Sturridge fee set

The tribunal to decide the transfer fee of Daniel Sturridge has of course now announced the fee we would receive to compensate for the loss:

CHELSEA must pay Manchester City an initial fee of £3.5m for Daniel Sturridge and the striker's transfer could eventually cost the Londoners around £7m. The Professional Football Compensation Committee hearing ruled a compensation payment of £3.5million was due, with additional payments of £500,000 due after each of 10, 20, 30 and 40 first-team competitive appearances in all competitions. A further payment of £1m will be due if Sturridge makes a full international appearance, while City will be due a 15 per cent sell-on fee if the 19-year-old leaves Stamford Bridge. Sturridge joined Chelsea in July on a four-year deal after his contract expired at City.

I thought that the fee that would be decided upon by the tribunal would be in the region of what was announced, yet thought that the initial 'up front' fee would be more in line of the £5-6 million mark, with a far lower 'add on' figure dependent on appearances, goals and international appearances.

I have been throwing this around and can't unequivocally decide whether the fee is a fair one. As a 'selling' club, we were hardly in a position of strength as we weren't receiving a transfer fee to buy out the remainder of a contract, merely receiving a compensatory amount so would of course not be as high as if we were selling a player under contract. The amount based on future appearances etc did surprise me though as tribunals don't overly make a habit of including this element as such a high figure.

Of course, when compared to some fees, the initial fee appears a low one. £3.5 million clearly doesn't buy you much in the transfer market these days, and compared with fees paid for the likes of Theo Walcott (or even Giorgios Samaras or Felipe Caicedo), it is a low figure.

Yet transfer fees that are paid are to buy out a players contract, and for whatever reason (and both club and player were culpable to some degree) Sturridge was no longer contracted to us. In addition, up until the end of the 2008/09 had been nothing more than a bit part player for us - showing glimpses of his undoubted potential, but at this stage really only that.

Sturridge could go on to be a superstar, or he could ultimately sink without trace. But he will do so as a Chelsea player, not a Manchester City player. It is a huge shame that he walked away from the club, but - and as the club confirmed - it is in truth, a figure that is probably one to be content given the circumstances involved.

City to demand £7 million for Sturridge

The Telegraph is reporting that we are set to demand a fee of £7 million for Daniel Sturridge when the tribunal is held in a week or so's time on January 14th:

City had initially planned to target a £10 million figure, but the club have now set what they consider a more realistic figure of £7 million for the England U21 forward.

Chelsea, who gave Sturridge a four-year contract last summer, are expected to offer less than half the figure being sought by City, however, and the London club will point to his restricted involvement at Eastlands last season, when he made just 26 senior appearances for Hughes’s team, as justification for their own lesser valuation.

As ever with these siutations, it is near impossible to predict an accurate figure - even moreso with a lack of any real precedent being set.

I'd anticipate a final figure somewhere in the middle of what we are asking and Chelsea are offering - around the £5 million mark.

Not a huge amount if he lives up to his obvious potential, but equally, a sizeable figure given the limited action he saw with us up until his departure in the summer.

Bid for Adebayor reported

The mornings press is dominated by news that we have bid for Emmanuele Adebayor, with The Independent, Telegraph and Mail all reporting bids of between £20-£25 million for the Arsenal forward.

It does appear that Arsenal would be in selling mood, and Adebayor will in all likelihood be keen - seeing his wages likely doubled less than a year after his previous 50% hike in salary. I knew Adebayor wasn't the most universally liked player at Arsenal, but the weight of opinion against him has been surprising since the story broke and I don't think it is a case of sour grapes after the event like we saw when Gareth Barry moved from Aston Villa. There really does appear to be a genuine dislike for Adebayor amongst Arsenal fans.

A player with character issues doesn't seem to be the most obvious choice for Mark Hughes, and given the anti-Anelka feeling that developed in certain sections of the City crowd, he may not be set to become a terrace idol anytime soon. Hughes, if nothing else though, is a combative type, and I'm sure would back himself to manager players deemed to be troublemakers.

I don't have a problem with the signing in terms of fitting him into the team either. My concern with Adebayor is that he does not seem a natural goalscorer, but his record is a decent one and if nothing else, we would have plenty of variety and options. Although there is no European competition this season, we really do need to carry four top forwards, and given that our options in attack for the large part last season were a choice of Robinho plus one of Evans, Caicedo, Sturridge or a returning Bojinov, it is clear we needed to seriously upgrade.

UPDATE:

The BBC are reporting that we are in negotiations with Arsenal, taking the early morning reports one step further.

Sturridge on his move to Chelsea

'My motivation [for moving] was to play in the Champions League,' he explained at Cobham, midway between Thursday's two training sessions.

'I am a young player but I am very ambitious and I want to push myself to the highest level and play with the best players in the world. I believe that I can achieve big things here at Chelsea.

'But I am going to be very patient,' he qualifies, 'because I know there are world class players here and I am not going to get upset if I am not playing because it is very long season. There are going to be a lot of games and hopefully as the season goes on there are going to be opportunities so I can show the fans what abilities I have.

'I am not saying that Man City haven't got ambitions for the Champions League, or for any competition, but Chelsea is a fresh start for me and I believe that coming here will make me a better player.

'Man City is the past and Chelsea is the future for me.'

>>chelseafc.com

Not a huge amount of interest in his press conference (video via BBC Sport here) but what was noticeable was the lack of any discussion regarding the contract offer (or lack of it) from us and whether or not he considered re-signing at any stage.

Obviously the press conference was very much Chelsea centred, so it may be worth looking out for any comments from Mark Hughes or the club that come out the next day or so.

A further bid for Terry?

The Independent this morning suggests we could well try again for John Terry, raising our offer to £40 million pounds and making him the first £300,000 a week footballer:

Manchester City's pursuit of John Terry is not over and they are now considering increasing the pressure on Chelsea with a second bid for the England captain in excess of the £30m deal that was rejected on Thursday night. Chelsea are opposed to losing their captain but it is understood that Terry could yet opt to leave.

The article also states that there may be some indication that Terry at the very least would be open to discussions:

There is no doubt that City's executive chairman, Garry Cook, would not have made the offer to Chelsea had he not been receiving some encouragement that Terry would be amenable to a move. As a former Chelsea player, the City manager Mark Hughes has close contacts with his ex-club, including those individuals close to the players.

If a firm offer hadn't been made for Terry, this would strike you as a classic summer transfer non-story. The press could now well be dragging this out for all the column inches it's worth, but maybe, just maybe there may actually be a degree of truth to it.

I still maintain that I would be amazed if this offer ever amounted to anything, yet perhaps there has been encouragement of some sort from Terry in which case expect a follow up bid to materialise.

Of course, on the other hand it could all be a retaliatory gesture designed to hack Chelsea off over the Daniel Sturridge affair.

Chelsea confirm Sturridge signing

Chelsea Football Club is delighted to confirm that Daniel Sturridge has agreed to join the club on a four-year contract.

He will join the first team squad for pre-season training next week when the players return from their summer break.

The 19-year-old previously played for Manchester City, where he first burst onto the first team scene in the 2007/08 season, scoring twice in four days in January for Sven Goran Eriksson's side, including an important equaliser at Derby County to earn a point.

>>chelseafc.com

No great surprise and there has been plenty said about the whole Sturridge 'situation' before. All that remains is to have the fee agreed - either by tribunal or if both clubs can settle on a figure.

I'll keep my eyes on this for any official comments from either Sturridge or the club about the move.

Terry bid rejected

It was confirmed on chelseafc.com that we have had a bid for John Terry turned down. Whilst there were reports in January that we had tentatively enquired as to his potential availability, a concerete offer has clearly now been made (with some suggestion that we used the ruse of Sturridge negotitations to the spring the formal offer on a 'stunned' Peter Kenyon).

Despite being rebuffed, it is reported that we are set to go back in with a further bid. It does surprise me however as whilst we can flex some muscle to bring Barry and Santa Cruz to the club it is a different scenario entirely with Terry. Notwithstanding that there is a school of thought that actually suggests Terry benefits from having played alongside the likes of Carvalho, if we are talking £18 million for Joleon Lescott, is the region of £30 million way too low.

For me, whilst every player has his price, it has to be at the right time. Terry is a lynchpin and appears wedded to Chelsea and is the embodiment of the modern day Chelsea (both good and bad). I just don't see them even contemplating a deal regardless of what offer we put on the table. Having been rebuffed in January when the position at Chelsea was less stable (with Terry reportedly butting heads with Scolari), I fail to see the logic in going after him once again and surely we are better pursuing targets elsewhere.

Players released

CITY have confirmed the list of players released from the club.

Danny Mills, Daniel Sturridge, Darius Vassell, Glauber Berti, Didi Hamann and Michael Ball will all be playing their football away from Eastlands next season. Goalkeeper Richard Martin has gone, report www.mcfc.co.uk as have youngsters Matthew Brown, Ian Daly, Gregor Hartley, Ben Morris, Curtis Obeng, Chris Ramsey and Angelos Tsiaklis.

>>MEN.

No surprise with the names of Mills, Vassell, Glauber, Hamman or Ball on the list. Quite cleary none have any future with the club given the changes we have undergone the past couple of seasons.

It is worth noting though that when Vassell, Hamman and Ball arrived at the club they were very much components of the squad at that time. Vassell and Ball in particular played key roles when they first arrived before being marginalised during their latter days. Hamman's time was perhaps blighted through injury yet had a very big season in 2007/08 where he showed the form that he displayed during his days at Liverpool.

Whilst not unexpected (and the move to Chelsea will now surely be imminent), it also a very understated exit for Sturridge.

As for Danny Mills, the less said the better.

Sturridge set for Chelsea

The 19 year-old's contract expires this summer, but as he is under 24, he is not available to sign on a Bosman-style free transfer.

The two clubs have failed to reach an agreement on a suitable compensation package. City are looking to get a 'development fee' of around £10 million, but Chelsea's valuation is thought to be £3 million.

>>telegraph.co.uk

Nothing official from either club's websites, but it is a story that is now being widely reported with the agreement (or decision) of a fee the only thing now outstanding.

What will be interesting is the undoubted recriminations from both camps as to exactly where the blame lies for the failure to sign him to a new deal. I've written plenty before as the saga dragged on but we should see more come out over the next few days or so.

As big a potential loss as this could be, we are in a fortunate position that in terms of bringing players to the club the loss may not be anywhere near as damaging as it once might have been.

Evans bid rejected

CITY have turned down a £1.5m bid from Sheffield United for 20-year-old striker Ched Evans.

The Wales international was expected to be one of the victims of the cull which manager Mark Hughes is planning - to make room for his summer signings.

But City's rejection of the bid from the Championship play-off finalists is a sign of intent that they will not let their Academy success stories go for peanuts.

>>MEN.

I'd be surprised if the fee itself was the issue with any potential move as I think £1.5 million is more or less in the region of what we could command for Evans.

Does it indicate a future for Evans at the club? Again, I would be surprised as despite him making a number of appearances last season he did appear to fall down the pecking order with Caicedo earning favour during the run in.

The likelihood as well is that certainly one, possibly two top level forwards will arrive during the summer and some younger Academy forwards nipping at his heels so I don't see that Evans, for all his industry and physical presence (clearly an asset for Hughes) getting much opportunity. Whilst he has not had a consistent run in the side, I don't think he quite has the quality that is required - certainly not in playing a lone striker role.

Perhaps Hughes is mindful that the Sturridge situation is still in limbo, and perhaps unwilling to let Evans leave quite yet with that being unresolved.

Hughes on the Sturridge situation

City are understood to have offered £55,000-a-week, with Sturridge allegedly seeking nearer £80,000. Reports have since suggested Sturridge was set to become Carlo Ancelotti's first signing at Stamford Bridge. Hughes said that while he would like to secure Sturridge, he fears the teenager is more likely to move.

"I've got high regard for him, and would like to resolve the contract situation and keep him at the club," said Hughes. "But if he gets offers from elsewhere, there's not much I can do about that."

>>guardian.co.uk

It's been a couple of weeks since the last update on the Sturridge situation, and with the press fixated on who may be arriving rather than leaving the club, the whole issue is sliding under the radar a little.

Perhaps this all weeks in our favour as I have no doubt players (and agents?) heads are turned by constant media speculation linking players here and there. I maintained from the start when talk of problems re-signing him first surfaced that I thought the end result would be that he re-sign, and the longer the situation continues the more confident I am that it will happen.

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.

Ireland names supporters player of the year

Stephen Ireland has capped a superb season by being named as City’s Player of the Year by the Official Supporters Club.The 22-year-old midfielder has scored 13 times in all competitions for the Blues this season, but he has been won huge acclaim for his influential contribution throughout a gruelling season.

Runners-up in the senior category were Vincent Kompany and Pablo Zabaleta, and the winner of the Young Player of the Year award was Danny Sturridge. The 19-year-old striker has made the most his chances this season, grabbing four goals and playing a big part in the win over Schalke when asked to play out of position on the left flank. Just behind him were fellow strikers Felipe Caicedo and Ched Evans.

>>mcfc.co.uk

City 4 West Brom 2

Unsurprisingly, there was much tipping of West Brom for an upset ahead of yesterday's game - given our exertions in the UEFA Cup and also no doubt our propensity for allowing those sides near the bottom a great shot at taking three points.

Despite wobbling enough to allow West Brom back into the game at 2-2 (with a sniff of a win) we had enough quality and firepower to ultimately go on and take the points, and coupled with results elsewhere (notably draws for West Ham and Fulham) allow a glimmer of hope once again in the race for seventh, which will bring Europa League qualification.

There is no doubt Thursday night took a lot out of us but it was a flying start that we got off to with Robinho firing impressively home from a sumptuous through ball from Stephen Ireland to put us 1-0 ahead, and when Nedum Onouha took advantage of a bodycheck on Scott Carson from Felipe Caicedo (although it is safe to say Caicedo was surely fouled in the build up anyway), Mark Hughes may have been tempted to mimic Rafa Benitez in declaring the game over.

Perhaps a combination of both mental and physical tiredness allowed West Brom back into the game, and there must have been thoughts of games such as Liverpool where we contrived to allow sides back into games when we should have killed them off.

Credit though to the side, although Olsson's needless trip on Elano so soon after getting back on level terms was a gift, but Elano fired home (once again) and you did sense that West Brom felt their opportunity had gone. It was not until the final minute until the game was killed off though, when Ireland selflessley teed up Daniel Sturridge for a fourth and all but condemn our opponents to the drop.

A good three points then and a vital win as it keeps the season very much alive as we still have designs on that seventh position. With 53 points still the target I believe we need we have very little margin for error with some difficult games still on the fixture list to come.

We may need a huge amount of help from those sides ahead of us for us to achieve it, but if we keep winning that is all we can do. Time to sort out the away form then.

Robinho left out

Amongst five other changes from Thursday night's defeat in Hamburg. An interesting forward line, with Etuhu, Bojinov and Petrov all starting.

Man City: Given, Richards, Onuoha, Dunne, Garrido, Etuhu, Zabaleta, Ireland, De Jong, Petrov, Bojinov. Subs: Hart, Robinho, Elano, Fernandes, Evans, Sturridge, McGivern.

Hamburg 3 City 1

I wrote in the preview for the game that above all else an away goal would be crucial - and on the evidence of tonight Stephen Ireland's goal after just 30 seconds is our only glimmer of hope heading back to Eastlands for the second leg.

It was such a dream start to go in front so early, but before we could capitalise on this advantage Hamburg were back in the game and in truth it was no more than they deserved, with Shay Given making a number of saves before they got back on level terms.

From that moment on we were well and truly second best as Hamburg looked the brighter, livilier and more purposeful side. Our attacking fulcrum of Robinho, Bellamy and Sturridge - despite their movement - could not maintain possession which made it difficult to bring Ireland and Wright-Phillips into the game enough in key areas.

Counter this with the excellent front line from Hamburg, led superbly by Olic, who had a fantastic evening. Perhaps our long season finally caught up with us in some respects but we were second to the ball, and looked tired and leggy for the most part, chasing the game for the majority.

On the balance of play it wasn't a surprise that Hamburg added a second, and there can be no complaints regarding the award of the penalty, which was dispatched easily past Given. At 2-1 though, this would have left us with a slight advantage I believe but we could not hold out and Hamburg got what could be the vital goal to put daylight between the two sides and ensure the first leg finished 3-1.

Can we recover from tonight? Of course, as although a 2-0 victory sees us through I don't see that we will be able to post a clean sheet this time next week. It could be set up for a great night this time next week, but in the aftermath of tonight's defeat it does seem a long way away.

'Final offer' for Sturridge?

CITY are still hopeful they will keep hold of promising striker Daniel Sturridge in the summer. The talented teenager made a brief substitute appearance against Arsenal on Saturday following injury and the Blues are ready to put together a 'take it or leave it' package thought to be in excess of £40,000 per week. Chelsea and Aston Villa are both awaiting the outcome of the youngster's last-ditch talks with the Blues hierarchy. Hughes has made it clear he would like Sturridge to stay but the 19-year-old is out of contract in the summer and free to talk to other clubs. City would receive compensation but it would be a fraction of his future worth.

>>MEN.

Once again it appears that we have reached a stalemate regarding an extension to Daniel Sturridge's current deal which is increasingly close to expiring.

I'm not sure that threatening talk of 'final' or 'take it or leave it' offers are really the best approach to take in this situation though as surely that will only serve to alienate a player who, at the very least, is considering a future away from the club.

It would be a terrible shame if he were to leave, given that he does possess a wonderful talent, and for all that has been written about our adding a galaxy of world stars to block home grown players, it will be ultimately be money and not footballing reasons that result in his departure.

I know we have had a good degree of success in re-signing our Academy players to contract extensions this season but are we witnessing the first indications of problems further on with the scenario with Sturridge?

On the face of it, £40,000 per week is a very generous offer for a teenage player, who, whilst showing undeniable talent on occasion, has only featured in a handful of matches so can he really justify him being paid on par (or thereabouts) with the likes of Dunne, Richards, Ireland or Onouha for example?

Yet, could it also be argued that if Robinho can earn in excess of £150,000 per week, Bridge in the £100,000 range and so on, is £40,000 a reasonable figure in comparison? I have always thought, and still do, that Sturridge will re-sign but have to admit to having some doubts at present.

I do think he probably wants to remain at the club, but if another club is willing to pay what he believes he is worth, and we don't/won't match it, then for all the best will in the world he will not be playing for us come next season.

Positive news on the injury front

With this from the MEN:

MICHAEL Johnson is winning his fitness battle to be back in the first team picture by the end of the season.

And boss Mark Hughes is ready to invite other clubs to Carrington for behind-closed-doors matches to speed up the process even further.

Nagging groin and pelvic problems have kept the 21-year-old out of action since the end of September but if Johnson keeps making progress he could yet force his way back into the manager's plans before the end of the current campaign.

And this from skysports.com:

Daniel Sturridge and Benjani Mwaruwari could both feature for Manchester City against Arsenal on Saturday.

Benjani has made just 12 appearances for City this season due to hamstring problems, while ankle trouble has kept Sturridge out for the past two months.

However, both players are making good progress and manager Mark Hughes has also been boosted by news concerning Michael Johnson and Martin Petrov.

It remains to be seen quite how much of an impact some of the longer term casualties will be able to have given their lack of match fitness but it is a boost to all concerned nonetheless and will certainly create a bit of pressure on those currently in possession, with the carrot of both European qualification and winning the UEFA Cup firmly in our sights between now and the end of the season.

It will also create some intriguing discussion regarding team selections, and I'm sure we'll see plenty more of these before the season is out.

Benjani set to return

CITY striker Benjani will step up his return from a long-term leg injury when he lines up for the reserves against Blackburn tonight.

Benjani has made only 10 appearances for the Blues this season and last played in the 2-1 defeat against West Brom on December 21.

Daniel Sturridge, also recovering from injury, will play as will Darius Vassell and Javier Garrido in a strong looking side.

>>MEN.

The days best City links 02/13/2009

• Mark Hughes refuses to bow to Daniel Sturridge’s demands | Manchester City - Times Online

  tags: City

• Robinho has big ideas for Manchester City - Telegraph

  tags: City

• Everton want to sign Jo on permanent deal from Manchester City - Telegraph

  tags: City

• City star turns life around - News - Manchester Evening News

  tags: City

• Elano's Blues ambition - Manchester City - Football - Sport - Manchester Evening News

  tags: City

• Bellamy plays down Wales fuss - Manchester City - Football - Sport - Manchester Evening News

  tags: City

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.