zolayes 14,489 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Tell me the difference? Both players past their best, still at the club, by the fault of the club. The rest is redundant. you deserve a warning for cuntishness in saying there is no difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 you deserve a warning for cuntishness in saying there is no differenceThat's your opinion, however I maintain my stance. I'm not knocking either of these players because they have a right to stay and pick up their pay for not playing. After all, they have given enough years of service to the club. They're in the same ship, but the club is deciding to punish one and give the other alternative roles. Peace. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,326 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 LDN is completely right. Both not needed at all. Difference being Ferriera isn't a cunt CHOULO19, Muzchap, Peace. and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 12,049 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 LDN is completely right. Both not needed at all. Difference being Ferriera isn't a cunt I don't know about you but since those two aren't needed I think Chelsea should get Mario Götze to replace them.... Leif and We Hate Scouse 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave30 728 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I don't get how people can blame Malouda? its almost certainly the fault of the club. From what i see he's more than happy to contribute to the first team but is not wanted or used. That's fine and so he continues to train and behave with dignity and class. At no point have I heard that he has refused to play, turned up late to training or insulted any person within the club. Why should he just give up a nice contract and leave to save the Russian a few quid. Blue Armour 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,326 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I don't know about you but since those two aren't needed I think Chelsea should get Mario Götze to replace them....What a player. What a man. What a looker. I'd turn gay for him. Spike 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 12,049 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 What a player. What a man. What a looker. I'd turn gay for him.Doesn't look as good as a De Gea on ectasy at a Stone Roses concert. Damn, I get all giddy thinking about it. We Hate Scouse 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,326 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Doesn't look as good as a De Gea on ectasy at a Stone Roses concert. Damn, I get all giddy thinking about it.People are going to read this and not have a scooby doo what is going on! Spike 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 12,049 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 People are going to read this and not have a scooby doo what is going on!They don't deserve to know. We Hate Scouse 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHOULO19 24,332 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 That's your opinion, however I maintain my stance. I'm not knocking either of these players because they have a right to stay and pick up their pay for not playing. After all, they have given enough years of service to the club. They're in the same ship, but the club is deciding to punish one and give the other alternative roles.The difference is purely in the attitude. Malouda goes and whines to the media and moans constantly on twitter about not playing despite him being the one who refused to take a pay cut and go play in Brasil while Paulo helps everyone on the training ground and has never said anything bad about the club. I agree that Malouda has the contractual right to stay and receive his pay, but once he makes that choice he does not have the right to moan and make the club look bad.And Paulo is a model professional, completely unfair to compare him to Malouda. Belgiannutt, Rubber bullets and zolayes 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 The difference is purely in the attitude. Malouda goes and whines to the media and moans constantly on twitter about not playing despite him being the one who refused to take a pay cut and go play in Brasil while Paulo helps everyone on the training ground and has never said anything bad about the club. I agree that Malouda has the contractual right to stay and receive his pay, but once he makes that choice he does not have the right to moan and make the club look bad.And Paulo is a model professional, completely unfair to compare him to Malouda. I get the attitude thing, but Malouda isn't the first player to complain in the media and he certainly won't be the last. Even if he is talking sh*t in the media, the way he's being treated by the club is really poor. They don't even realize they're shooting themselves in the foot either. Once Malouda is no longer a Chelsea employee he's going to give a dirt sheet on the insides of this club, I have no doubt about this, and the club is going to look even worse than it does generally in the media. Lampard's attitude in the André Villas-Boas tenure was on par with Malouda but the club hasn't punished him (we can debate the semantics of his contract later) in the way they have with Malouda. Having a first-team player train with youth players is something lower league clubs do when they have a player who causes mischief or problems within the squad. Malouda seems like he just talked about his frustrations in the media (not that I'm saying that's okay), but he's not someone like Tevez who would refuse to come on in the middle of a game then take a 6-month golfing vacation. It also shows the further lack of control managers have. Because now the club decides who plays/who doesn't based on contractual matters, which really is pathetic. I'm only comparing Ferreira & Malouda in the contractual aspect, the fact they're earning a lot knowing they're not going to/hardly going to play any games this season. Amblève. and BlueSunshine 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHOULO19 24,332 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I get the attitude thing, but Malouda isn't the first player to complain in the media and he certainly won't be the last. Even if he is talking sh*t in the media, the way he's being treated by the club is really poor. They don't even realize they're shooting themselves in the foot either. Once Malouda is no longer a Chelsea employee he's going to give a dirt sheet on the insides of this club, I have no doubt about this, and the club is going to look even worse than it does generally in the media. Lampard's attitude in the André Villas-Boas tenure was on par with Malouda but the club hasn't punished him (we can debate the semantics of his contract later) in the way they have with Malouda. Having a first-team player train with youth players is something lower league clubs do when they have a player who causes mischief or problems within the squad. Malouda seems like he just talked about his frustrations in the media (not that I'm saying that's okay), but he's not someone like Tevez who would refuse to come on in the middle of a game then take a 6-month golfing vacation. It also shows the further lack of control managers have. Because now the club decides who plays/who doesn't based on contractual matters, which really is pathetic. I'm only comparing Ferreira & Malouda in the contractual aspect, the fact they're earning a lot knowing they're not going to/hardly going to play any games this season. But the thing with Malouda is that he chose this. He was clearly told by the club in the summer that he is no longer needed and he got several offers to leave but he chose to stay and not play instead of taking a pay cut. Just like he has the contractual right to stay and see out his contract, the club has the right to not play him or let him train with the first team. Muzchap 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 But the thing with Malouda is that he chose this. He was clearly told by the club in the summer that he is no longer needed and he got several offers to leave but he chose to stay and not play instead of taking a pay cut. Just like he has the contractual right to stay and see out his contract, the club has the right to not play him or let him train with the first team. This is true, but I'm sure he didn't expect this level of resentment from the club. People were outraged by what the club did with Alex & Anelka, I believe this is equally as bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHOULO19 24,332 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 This is true, but I'm sure he didn't expect this level of resentment from the club. People were outraged by what the club did with Alex & Anelka, I believe this is equally as bad. The thing is we still don't know what Alex and Anelka did so we can't really judge that. But in both cases the biggest loser seems to be the club! zolayes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDN Blue 7,903 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 The thing is we still don't know what Alex and Anelka did so we can't really judge that. But in both cases the biggest loser seems to be the club!Definitely. A trend that looks never ending lately.. Something's gotta give. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Armour 4,442 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 The difference is purely in the attitude. Malouda goes and whines to the media and moans constantly on twitter about not playing despite him being the one who refused to take a pay cut and go play in Brasil while Paulo helps everyone on the training ground and has never said anything bad about the club. I agree that Malouda has the contractual right to stay and receive his pay, but once he makes that choice he does not have the right to moan and make the club look bad.And Paulo is a model professional, completely unfair to compare him to Malouda. You also have to remember Paulo gets opportunities to play with the first team from time to time. Not exactly a reason for a 34 yr old squad player to complain... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueLyon 9,359 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 No disrespect but there are some real cunts on this forum. I mean, yes Malouda is getting old and he is not in form any more, but he gave us a lot in his time here. In the 09/10 season was absolute beast, huge part of those 100goals goes to his contribution as well. I just dont see why people shit on him nowdays. Ironicaly, those that are saying that he is cunt because he didnt accept paycut are cunts themselves for not standing by our player when he is not the best shape anymore. Just saying, no one knows what happend to him, why he stayed and why the board sent him to u21 team, but he gave us enough to be treated more respectively!! GeeMon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueLyon 9,359 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 Double post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post! The only place to be 11,313 Posted February 18, 2013 Popular Post! Share Posted February 18, 2013 No disrespect but there are some real cunts on this forum. I mean, yes Malouda is getting old and he is not in form any more, but he gave us a lot in his time here. In the 09/10 season was absolute beast, huge part of those 100goals goes to his contribution as well. I just dont see why people shit on him nowdays. Ironicaly, those that are saying that he is cunt because he didnt accept paycut are cunts themselves for not standing by our player when he is not the best shape anymore. Just saying, no one knows what happend to him, why he stayed and why the board sent him to u21 team, but he gave us enough to be treated more respectively!!It's not that he didn't accept a paycut, but that he didn't leave when he had offers on the table. He was happy just to sit on his arse for a year and take the money which football supporters will never like. Throw in the fact that he's been largely shit for the last few years and you're going to become a very unpopular person at this club. Bosnian Blue, Peace., Rmpr and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzchap 8,966 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 It's not that he didn't accept a paycut, but that he didn't leave when he had offers on the table. He was happy just to sit on his arse for a year and take the money which football supporters will never like. Throw in the fact that he's been largely shit for the last few years and you're going to become a very unpopular person at this club.This... If you are told 'surplus to requirements' - you have no arguments if you don't leave.In most 'normal' jobs those words = redundancyMalouda knew what he was doing - and now it hasn't worked out he's pissed off... But the fault is his and his alone. The club were honest with him (well done) and he chose to ignore that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.