Saturday, May 23, 2009

Sturridge stalemate

'We put in another offer but that was declined so we won't be going back. We've not got much headroom to negotiate and I'm disappointed.'
>>Mark Hughes.

It had all gone very quiet on the Sturridge contract front of late prior to the Hughes's comments. They don't appear to offer much hope in terms of getting a deal done, and it appears that the situation hasn't progressed from previous negotiations.

It seems as if the club have gone as far as they are prepared to do, and whatever offer has been made is deemed unsuitable by Sturridge and his representatives. It it also slightly disappointing given Sturridge's comments this week in which he heaped praise on the Academy after being named young player of the year.

I know the argument has been put forward that given our riches, why can't we just offer up what he wants and have done with it, but you cannot help but feel that Sturridge is being more than unreasonable. Let's not forget (putting his talent and potential aside) that here is a young player who hasn't had a huge impact on the senior side as yet, so is he right be demanding parity with the likes of Ireland and those former Academy players who have established themselves?

One thing that I'm struggling to understand with the negotiations (from Sturridge's perspective) is say he does leave the club in the summer, how likely will he actually be to get an offer from a side that is on par or better than the one we have put on the table?

Truth be told there are very few clubs that will be putting a long term offer in the region of £75,000 on the table for an untested teenager, and if there are clubs with those resources (likely a top four side) will he be better off in terms of playing time and development than he will be with ourselves?

It is a dilemna though, because as correct as our stance is, if indeed Sturridge does walk away, there is always the danger of his vast potential being realised elsewhere, and that would be a terrible loss on our part.

I'm still hopeful he signs though, and despite the negativity surrounding the situation, do still think it the likely outcome as opposed to Sturridge lining up elsewhere next season and beyond.

vote it up!


City lady said...

Interesting and thought provoking article. Though I would say such a greedy young man developing elsewhere is only a loss to the old City who had no money to buy the best teenagers and young players on the planet. Keirrison is only 19/20yo is top scorer in Brazil. He is strong and very skillful and is an improvement on Sturridge now. Barcelona had a bid turned down already for him. He would be a great young replacement and no doubt would find the offer we made Sturridge more than acceptable. Sturridge is very badly advised but at the end of the day he has been very duplicitious in what he has been saying all season. His interview is still on Mcfctv where he swears allegiance to City for life or did he mean the next 6 months. Good riddance, onwards and upwards for us.

Anonymous said...

Good Article and totally agree with the Lady. Could there be two more complete polar opposites than Nedum and Sturridge? One is a hard working, modest, ethical, Blue to the bone teamplayer. Quietly authoritive, loyal, doggedly determined, VERY intelligent, an erudite speaker, generous in his praise for others. IMO a future City and England Captain for many years to come. The other one is Daniel Sturridge. Like the Lady says, to lose him would have been a huge blow to the OLD City. The NEW City can do much better for the money we can now offer. Let this arrogant no mark disrupt someone elses Dressing Room.

Anonymous said...

The Ego is leaving it seem's.
A young player ill advised demanding the impossible in salary for an untried and untested player.
Sturridge will not hit the wage elsewhere it is beyond reason.
Championship bound within a few years what a pity... what a waste still we have as good if not better following up.
If you do not want to wear the shirt go... we do not want you.