TrentVilla Posted March 21, 2012 Moderator Share Posted March 21, 2012 Hes had a single half decent season in his whole career. I agree and it took a Brazilian star to get the best out of him. While he did link up well with Robinho I don't agree with you Trent. Fair enough. Everyone has their own opinion, out of interest why don't you agree? When other than playing alongside him has Ireland ever performed to the same level? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_c Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 we should be building the team around Ireland. Letting him go will be a massive mistake. There's more to come from him, he's in his prime. He can be as good as Zidane. I would sell Agbonlahor before Ireland. As good as Zidane? This is a joke, yes? Could tackle, pass, shoot, and head the ball. Had the touch of a master and a massive work rate. Yes, just like Ireland on his day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brommy Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 It appears that Ireland is VillaTalk's latest Marmite player! I've read that a player is somehow crap and amazing several times on one page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I'd be extremely disappointed. Why? He's not worth the best part of 70k a week he gets paid We desperately need him off the payroll Let the kids flourish now So you'd advocate selling another one of our better players and replacing him with Bannan who has shown no signs whatsoever that he is going to be good enough? If there is any truth in the rumour at all then it would explain the Holman signing but i would be very disappointed to see Ireland go especially when his performance level is starting to improve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiegoD Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 While i agree it took Robinho to get the best out of him, he was definitely better than 'half decent' that season. He scored, he created and he worked hard and there is not much more you can ask from a midfielder. I'd like him to stay because i think he has been playing much better recently and adds something different to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I'd be extremely disappointed. Why? He's not worth the best part of 70k a week he gets paid We desperately need him off the payroll Let the kids flourish now So you'd advocate selling another one of our better players and replacing him with Bannan who has shown no signs whatsoever that he is going to be good enough? If there is any truth in the rumour at all then it would explain the Holman signing but i would be very disappointed to see Ireland go especially when his performance level is starting to improve. Ireland is on far too much money for a club of our size. i think that aussie bloke is his replacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_c Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 If he is indeed on 70k a week, the truth is we should be getting two or three players for that. (given our current turnover and finances) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Ireland has 2 assists and 1 goal in 16 games (according to ESPN).. it really isn't that impressive or worth it for £70k (if he is on £70k that is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swerbs Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Man City pays 20k of his wages, if it is 70k we would be only be paying around 50k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Ireland is on 81k, we pay him 61k. Darren Bent is also on 81k they are the 2 highest earners. If we are being realistic then we should get rid of them both and get in around 5/6 players for the same amount of wages. It makes sense, Ireland is a luxury player and Bent is not and never will be used correctly by McLeish. He is not a lone sriker so why waste the money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villastine Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Ireland is on 81k, we pay him 61k. Darren Bent is also on 81k they are the 2 highest earners. If we are being realistic then we should get rid of them both and get in around 5/6 players for the same amount of wages. It makes sense, Ireland is a luxury player and Bent is not and never will be used correctly by McLeish. He is not a lone sriker so why waste the money I suppose you can scan in their pay slips?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 As far as i can read we all seem to be preparing ourselves for some bleak years ahead if we are still advocating selling our best players and bringing in players on lower wages which is sound financially but does it equate to a successful club? I'd rather keep Bent and Ireland if they were happy to stay with us and get rid of Heskey, Dunne, Warnock, Collins, Hutton, Petrov and replace them with our younger crop of players and one or two astute signings. Randy has done a very good job of brain washing the lot of us if our expectation levels are that low now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voinjama Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Dont care if he leaves. In my opinion there is only 1 player the club must keep at all costs, and that is Bent. Maybe Given also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Sell him. He gets paid too much for being generally an underperforming, sulking pain in the ass. The fact that it's an MLS club coming in with a decent offer tells the tale, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super-Villan Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Ireland is on 81k, we pay him 61k. Darren Bent is also on 81k they are the 2 highest earners. I really don't think that's the case at all. Previous clubs do not carry on paying players a wage after they have tranfered away. When they are on loan, yes. I'm not even sure it would be allowed to pay the wages of a player you didn't own - I strongly suspect it would contrevene fair play rules. What can happen is that a bulk sum is paid when a player leaves for lower wages, so Ireland could have been paid enough to cover an additional £20k a week for the remainder of his contract. But unless someone has any decent evidence to the contrary, I'm pretty sure that they can't be still paying any of his wages directly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Ireland is on 81k, we pay him 61k. Darren Bent is also on 81k they are the 2 highest earners. I really don't think that's the case at all. Previous clubs do not carry on paying players a wage after they have tranfered away. When they are on loan, yes. I'm not even sure it would be allowed to pay the wages of a player you didn't own - I strongly suspect it would contrevene fair play rules. What can happen is that a bulk sum is paid when a player leaves for lower wages, so Ireland could have been paid enough to cover an additional £20k a week for the remainder of his contract. But unless someone has any decent evidence to the contrary, I'm pretty sure that they can't be still paying any of his wages directly. He still gets 20k from man city.he didn't want to come to villa and demanded money to move. man city really wanted milner and agreed to the deal. man city will pay him the extra 20k until the date his man city contract would have run out had he not left them. its basically a compensation agreement for being forced out of the door and it is perfectly legal. Bent is on the same money overall as he has a clause in his contract to say that he has to ne on a par with the highest earner which was Ireland even though part of his money comes from man city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Hes had a single half decent season in his whole career. I agree and it took a Brazilian star to get the best out of him. While he did link up well with Robinho I don't agree with you Trent. Fair enough. Everyone has their own opinion, out of interest why don't you agree? When other than playing alongside him has Ireland ever performed to the same level? From memory, he had a good season in 07-08 under Sven when Man. City were threating to finish in the top half up until February. Trent, would you have got rid of Merson early on when he was playing up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Leeds were paying some of their former players after they left. 10 years ago but it does seem plausible. Hopefully culling Heskey and his 60k a week in the summer will be all the financial cutting we need to make from the attacking area as we do have a bit of youth in that area, likes of Weimann, Fonz, Gardner, Albrighton and Bannan won't be on mega wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeps Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Heskeys wages are a joke and I see on of dunne Collins or Carlos leaving to ease more wages. Ireland was great vs fulham so if the form continues why would u let him go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super-Villan Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Ireland is on 81k, we pay him 61k. Darren Bent is also on 81k they are the 2 highest earners. I really don't think that's the case at all. Previous clubs do not carry on paying players a wage after they have tranfered away. When they are on loan, yes. I'm not even sure it would be allowed to pay the wages of a player you didn't own - I strongly suspect it would contrevene fair play rules. What can happen is that a bulk sum is paid when a player leaves for lower wages, so Ireland could have been paid enough to cover an additional £20k a week for the remainder of his contract. But unless someone has any decent evidence to the contrary, I'm pretty sure that they can't be still paying any of his wages directly. He still gets 20k from man city.he didn't want to come to villa and demanded money to move. man city really wanted milner and agreed to the deal. man city will pay him the extra 20k until the date his man city contract would have run out had he not left them. its basically a compensation agreement for being forced out of the door and it is perfectly legal. Bent is on the same money overall as he has a clause in his contract to say that he has to ne on a par with the highest earner which was Ireland even though part of his money comes from man city. I think you're wrong. It wouldn't be allowed, as to be paid weekly like that he'd have to be an employee. If they were paying him every week there would be a conflict of interest whenever we played Man City. I think you've misunderstood the situation. The compensation for agreeing to come here is correct, but it would have been paid in a lump sum to him on leaving Man City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts