. So for people to quibble over Cahill's wage is largely pointless as the clubs financier's, the people who have all the information, have deemed it acceptable.

It's not that people begrudge talk about finance, it's the type of talk. Saying a player shouldn't play because he's clearly out of form makes sense as we can see that for ourselves. Saying Gary Cahill shouldn't get 80K a week is pointless since we have no idea about the state of the clubs finances.

And the worst bit about it all is the people slandering Cahill, saying he's not worth his wage, not good enough etc before he's even pulled on a Chelsea shirt. The reason this is the worst part is because if he turns up, plays well and becomes a great player for us, as sure as a hoop's round the same people who rubbished him before he even stepped on the pitch as a Chelsea player will be verbally patting him on the back and proclaiming he's a great player and all the rest of it.

I could be wrong, but I suspect there will be a few people who posted in this thread who will end up eating crow.

[Fernando 6,534]

  On 14/01/2012 at 23:58, kylehimself said:

I think the difference is that we can all see what's good or bad with tactics, play etc. It's out there for all to see. We have enough information to actually generate a meaningful discussion. When it comes to the likes of contracts and so on, not all the relevant information is disclosed. All the information we have is based on paper speculation and hearsay.

Talking about tactics and play is something that directly effects the game, where as how much a player earns is virtually meaningless. It's even more so meaningless when you consider most of the conversation is worrying about the state of the clubs finances. The club is unlikely to make financially unsound decisions (you don't make the money Roman has by doing as such) , especially as we approach FFP. So for people to quibble over Cahill's wage is largely pointless as the clubs financier's, the people who have all the information, have deemed it acceptable.

It's not that people begrudge talk about finance, it's the type of talk. Saying a player shouldn't play because he's clearly out of form makes sense as we can see that for ourselves. Saying Gary Cahill shouldn't get 80K a week is pointless since we have no idea about the state of the clubs finances.

And the worst bit about it all is the people slandering Cahill, saying he's not worth his wage, not good enough etc before he's even pulled on a Chelsea shirt. The reason this is the worst part is because if he turns up, plays well and becomes a great player for us, as sure as a hoop's round the same people who rubbished him before he even stepped on the pitch as a Chelsea player will be verbally patting him on the back and proclaiming he's a great player and all the rest of it.

I could be wrong, but I suspect there will be a few people who posted in this thread who will end up eating crow.

Wow that was long! lol

But I will say you have a point as well with the exception of what seems meaningless to you might not be meaninless for another person.

[Kojo 4,676]

Ah well it's not too bad, as long as the club can pay it thats the main thing, and i doubt other clubs will say much or bring it up, because you take a look at Cities wages, i'm sure they've got 5 people on over 200 grand a week.

[nullabletype 987]

  On 15/01/2012 at 01:22, Fernando said:

Wow that was long! lol

But I will say you have a point as well with the exception of what seems meaningless to you might not be meaninless for another person.

Of course. Each to there own and all that. But people seem to get themselves worked up over the topic even though it's something that they're very much in the dark about, which comes across as slightly odd to me. However.

[Fernando 6,534]

  On 15/01/2012 at 01:34, kylehimself said:

Of course. Each to there own and all that. But people seem to get themselves worked up over the topic even though it's something that they're very much in the dark about, which comes across as slightly odd to me. However.

I think what made more sense to me about the topic of wages was this, what Kostas posted:

  On 14/01/2012 at 13:58, Kostas said:

If I had to guess I'd say he managed to get the alleged contract due to his fee being relatively low because Cahill over the past few seasons declined new contracts from Bolton effectively losing potential income. A player would naturally want to make up for that lost income with his new contract.

It's similar to players who run down their contracts getting sign-on fees at their new club and higher wages than they would had they had a transfer fee.

In the end both wages' and transfer fees' effect on the account of the club is very similar due to amortization.

The most striking recent example of that fact is how Anderlecht's Milan Jovanovic was on 120k p/w at Liverpool due to signing for free.

[JozManPro 2]

Glad all of that is finally over with, welcome Gary