United Forum
Go Back   United Forum > Manchester United > Football
Closed Thread
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 07:04 AM
PaulParkers
 
Default Ji-Sung Park's rumoured new contract

Any footballing reasons anybody can discern for this? Has not progressed in 4 years at the club and is blocking the way of younger players who may be able to make it. He is consistently mediocre performer with minimal creative talent and goal threat... Its a lot of shirts at 65k a week....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...ks-future.html
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 07:17 AM
Fountz
 
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulParkersPubes
Any footballing reasons anybody can discern for this? Has not progressed in 4 years at the club and is blocking the way of younger players who may be able to make it. He is consistently mediocre performer with minimal creative talent and goal threat... Its a lot of shirts at 65k a week....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...ks-future.html
I can forgive the absolute top performers, the game changers, being on mega-bucks ( although even they're on far far too much ) .. but the problem is the whole base of the pyramid then think they're worth not far short and they're ones in sheer numbers alone who make up the bulk of the wage bill.

Park should be on £10k week max which would still put him on half a million a year and he should think himself lucky at that aswell, that's over a £100k a fortnight less than he is on, which equate to about £1-2 off a seat across the ground. Multiply that by another 15-20 across the squad and that's £30-£40 less per seat per game... and suddenly football becomes far more affordable !
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 07:35 AM
PaulParkers
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fountz
I can forgive the absolute top performers, the game changers, being on mega-bucks ( although even they're on far far too much ) .. but the problem is the whole base of the pyramid then think they're worth not far short and they're ones in sheer numbers alone who make up the bulk of the wage bill.

Park should be on £10k week max which would still put him on half a million a year and he should think himself lucky at that aswell, that's over a £100k a fortnight less than he is on, which equate to about £1-2 off a seat across the ground. Multiply that by another 15-20 across the squad and that's £30-£40 less per seat per game... and suddenly football becomes far more affordable !
Completely agree Mr F.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 07:37 AM
dunk
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fountz
I can forgive the absolute top performers, the game changers, being on mega-bucks ( although even they're on far far too much ) .. but the problem is the whole base of the pyramid then think they're worth not far short and they're ones in sheer numbers alone who make up the bulk of the wage bill.

Park should be on £10k week max which would still put him on half a million a year and he should think himself lucky at that aswell, that's over a £100k a fortnight less than he is on, which equate to about £1-2 off a seat across the ground. Multiply that by another 15-20 across the squad and that's £30-£40 less per seat per game... and suddenly football becomes far more affordable !
I know and know of 20 year olds that have never played for the first team at United and City that are on that and more.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 08:35 AM
BryanRobson'sLiver
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulParkersPubes
Any footballing reasons anybody can discern for this? Has not progressed in 4 years at the club and is blocking the way of younger players who may be able to make it. He is consistently mediocre performer with minimal creative talent and goal threat... Its a lot of shirts at 65k a week....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...ks-future.html
My guess is he just goes in to negotiations and points out he has played better than that useless fat @#%&! Anderson.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 08:41 AM
Aloe Blacc
 
Default

What a disgrace if he gets a new contract let alone a 65k per week one.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 08:44 AM
Spiffy
 
Default

If United could pay him £10K per week they would. It's supply and demand. Someone would always outbid us in contract negotiations and we'd end up with shit throughout the squad if the club stuck to their guns. We'd then fail to get into the to 4 which would mean losing the better players.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 08:47 AM
BulgarianSpectator
 
Default

If the marketing people are to be believed, Park brings in more revenue for the club than Ronaldo (did) and Rooney combined due to his appeal as the number one sportsman in Asia.

On that basis, he could be the highest paid player at the club and still make a profit.

I agree with the wages scenario. Cut out the huge pay and we could get in for free. It can be done - Sam Hamman said Wimbledon in the 90s was run so lean, that sponsorship and TV money paid for everything and he made all profits from the gate receipts, so he could afford to keep them low.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 08:56 AM
hopkins
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BulgarianSpectator
I agree with the wages scenario. Cut out the huge pay and we could get in for free.
Cut out the huge interest paid on the debts and we could get in free
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 08:57 AM
wiganste
 
Default

I love the Ji-Sung Park threads.

As soon as his name is mentioned, all the usual suspects jump on board venting their outrage that someone so shit can play for United.

It's just a shame sharath/berba is banned because as sure as night follows day, he'd be wishing serious injury on him as we speak.


fwiw - Park is a good squad player. In my humble opinion of course. Definitely worth keeping.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 08:58 AM
Mr_Ed
 
Default

He's Korean
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 08:59 AM
Aloe Blacc
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiganste
I love the Ji-Sung Park threads.

As soon as his name is mentioned, all the usual suspects jump on board venting their outrage that someone so shit can play for United.

It's just a shame sharath/berba is banned because as sure as night follows day, he'd be wishing serious injury on him as we speak.


fwiw - Park is a good squad player. In my humble opinion of course. Definitely worth keeping.
Park has to be sold as soon as possible if we are to progress as quickly as possible from ronaldos departure. sorry
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 09:00 AM
marlo
 
Default

park is shit. completely shit.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 09:11 AM
Baron
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiganste
fwiw - Park is a good squad player. In my humble opinion of course. Definitely worth keeping.
other than some appalling plebs, who doesn't think this?

But apparently being born in Asia & running about a lot, very infrequently effecting a game in a positive sense with a goal, a run, an assist constitutes £65k a £#%&!ing week.

He's a good player, nowhere near great, nowhere near an integral part of this United side, he could be replaced in the same way Pip Neville or Nicky Butt were for example, a top professional but that is frankly obscene in my opinion.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 09:22 AM
PaulParkers
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiganste
fwiw - Park is a good squad player. In my humble opinion of course. Definitely worth keeping.
I'm not saying I necessarily disagree with you Stephen but that facts of the matter are there are a hundred better squad players we could get for less than 65k a week.

In my opinion he is dog shit but we cant get rid of him because we dont have anyone else. That's what annoys me so much.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 09:34 AM
Pete's Shoes
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aloe Blacc
Park has to be sold as soon as possible if we are to progress as quickly as possible from ronaldos departure. sorry
Why bring Ronaldo into it? Park was here when he was.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 09:39 AM
wiganste
 
Default

I don't see the point in having a debate as to whether or not he deserves a new contract.

The main reason he's here is because of the interest generated in Korea/Asia. The fact that he's a decent player is secondary.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 09:42 AM
MUFC One Love
 
Default

It makes me laugh, Tevez was lauded for what Park does, and let's be honest., Tevez only had a bit more of a goal threat, and you'd expect that considering Tevez was a striker. If Tevez got 1 on 1 with an opposition player did you fancy him to beat him and make something happen? Did you £#%&!. Tevez was slower than Park
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 09:55 AM
Baron
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MUFC One Love
It makes me laugh, Tevez was lauded for what Park does, and let's be honest., Tevez only had a bit more of a goal threat, and you'd expect that considering Tevez was a striker. If Tevez got 1 on 1 with an opposition player did you fancy him to beat him and make something happen? Did you £#%&!. Tevez was slower than Park
Man alive.

I gave Tevez a bit of shit, but he still scored 34 in 2 seasons, in 99 games.

Park has scored 12 in 125 games.

Slightly different players, positions, output.

Similar amounts of dodgy touches & ability to look like they're running in a strobe light.
 
Unread 27-08-2009, 10:03 AM
dodger
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiffy
If United could pay him £10K per week they would. It's supply and demand. Someone would always outbid us in contract negotiations and we'd end up with shit throughout the squad if the club stuck to their guns. We'd then fail to get into the to 4 which would mean losing the better players.
I think they call that capitalism
Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Similar Threads for: Ji-Sung Park's rumoured new contract
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Manchester United legend Ji-Sung Park takes on coaching role at Queens Park Rangers fred tissue Football Auto-Threads 0 21-12-2021 10:40 AM
Ji sung park carrick_16 Football 40 01-10-2014 02:24 PM
park ji sung marlo Football 65 15-09-2010 01:13 PM
Ji Sung Park Fuzzy Dunlop Football 62 31-01-2008 04:17 PM
Park Ji Sung punk_football Football 21 06-07-2007 03:56 AM
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:30 AM.
Copyright ©2006 - 2024 utdforum.com. This site is in no way affiliated to Manchester United Football Club.