Fredrik Ljungberg (Out)

[kel varnsen]

I've said before we need to cut our losses. 70k a week for someone who is always injured is beyond bad business.

It's of the utmost importance that he is replaced however. Replaced by a similar player who is willing to make runs from midfield and get into goalscoring positions. If we sell Freddie before we have a replacement lined up I'll be very disappointed.

disagree. first of all, it's not like freddie has been a vital player so far this year. the few matches he has played, he has been down right poor. secondly, we have plenty of players who make runs from midfield.

as patrick mentioned, i think we'll see a young winger brought in either in january or next summer. someone young, talented, but not very well known. someone who could step in once in a while the first year without severly weakening the first team and then eventually fight for a regular starting place. i doubt very much we'll sign someone like ribery.

 

[lagos]

@ some replies here:

Football isn't a charity, it is a business. You can't expect a club like Arsenal that's in major debt to have a liability in the squad earning over £70k a week. The club needs to cut their losses and reduce wage bill as much as possible.

I'm definitely in favour of this move. The "freed" up money could be put to better use.

Using your argument, footballers are not playing for charity, it's a job for them, therefore Ashey cole and all other players need to maximise the income from their limited footballing lifespan irrespective of sentiments? So what was all the fuss about Asley Cole?

And please don't kick a fuss if manu make Ade an offer he can't refuse, he's not playing for charity you know! :roll:

So long as we are clear on that! or is it just for the club and not the player :?:

 

[Alfonso]

LagosGooner i 100% agree with you mate. Freddie may not be the same player as before, but people should give him some respect. He's done a lot for our club and people should never forget that.

 

[sabret00the]

I must say that Freddie is at that stage now, i must say i wanted us to sell him but i can't say i imagined it in such a way that we'd tell him to "find yourself a new club". New ruthless Wenger however, had no real choice in this. it's sad but true, Ljungberg has spend the past three seasons building walls between him and the club and i guess now it's just easier to replace him. I wish him luck.

 

[Alfonso]

I love the way how everyone is taking the NOTW article as 100% accurate.

 

[bazza_afc]

If the NoW was ever accurate, we would have a squad of 100 players including Buffon, Ribery, Trezeguet & Reo-Coker but no Fabregas & Henry

 

[Shadow Moses]

@ some replies here:

Football isn't a charity, it is a business. You can't expect a club like Arsenal that's in major debt to have a liability in the squad earning over £70k a week. The club needs to cut their losses and reduce wage bill as much as possible.

I'm definitely in favour of this move. The "freed" up money could be put to better use.

Using your argument, footballers are not playing for charity, it's a job for them, therefore Ashey cole and all other players need to maximise the income from their limited footballing lifespan irrespective of sentiments? So what was all the fuss about Asley Cole?

And please don't kick a fuss if manu make Ade an offer he can't refuse, he's not playing for charity you know! :roll:

So long as we are clear on that! or is it just for the club and not the player :?:

:?: :?:

How on earth does that relate to the club paying £70k a week to someone not doing their job? It's an employer-employee situation, you don't want to pay someone who isn't working or better yet, a liability to the company for over a year+. You ask them to leave and pay compensation for the remaining part of their contract.

 

[Shredder]

To Shredder in particular,

you don't understand me, I'm not against a Ljunberg exit I'm against the disparaging comments like "cripple" or waste of space for someone who has served the club well in the past and who is getting to the end of his shelf life (as if we didn't know that would happen). It simply shows that fans only give a s**t about a players current form and as such you can't expect that player's don't see that and hence decide to disregard loyalty and cash in while they can


As regards Ashley Cole, of course he wasn't booed while he was here because he was playing well (which is exactly my point) the only reason his departure was generated such bad feeling was primarily because he was such a good player and still in his prime i.e he screwed us before we screwed him. If he had been playing like s**t before he left people like you wouldn't have given a toss.


All i'm saying in a nutshell is you can't be selective with your "loyalties" you can't show disloyalty to out of form players and expect players in form to show you any loyalty. Yes Ljumberg time is coming to an end, particularly with his wage bill, but can we as fans at least give him a more dignified exit?

Eventhough he's close to being put on "my" transfer list, selling a player doesn't have to mean that we are picking at his dignity.

Cripple was a bad word - I agree - but being Swedish I know how his every move is followed here and his non-participation - because of injuries - in especially internationals has become almost a running joke here. "What's he got this time?", you know... I'm not saying he's faking anything - surely he is not - but man is he injury prone nowadays. It's not a loyalty thing. Being saddled with the responsibilty of being the captain of the national team now and a veteran presence at Arsenal, it must be frustrating for him that he can't produce like he could just a few years ago. Maybe that's weighed him down lately.

I don't know if you know Swedish ice hockey player Peter Forsberg, but he's in the same type of situation. Comparatively, he's even better than Ljungberg - perhaps the best in the world - when he's healthy, but there's always something nagging him down. He's recently been named captain of the Philadelphia Flyers in the NHL (much like Freddie for Sweden) so he gets all the questions when the team isn't performing (and the Flyers are gawd awful right now). The frustration of not being able to perform and the questions he keeps getting is starting to take its toll on Peter and Freddie may have well started going down that road too, in a general sence.

I hope not (if you thought England's got a shallow talent pool you obviously don't know Sweden's...), and again, if Ljungberg somehow reaches 100% - jolly good.

 

[lagos]

How on earth does that relate to the club paying £70k a week to someone not doing their job? It's an employer-employee situation, you don't want to pay someone who isn't working or better yet, a liability to the company for over a year+. You ask them to leave and pay compensation for the remaining part of their contract.

Since we are now arguing strictly on a purely business angle (i.e no sentiments on either part) i would say a player must have been doing something right at some point for you to offer him a long term contract worth 70k a week. It's a business decision (with risks) which the club has taken but has back fired as the player hasn't produced to expectation for whatever reason. The chance you took was that if you didn't not offer him that contract he could have been lured away elsewhere with a more lucrative deal. You can't eat your cake and have it!

From a strictly business point of view. I would advice Ljunberg to sit out his contract and collect his 70k till his contract runs out. But of course how does that help Arsenal? Ljunberg holds the aces now (he's got the contract) if we want to free up the wages we need to do it gracefully (both from the club and the fans) or he has every right to dig his heels in.

Can you see how stupid your strictly business argument is now?

 

[Shadow Moses]

How on earth does that relate to the club paying £70k a week to someone not doing their job? It's an employer-employee situation, you don't want to pay someone who isn't working or better yet, a liability to the company for over a year+. You ask them to leave and pay compensation for the remaining part of their contract.

Since we are now arguing strictly on a purely business angle (i.e no sentiments on either part) i would say a player must have been doing something right at some point for you to offer him a long term contract worth 70k a week. It's a business decision (with risks) which the club has taken but has back fired as the player hasn't produced to expectation for whatever reason. The chance you took was that if you didn't not offer him that contract he could have been lured away elsewhere with a more lucrative deal. You can't eat your cake and have it!

From a strictly business point of view. I would advice Ljunberg to sit out his contract and collect his 70k till his contract runs out. But of course how does that help Arsenal?

Can you see how stupid your strictly business argument is now?

So where or what is that basis of your argument at the moment, because you are all over the place.

- Assuming they've asked Freddie to find a new club, staying here on your genius advice would more than likely ruin his career as he would more than likely be frozen out.

- Both parties are likely to come to some kind of agreement and settle on his last 2 years of contract, just like they did with Sol.

 

[nazo]

I've said before we need to cut our losses. 70k a week for someone who is always injured is beyond bad business.

It's of the utmost importance that he is replaced however. Replaced by a similar player who is willing to make runs from midfield and get into goalscoring positions. If we sell Freddie before we have a replacement lined up I'll be very disappointed.

disagree. first of all, it's not like freddie has been a vital player so far this year. the few matches he has played, he has been down right poor. secondly, we have plenty of players who make runs from midfield.

as patrick mentioned, i think we'll see a young winger brought in either in january or next summer. someone young, talented, but not very well known. someone who could step in once in a while the first year without severly weakening the first team and then eventually fight for a regular starting place. i doubt very much we'll sign someone like ribery.

Don't we already have that player right now? Theo?

 

[lagos]

How on earth does that relate to the club paying £70k a week to someone not doing their job? It's an employer-employee situation, you don't want to pay someone who isn't working or better yet, a liability to the company for over a year+. You ask them to leave and pay compensation for the remaining part of their contract.

Since we are now arguing strictly on a purely business angle (i.e no sentiments on either part) i would say a player must have been doing something right at some point for you to offer him a long term contract worth 70k a week. It's a business decision (with risks) which the club has taken but has back fired as the player hasn't produced to expectation for whatever reason. The chance you took was that if you didn't not offer him that contract he could have been lured away elsewhere with a more lucrative deal. You can't eat your cake and have it!

From a strictly business point of view. I would advice Ljunberg to sit out his contract and collect his 70k till his contract runs out. But of course how does that help Arsenal?

Can you see how stupid your strictly business argument is now?

So where or what is that basis of your argument at the moment, because you are all over the place.

- Assuming they've asked Freddie to find a new club, staying here on your genius advice would more than likely ruin his career as he would more than likely be frozen out.

- Both parties are likely to come to some kind of agreement and settle on his last 2 years of contract, just like they did with Sol.

Goodness, The frustration of arguing on this forum sometimes, it takes all sorts :roll: :roll:

Aren't you the genius who argued that it's all about business? i.e money? how many years do you think it will take freddie to earn the £7 million he is guaranteed for the next 2 years if he leaves now? even if he were to agree to a payout how much would arsenal pay him to make it worth his while? it doesn't take a genius to work out that if freddy leaves, his wages will reduce drastically wherever he goes, I can't see him earning more than £25k if he leaves.

You are the one who brought up the argument that evrything is all about business i.e money and I'm saying if that's the way freddie sees it then he's better off staying put! Now you begin to talk about career implying there is more to football than money. which is what I said initially that you have to consider other things like what the player has done for the club etc in the same way that a player considers other things. But if you want to be ruthless and look at Freddies case strictly on finances and he decides to do likewise then he has the upper hand

 

[Shadow Moses]

Yes, I was referring to business to the club, not Freddie. What you are on about now is Freddie's finances. Is that too much to understand? Business to the club doesn't equate to business to Freddie. It will be his decision, ruin your career in favour of money or come to an agreement with the club where both parties take losses, assuming they don't want him anymore. There are already precedents on this matter.

 

[Shredder]

I love the way how everyone is taking the NOTW article as 100% accurate.

Uh-huh!

:roll:

 

[lagos]

Yes, I was referring to business to the club, not Freddie. What you are on about now is Freddie's finances. Is that too much to understand? Business to the club doesn't equate to business to Freddie. It will be his decision, ruin your career in favour of money or come to an agreement with the club where both parties take losses, assuming they don't want him anymore. There are already precedents on this matter.

In case you haven't worked it out, I'm playing devil's advocate based on your strictly business philosophy. What right have you to say the club can adopt a strictly business stance without Freddie doing the same? Is that too much to understand? i believe there are at least 2 parties to a business transaction or can you do business with yourself? to borrow your phrase he's not a charity! and by the way condidering form and injury isn't it more likely that freddy's carreer has only one way to go? it's not far fetched that the £7m freddy is guaranteed at arsenal is probably close to all he'll ever get as a footballer if he leaves now. why take 5/6 yrs to earn something you can earn in 2? (from a strictly business point of view) especially when your not even sure you'll last that long?

 

[Shadow Moses]

Yes, I was referring to business to the club, not Freddie. What you are on about now is Freddie's finances. Is that too much to understand? Business to the club doesn't equate to business to Freddie. It will be his decision, ruin your career in favour of money or come to an agreement with the club where both parties take losses, assuming they don't want him anymore. There are already precedents on this matter.

In case you haven't worked it out, I'm playing devil's advocate based on your strictly business philosophy. What right have you to say the club can adopt a strictly business stance without Freddie doing the same? Is that too much to understand? i believe there are at least 2 parties to a business transaction or can you do business with yourself? to borrow your phrase he's not a charity! and by the way condidering form and injury isn't it more likely that freddy's carreer has only one way to go? it's not far fetched that the £7m freddy is guaranteed at arsenal is probably close to all he'll ever get as a footballer if he leaves now. why take 5/6 yrs to earn something you can earn in 2? (from a strictly business point of view) especially when your not even sure you'll last that long?

..hence Feddie's decision

 

[sesquioxide]

Sometimes you can't blame the modern day footballer for the way they act and I include the likes of Ashley Cole

You only need to read some of the comments here to realise that fans are equally as bad. The same fans that were calling Adebayor a waste of space are now hailing him as a hero. we boo our own player (Song)instead of trusting the managers judgement and encouraging new players to settle. We have/had SQUAD players like Flammini and Cygan and we keep attacking them depsite the fact that they show commitment if nothing else whenever they step on the field. Yet we expect our star players to show loyalty to the club? Loyalty is a 2 way street. What we as fans are doing to Ljunberg now is no different from what Cole did to the club. What right do we have to expect Cole to have shown any loyalty to the club if we treat Ljunberg this way?

Yes Ljunberg is past his best, yes he is on big wages(which we could do without for what he now gives us on the pitch) but he is one of our longest serving players and has played his role in the past. A little more respect please in his twighlight years instead of treating him like some old rag. And this applies to all our players while they are still in an arsenal shirt!

I absolutely agree with you, Lagosgooner.

It saddens me to see how quickly our knives can be brandished upon our best and most loyal as soon as they reach decline (or are perceived to reach decline). I "can't wait" until the day when this process would be repeated for Henry himself (if it is not already begun) and that we will have to recycle your post with "Henry" replacing the word "Ljunberg". Hell, not even Wenger is safe these days.

And I feel we can't exactly blame Ljungberg himself for being injured so often. Given how frequently van Persie and Adebayor (both fit young guys) get injured and how Gallas gets into an uncustomary injury spell as soon as he joined us, I strongly suspect there are alternate explanations to our player's injuries.

 

[KY]

I've completely lost you there Shadow moses. First you say its the clubs business decision now you say its freddie's? could you clarify a bit more? As it is, I'm completely with lagosgooner on this one.

 

[stiiphunn]

Yes, I was referring to business to the club, not Freddie. What you are on about now is Freddie's finances. Is that too much to understand? Business to the club doesn't equate to business to Freddie. It will be his decision, ruin your career in favour of money or come to an agreement with the club where both parties take losses, assuming they don't want him anymore. There are already precedents on this matter.

In case you haven't worked it out, I'm playing devil's advocate based on your strictly business philosophy. What right have you to say the club can adopt a strictly business stance without Freddie doing the same? Is that too much to understand? i believe there are at least 2 parties to a business transaction or can you do business with yourself? to borrow your phrase he's not a charity! and by the way condidering form and injury isn't it more likely that freddy's carreer has only one way to go? it's not far fetched that the £7m freddy is guaranteed at arsenal is probably close to all he'll ever get as a footballer if he leaves now. why take 5/6 yrs to earn something you can earn in 2? (from a strictly business point of view) especially when your not even sure you'll last that long?

As long as you put it like this, I tend to agree with you lagosgooner. Business goes both ways- it's normal. But If this is the reason some fans put forward, I don't think this is it what motivates Wenger's decision.


Because, from a strictly footballish point of view, Ljunberg leaving us is in my opinion the best solution. Freddie won't get many games as he wants, and at 29 he can still find one last exciting challenge in a top club. As for Arsenal, it'll allow us to get an effective winger, because let's be honest Freddie has been quite poor up till now and for about two seasons now.

We all need to move IMO, and the moment seems about right. And I'm not talking about financial matters, strictly about football matters.

 

[lagos]

As long as you put it like this, I tend to agree with you lagosgooner.
But to be honest, from a strictly footballish point of view, Ljunberg leaving us is in my opinion the best solution. Freddie won't get many games as he wants, and at 29 he can still find one last exciting challenge in a top club. As for Arsenal, it'll allow us to get an effective winger, because let's be honest Freddie has been quite poor up till now and for about two seasons now.

We all need to move IMO, and the moment seems about right. And I'm not talking about financial matters, strictly about football matters.

Maybe you misunderstood me. I did say I was playing the devil's advocate. I wasn't saying I would like Ljunberg to take that stance. I was just throwing a counter argument to Shadow Moses' assertion that Arsenal and the fans' reaction to freddie's possible exit should be all about the money to be saved disregarding other things like his contribution and relationship with the club. I argued that if all that mattered was the money, and arsenal tried to ship him off in an undignified manner, then Freddie was well within his right to take the same stance and see out his contract.

My point being the long relationship between freddie and the club and the dignity of the player should not be sacrificed for the sake of saving a few bob