Heya fellas, this is my first post on here so go easy on me :)

 

I was wondering what your opinions would be on the policy that Chelsea FC will only offer 1 year contracts to player who are above the age of 30.

 

This has been the case in most of the Abramovich years. I don't know where to stand on this, although I enjoy the financial responsibility of this policy I think it seems disrespectful to some of our greatest servants to receive this treatment and I also believe it forced players like Lampard to move away. Seeing him in a sky blue shirt was my worst experience this season, and all fans who do not see that this is totally and utterly our fault are a disgrace.

 

Back on topic, what are your opinions on this issue?

I think from a business point of view it makes good sense.

 

So you would give a 37 year old Drogba a 4 year contract?

 

 

 

Lampard moved away because he wasn't going to get any playing time at Chelsea.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ETA Nice 1st post

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 11, 201511 yr by Scott

So us offering Lampard a 1 year contract, lead to Lampard signing a 1 year contract with Man City???

Errrrrr yeah right!

Probably not the best way to endear yourself to everyone on the board calling people who don't agree with you a disgrace.

On topic I agree with it, great business by the club, keeps players on their toes and gives them something to shoot for, while ensuring we stay in financial control of the situation.

Heya fellas, this is my first post on here so go easy on me :)

 

I was wondering what your opinions would be on the policy that Chelsea FC will only offer 1 year contracts to player who are above the age of 30.

 

This has been the case in most of the Abramovich years. I don't know where to stand on this, although I enjoy the financial responsibility of this policy I think it seems disrespectful to some of our greatest servants to receive this treatment and I also believe it forced players like Lampard to move away. Seeing him in a sky blue shirt was my worst experience this season, and all fans who do not see that this is totally and utterly our fault are a disgrace.

 

Back on topic, what are your opinions on this issue?

 

It was our fault that he left, but he was the one who chose to go to City. As it is, that's his choice and doesn't really bother me anymore.

 

But yes the 1 year deal for those over-30 is a fairly sensible move amongst many sensible things we do on this front. I do wonder how many players this actually affects though, considering Ivanovic and Fabregas will both actually be 32 when they're contracts run out.

I was wondering what your opinions would be on the policy that Chelsea FC will only offer 1 year contracts to player who are above the age of 30.

 

It's sensible in an age of FFP

 

This has been the case in most of the Abramovich years.

 

No it hasn't, one of the first signings by the club was to sign a 30 year old Makalele, if you're going to try and troll, at least do it properly. 

 

I don't know where to stand on this, although I enjoy the financial responsibility of this policy I think it seems disrespectful to some of our greatest servants to receive this treatment.

 

What disrespectful treatment would that be then? Making them prove their worth their multi million pound contracts? The horror! 

 

I also believe it forced players like Lampard to move away.

 

After 13 years service and at the age of 36 you honestly think Lampard was "forced" out of the club? 

 

 

Seeing him in a sky blue shirt was my worst experience this season, and all fans who do not see that this is totally and utterly our fault are a disgrace.

 

Oh yes, total disgrace letting Lampard go in order to allow us to sign Cesc Fabregas, current highest assist maker in the Premier League... Terrible decision that. 

 

Not nice seeing Lampard at another Premier League team but somehow I think we'll get over it. 

 

First post and calling fans a disgrace? Classy move that one. 

 

Back on topic, what are your opinions on this issue?

 

My opinion? You're not very good at this trolling business, I give you a 2/10. Must try harder. 

I think (as with most things in life) that these sort of decisions should be looked at on a case by case basis and not all tarred with the same brush ignoring context.

 

A 30 year old John Terry with little to no prior serious injuries who is the captain of the team, still one of the best in his position in the world and with no serious competitors for his spot, would have warranted a longer extension.

 

A 34 year old Lampard who has lost his starting role and is clearly past his prime facing the likes of Matic, Fabregas, Oscar and Ramires for competition, clearly would not have warranted a longer contract.

I think its a very reasonable policy. It works financially and is the most logical thing to do. We're a football club ultimately to make money and turnover a profit. Offering contracts based on sentiment wouldn't make sense in a game that revolves around money and especially with FFP it's great. Players like John Terry, Ivanovic and Drogba know that they're playing for a contract extension. It shows in their performances. It's amazing to hear a club legend like John Terry speak about playing well enough to hopefully get another extension. We're a club where equality is a huge thing and it's not fair for certain players to be offered 3 year plus contracts where they're at an age when they can suddenly decline at any point and injuries can catch up with them.

Well that's my two cents on the contract policy.

I think (as with most things in life) that these sort of decisions should be looked at on a case by case basis and not all tarred with the same brush ignoring context.

 

A 30 year old John Terry with little to no prior serious injuries who is the captain of the team, still one of the best in his position in the world and with no serious competitors for his spot, would have warranted a longer extension.

 

A 34 year old Lampard who has lost his starting role and is clearly past his prime facing the likes of Matic, Fabregas, Oscar and Ramires for competition, clearly would not have warranted a longer contract.

 

On a football only basis.  He still had an awful lot to offer the club if we'd wanted that and it had suited him.

I think there are wasys around this, for example if Terry really pushed I'm sure the club could have offered him a longer contract but on some sort of a player coach level with progression and reviews tied into it.  It would need to make business sense to both parties.  I think another key reason for this stance is that if a new manager comes in (AVB) and doesn't have the backing of the senior players, he knows that he only has one year to see out before they're gone - it takes power away from the players.