Shay Given

[Damo70]

I defend their choice not to take a wage cut, but if that is the sticking point stopping them moving on and playing football then it questions how desperate they are to go to another club to get games.

[PeterWithesShin]

If they chose to stay for, arguments sake, £40k a week  rather than move for £35k then yes, they are just greedy bastards. But what if it's 10K a week on offer? No matter how much I loved playing football i'd stay put and make sure I raked in as much as possible from what is a short career.

[Percy McCarthy]

It amazed me footballers still want to sit on the bench or stand in  the stand rather earn 40 thousands a week than play every week earning 25 thousand a week. both pay is still plenty.

How did you gain such precise knowledge of what players are earning and what offers they have received from other clubs?

[paul_e]

If they chose to stay for, arguments sake, £40k a week  rather than move for £35k then yes, they are just greedy bastards. But what if it's 10K a week on offer? No matter how much I loved playing football i'd stay put and make sure I raked in as much as possible from what is a short career.

For me it's not about greed, the wages are what they are, there's a famous quote that money is only important if you haven't got any (I have no idea who it's from but I've read it a few times) and for these 2 I think that's a very important point.

As things stand they've both earned enough money (a rough estimate based on the figures we regularly see for them suggests £10m+ for Hutton in his career and quite a bit more than double that for Shay) to live a comfortable life and never have any need to worry about money (unless they get heavily into gambling or drugs, etc).  So the decision they're faced with is, when they retire do they want to look back on a couple of years of training with the kids and raking in the money or a couple of years of playing the sport they loved enough to want to do it for a living.  If they've rejected contracts from clubs who pretty much guaranteed them games then they've made their decision, and it's their right to do so.

What I dislike is to then blame the club for not making the decision easy by giving them the money and letting them leave to get games.

[dave.woodhall]

If they chose to stay for, arguments sake, £40k a week  rather than move for £35k then yes, they are just greedy bastards. But what if it's 10K a week on offer? No matter how much I loved playing football i'd stay put and make sure I raked in as much as possible from what is a short career.

For me it's not about greed, the wages are what they are, there's a famous quote that money is only important if you haven't got any (I have no idea who it's from but I've read it a few times) and for these 2 I think that's a very important point.

As things stand they've both earned enough money (a rough estimate based on the figures we regularly see for them suggests £10m+ for Hutton in his career and quite a bit more than double that for Shay) to live a comfortable life and never have any need to worry about money (unless they get heavily into gambling or drugs, etc).  So the decision they're faced with is, when they retire do they want to look back on a couple of years of training with the kids and raking in the money or a couple of years of playing the sport they loved enough to want to do it for a living.  If they've rejected contracts from clubs who pretty much guaranteed them games then they've made their decision, and it's their right to do so.

What I dislike is to then blame the club for not making the decision easy by giving them the money and letting them leave to get games.

They don't pay football for a living because they love it. They play football for a living because it pays more than anything else would.

[Fasth56]

Just because a player wants to play doesn't mean he should lower his contracted salary just to do it.

If a company I worked for employed someone who was better at the job than I was, then I may have to start looking for another job at whatever rate they thought I was worth. I do not see footballers as any different. If you want to play, prove it and accept the lower salary.

[paul_e]

If they chose to stay for, arguments sake, £40k a week  rather than move for £35k then yes, they are just greedy bastards. But what if it's 10K a week on offer? No matter how much I loved playing football i'd stay put and make sure I raked in as much as possible from what is a short career.

For me it's not about greed, the wages are what they are, there's a famous quote that money is only important if you haven't got any (I have no idea who it's from but I've read it a few times) and for these 2 I think that's a very important point.

As things stand they've both earned enough money (a rough estimate based on the figures we regularly see for them suggests £10m+ for Hutton in his career and quite a bit more than double that for Shay) to live a comfortable life and never have any need to worry about money (unless they get heavily into gambling or drugs, etc).  So the decision they're faced with is, when they retire do they want to look back on a couple of years of training with the kids and raking in the money or a couple of years of playing the sport they loved enough to want to do it for a living.  If they've rejected contracts from clubs who pretty much guaranteed them games then they've made their decision, and it's their right to do so.

What I dislike is to then blame the club for not making the decision easy by giving them the money and letting them leave to get games.

They don't pay football for a living because they love it. They play football for a living because it pays more than anything else would.

I don't disagree, but when they started playing football they enjoyed it enough to play lots and worked hard enough to be in that position, I doubt there are many 9-10 year olds who get into playing in the hope of making a career out of it.  That's really the point.  Don't complain that the club is stopping you from moving so you can play when what is actually stopping you is your own choice to earn more money staying where you are and training with the kids.  I respect their right to make the choice, I don't respect them bleating about it in the press afterwards.

[Percy McCarthy]

Just because a player wants to play doesn't mean he should lower his contracted salary just to do it.

If a company I worked for employed someone who was better at the job than I was, then I may have to start looking for another job at whatever rate they thought I was worth. I do not see footballers as any different. If you want to play, prove it and accept the lower salary.

So you'd leave for a lower-paid job if you had the option of staying put and sitting in the canteen all day doing next to fuck all for the same money as before?

Fair play, you must love work.

[silhillvilla]

Given has an expensive divorce looming and based on the ray parlour precedent his ex will be getting a good chunk of his future earnings so he won't be leaving us for less dough.

[Salsa Party Animal]

but outside football we will be happy to sit in canteen and earn much money as possible to pay mortgages off and get early retirement. Football is different world due to them earning a year salary in one week for most people.

[dave.woodhall]

but outside football we will be happy to sit in canteen and earn much money as possible to pay mortgages off and get early retirement. Football is different world due to them earning a year salary in one week for most people.

And also spending a lot more. Most of the world would be equally happy to earn what we do.

[PeterWithesShin]

Let's say Hutton has earned £10m so far. It's not like he has it all in the bank. I would guess that about half has gone straight away in taxes and NI. Another 10% in agent fees (these are just guesstimates) £4m is still a nice chunk. But he has bought a house, car(s) for him and his wife (I assume he has one), like most normal people who have a lot of money he's probably done the same for his family. It soon becomes a lot lower figure and it has to last him and his family for the next maybe 40 years, and then there is his kids and grandkids future.

As I said, if what they have been offered is a lot less than what we are paying them then I don't blame them for staying. I would. If it was £40K to stay or £35k to move and play then i'd move.

[dave.woodhall]

Let's say Hutton has earned £10m so far. It's not like he has it all in the bank. I would guess that about half has gone straight away in taxes and NI. Another 10% in agent fees (these are just guesstimates) £4m is still a nice chunk. But he has bought a house, car(s) for him and his wife (I assume he has one), like most normal people who have a lot of money he's probably done the same for his family. It soon becomes a lot lower figure and it has to last him and his family for the next maybe 40 years, and then there is his kids and grandkids future.

As I said, if what they have been offered is a lot less than what we are paying them then I don't blame them for staying. I would. If it was £40K to stay or £35k to move and play then i'd move.

I doubt he's paid that much tax, but there's a good point in there. Once you've got used to earning over a million quid a year you don't want to go back to normal wages once you give up football. You want to make sure you can get every penny you can to last the rest of your life.

[Salsa Party Animal]

don't forget you probably get 5 grand a week if you put 2 millions pounds in a bank account untouched. So you can retire comfortable.

[dave.woodhall]

don't forget you probably get 5 grand a week if you put 2 millions pounds in a bank account untouched. So you can retire comfortable.

You wouldn't get anywhere near that, inflation would reduce its value and £5k a week might sound fine to you and I, but to someone who is used to earning ten times that much it's a pittance.