Wright says we treat Shaun like a youth team player

[Mase]

Funny how when Hughes got the boot Wright said in the paper that it was the City players that got him the sack. Who does Shaun actually play for Ian??

[Original Dub]

The fucking greedy little nearly was can get fucked, Chelsea knew he wasnt worth keeping, lets follow suit!!

Are you fucking real?

Fucking crazy isn't it?!!

He's said stuff like that about Shaun in the last thread as well I think and got a similar reaction...

[Mase]

[mr_nool]

PMSL!

[superkev8705]

Did you photoshop that or get it off something else??!! Absolute Gold. PMSL

[Mase]

Did you photoshop that or get it off something else??!! Absolute Gold. PMSL

Found it on google mate :p

[sandman]

The fucking greedy little nearly was can get fucked, Chelsea knew he wasnt worth keeping, lets follow suit!!

Are you fucking real?

Fucking crazy isn't it?!!

He's said stuff like that about Shaun in the last thread as well I think and got a similar reaction...

And I totally stand by it, SWP isnt the player he was before he went to Chelsea, Mourinho knew he wasnt good enough for the top 4, he shows what he CAN do every blue moon, this is not enough for where City want to be.

For many years I wouldnt have a bad word said about SWP as I honestly believed he had the potential to become what many stupidly seem to believe he is now, but now he is 28, its time to stop looking at what he potentially can do and start looking what he has done week in week out.

SWP is looking a sign the deal with a club to finish his career with, so lets look what he has done in his career, he looked very promising in a City side worthy of nothing more than a relegation battle, he kept the bench warm at Stamford Bridge, then he came back to City and has played mediocre for the most part with infrequent flashes of what he should be doing most games a season.

He has not got the resume of players like Adebayor and Tevez and he doesnt give the performances of players like Bellamy and DeJong, so if he wants to hold the club to ransome then he can take his mediocre performances somewhere else and we can concentrate on making Weiss and Johnson the players that SWP could have been.

[Original Dub]

that's fair enough mate.

However, I think SWP was starting to feature a lot towards the end of Mourinho's tenure.

Also, there's no need to insult the lad because he's involved in discussions over wages IMO. He is a city player that is most definitely up for the cause and I happen to think he's looking very sharp lately, as shown when he came on against Chelsea and for England. He has had a serious of niggling injuries, but I think we're a better team 9 times out of ten when he's in the side.

[Goataldo]

The man is a professional gobshite, hopefully his comments will be given the respect they deserve i.e. none.

That show he fronts on Five is one of the most inane pieces of broadcasting I've ever seen, and 'good old Wrighty' is perfect for it.

[Guy Debord]

From The Guardian:

Shaun Wright-Phillips shows true colours with contract demands

The City forward has always been seen as 'one of the good guys', but he too seems to have an inflated sense of self-importance

The first reaction on hearing that Shaun Wright-Phillips feels under-appreciated to be offered a new contract worth £70,000 a week is one of weary acceptance. This is England, after all – a country where football enjoys excess in all areas. Or at least at clubs such as Manchester City, where the rich get richer and the players might like to imagine that what they ask for is what they get.

Wright-Phillips is so upset not to get a weekly £100,000 his father, that eternal voice of reason Ian Wright, went on radio this week, without any apparent sense of irony, to denounce City's chief executive, Garry Cook, and the football administrator, Brian Marwood, for "just being a bit full of themselves".

Wright got himself awfully worked up delivering his sense of perspective to the negotiation process. "I'm not sure they know exactly what they are doing deep down," he said of Cook and Marwood. "They [City] called him in and he wanted to sign his deal, sign for the rest of his career so he can be settled and get ready to go [to the World Cup]. But there's these people like Marwood and Cook mugging him off, treating him like a youth team player and not someone who actually wants to be there because of what he thinks Manchester City can do."

It would be too easy to ridicule Wright and much better to ignore him but suffice to say that, for a man of nearly 50, it really is time he learned that saying things extra loud does not necessarily make them sound any better.

The real sense of disappointment from what is threatening to become a grubby little saga emanates from the fact that Wright-Phillips, a man regarded by City supporters as "one of the good guys", seems to believe City's offer to be so far beneath him. The mind strays back to Ashley Cole's infamous derision of Arsenal's £55,000-a-week offer before his defection to Chelsea in 2006 and one of the more infamous quotes of football's W-for-Whatever generation. "I was so incensed," Cole wrote in the brilliantly ghastly My Defence, "I was trembling with anger. I couldn't believe what I'd heard. I nearly swerved off the road."

Except we all knew Cole was a bit of a twerp back then. Wright-Phillips always seemed a bit more sensible, not so showy – less vulgar, if you like. The first time I met him he was stood outside Manchester City's old training ground in Platt Lane waiting for a lift, muddy boots over his shoulder, a thick plume of green snot coming from both nostrils. He was 16 at the time and looked like he came from Lilliput. There was nothing particularly streetwise about him. Platt Lane is in one of Manchester's more unloved districts. Wright-Phillips looked like a little lost kid.

He is 28 now and earns £60,000 a week, with bonuses on top. Or to put in an annual context, as most of us operate anyway, £3.1m a year. That contract will still have two years to run at the end of the season and, ordinarily, City would not start negotiating a renewal until a player was about 18 months from the end of his deal.

His problem is that when he rejoined City from Chelsea in August 2008, it was a few days before the Abu Dhabi United Group's takeover. Bad timing, in other words. To quote Ian Wright: "He signed before all the money came." City are now owned by Abu Dhabi's ruling Nahyan family, the richest men on earth (sitting on 9% of the planet's oil reserves), and Wright-Phillips feels like he has missed out. When Wayne Bridge followed him from Chelsea to City it was on £90,000 a week. Other players have arrived on six-figure weekly salaries. One, Carlos Tevez, has been City's player of the season, but Robinho, Joleon Lescott and Kolo Touré have been erratic at best.

So, incidentally, has Wright-Phillips, despite the goal-scoring substitute's display for England in Wednesday's 3-1 defeat of Egypt. He will also be 30 when his current contract expires and, as Cook and Marwood have pointed out, that is the age when insecurity starts to appear on a footballer's horizon, particularly one who has built his career on his speed.

City have offered a pay rise to £70,000 and a year-long extension, but it has been turned down flat. The argument now put forward by Wright-Phillips's camp is that City seem more willing to reward new signings than players with an affinity to the club – ignoring, of course, that he has already left Manchester once before. Indeed, that might be part of the problem. Moving to Chelsea can have a funny effect on a footballer's ego. There seems to be something about Stamford Bridge that inflates a player's sense of self-importance.

Over at Manchester United, meanwhile, a high-ranking source reports that it will "probably take two minutes" for Paul Scholes to agree the terms of a new contract, without the help or otherwise of any agent, when he gets round to discussing it with the club's board. Scholes, you could say, has a genuine affinity to his club. Wright-Phillips? He is just another on the long list of football's multi-millionaires who thinks he deserves better.

[sandman]

I happen to think he's looking very sharp lately, as shown when he came on against Chelsea and for England.

I couldnt agree more, if he played like that even 80% of the time i'd be singing his praises from the rooftops.

I think we're a better team 9 times out of ten when he's in the side.

I personally have preferred what little we've seen of Johnson and Weiss, I believe they will both be astonishing in the VERY near future!!

[sandman]

Shaun Wright-Phillips shows true colours

He is 28 now and earns £60,000 a week

That contract will still have two years to run at the end of the season

His problem is that when he rejoined City from Chelsea in August 2008, it was a few days before the Abu Dhabi U***d Group's takeover. Bad timing, in other words. To quote Ian Wright: "He signed before all the money came."

Wright-Phillips feels like he has missed out

He will also be 30 when his current contract expires and, as Cook and Marwood have pointed out, that is the age when insecurity starts to appear on a footballer's horizon, particularly one who has built his career on his speed.

City have offered a pay rise to £70,000 and a year-long extension, but it has been turned down flat.

Exactly my thoughts

City seem more willing to reward new signings than players with an affinity to the club – ignoring, of course, that he has already left Manchester once before.

He has no loyalty to us, just to money.

Moving to Chelsea can have a funny effect on a footballer's ego. There seems to be something about Stamford Bridge that inflates a player's sense of self-importance.

Unwarranted self-importance.

[john68]

I really don't see what Ian Wright hopes to achieve by dragging all this out in such a way into the public domain.
It shows a lack of proffessionalism for someone purporting to be his son's agent.
This should all be done behind closed doors and away from the media glare.

[Goaters 103]

From The Guardian:

Shaun Wright-Phillips shows true colours with contract demands

The City forward has always been seen as 'one of the good guys', but he too seems to have an inflated sense of self-importance

The first reaction on hearing that Shaun Wright-Phillips feels under-appreciated to be offered a new contract worth £70,000 a week is one of weary acceptance. This is England, after all – a country where football enjoys excess in all areas. Or at least at clubs such as Manchester City, where the rich get richer and the players might like to imagine that what they ask for is what they get.

Wright-Phillips is so upset not to get a weekly £100,000 his father, that eternal voice of reason Ian Wright, went on radio this week, without any apparent sense of irony, to denounce City's chief executive, Garry Cook, and the football administrator, Brian Marwood, for "just being a bit full of themselves".

Wright got himself awfully worked up delivering his sense of perspective to the negotiation process. "I'm not sure they know exactly what they are doing deep down," he said of Cook and Marwood. "They [City] called him in and he wanted to sign his deal, sign for the rest of his career so he can be settled and get ready to go [to the World Cup]. But there's these people like Marwood and Cook mugging him off, treating him like a youth team player and not someone who actually wants to be there because of what he thinks Manchester City can do."

It would be too easy to ridicule Wright and much better to ignore him but suffice to say that, for a man of nearly 50, it really is time he learned that saying things extra loud does not necessarily make them sound any better.

The real sense of disappointment from what is threatening to become a grubby little saga emanates from the fact that Wright-Phillips, a man regarded by City supporters as "one of the good guys", seems to believe City's offer to be so far beneath him. The mind strays back to Ashley Cole's infamous derision of Arsenal's £55,000-a-week offer before his defection to Chelsea in 2006 and one of the more infamous quotes of football's W-for-Whatever generation. "I was so incensed," Cole wrote in the brilliantly ghastly My Defence, "I was trembling with anger. I couldn't believe what I'd heard. I nearly swerved off the road."

Except we all knew Cole was a bit of a twerp back then. Wright-Phillips always seemed a bit more sensible, not so showy – less vulgar, if you like. The first time I met him he was stood outside Manchester City's old training ground in Platt Lane waiting for a lift, muddy boots over his shoulder, a thick plume of green snot coming from both nostrils. He was 16 at the time and looked like he came from Lilliput. There was nothing particularly streetwise about him. Platt Lane is in one of Manchester's more unloved districts. Wright-Phillips looked like a little lost kid.

He is 28 now and earns £60,000 a week, with bonuses on top. Or to put in an annual context, as most of us operate anyway, £3.1m a year. That contract will still have two years to run at the end of the season and, ordinarily, City would not start negotiating a renewal until a player was about 18 months from the end of his deal.

His problem is that when he rejoined City from Chelsea in August 2008, it was a few days before the Abu Dhabi U***d Group's takeover. Bad timing, in other words. To quote Ian Wright: "He signed before all the money came." City are now owned by Abu Dhabi's ruling Nahyan family, the richest men on earth (sitting on 9% of the planet's oil reserves), and Wright-Phillips feels like he has missed out. When Wayne Bridge followed him from Chelsea to City it was on £90,000 a week. Other players have arrived on six-figure weekly salaries. One, Carlos Tevez, has been City's player of the season, but Robinho, Joleon Lescott and Kolo Touré have been erratic at best.

So, incidentally, has Wright-Phillips, despite the goal-scoring substitute's display for England in Wednesday's 3-1 defeat of Egypt. He will also be 30 when his current contract expires and, as Cook and Marwood have pointed out, that is the age when insecurity starts to appear on a footballer's horizon, particularly one who has built his career on his speed.

City have offered a pay rise to £70,000 and a year-long extension, but it has been turned down flat. The argument now put forward by Wright-Phillips's camp is that City seem more willing to reward new signings than players with an affinity to the club – ignoring, of course, that he has already left Manchester once before. Indeed, that might be part of the problem. Moving to Chelsea can have a funny effect on a footballer's ego. There seems to be something about Stamford Bridge that inflates a player's sense of self-importance.

Over at Manchester U***d, meanwhile, a high-ranking source reports that it will "probably take two minutes" for Paul Scholes to agree the terms of a new contract, without the help or otherwise of any agent, when he gets round to discussing it with the club's board. Scholes, you could say, has a genuine affinity to his club. Wright-Phillips? He is just another on the long list of football's multi-millionaires who thinks he deserves better.

Spot on.

Wooders - Everton and Villa cant and wont afford the wages SWP and his stupid step-father think he's worth, whilst Spurs have Lennon and Bentley in that spot so even if they did take an expensive pungt on him I'm sure he'd find his arse welded to Spurs bench in a short space of time.

Agree with Sandman on this; SWP's form has been patchy at best, and with 2 plus years left on his contract he's lucky we are even at the negotiating table, considering the wealth at our disposal which puts us in position to look elsewhere for a replacement should the need arise and he and his camp continue to moan over £70k a week.

[Goataldo]

I liked that article, and it makes a very good point, partic the bit about Paul 'every other tackle's a booking' Scholes. One of the few ManUre players I actually respect, and this bears that out.

It would be mornoic and hypocritical to use loyalty or 'an affinity to club' as a reason to turn down 3.1 mil p.a. or whatever the figure is, to play for them. Ian Wright take a bow.

Something tells me that everyone here, given teh chance, would even take a mere 3 million to play for City. I think I could agree to those terms.

However, if I was Shaun, and I WAS being offered less money than new players of a lessure stature, I'd want to know why. If I asked and was told that it was because they were ranked higher than me with regard to the club's 'trajectory' or whatever, I'd have a difficult choice to make. Such is life. If I was loyal to the club, I'd suck it up and put my paw print on the line, and sign up for City's inevitably fantastic future.

Easy peasy innit.

[King Kev]

I really don't see what Ian Wright hopes to achieve by dragging all this out in such a way into the public domain.

Publicity! He is an attention whore.

[Goataldo]

For the record I think SWP is world class on his day, and though those days may not be numerous enough for us, I think he's worth his place in the team; even when he's not firing on all cylinders up front, he gets back fantastically well, and is always a worry for the opposition. There's been games this season where he's won more headers than Adebayor (I've counted), and I've seen him skin players alive in a way that even bamboozles me when I'm watching it. He's mint and I'll be physically sick on the nearestr person if he doesn't sign.

[btajim]

that's fair enough mate.

However, I think SWP was starting to feature a lot towards the end of Mourinho's tenure.

Also, there's no need to insult the lad because he's involved in discussions over wages IMO. He is a city player that is most definitely up for the cause and I happen to think he's looking very sharp lately, as shown when he came on against Chelsea and for England. He has had a serious of niggling injuries, but I think we're a better team 9 times out of ten when he's in the side.

SWP's remit has changed somewhat. The days of him stood with chalk on his boots on the right wing are long, long gone. Everything went through him when Keegan was in charge. He was the sole creative spark in an otherwise dull Team. Now, there's lots of options and he can feature in different positionings.

If any Blue was expecting the ball to constantly be knocked to him whilst he ran at Players upon his return then they were going to be disappointed. Although I wouldn't mind an Arsenal Away or Southampton Home wondergoal again. I also think SWP's influence in the dressing room as an experienced Manchester City man is very important.

Deep down, I think we should pay him enough to ensure he stays. But if his demands are unreasonable then he can do one.

[Mase]

that's fair enough mate.

However, I think SWP was starting to feature a lot towards the end of Mourinho's tenure.

Also, there's no need to insult the lad because he's involved in discussions over wages IMO. He is a city player that is most definitely up for the cause and I happen to think he's looking very sharp lately, as shown when he came on against Chelsea and for England. He has had a serious of niggling injuries, but I think we're a better team 9 times out of ten when he's in the side.

SWP's remit has changed somewhat. The days of him stood with chalk on his boots on the right wing are long, long gone. Everything went through him when Keegan was in charge. He was the sole creative spark in an otherwise dull Team. Now, there's lots of options and he can feature in different positionings.

If any Blue was expecting the ball to constantly be knocked to him whilst he ran at Players upon his return then they were going to be disappointed. Although I wouldn't mind an Arsenal Away or Southampton Home wondergoal again. I also think SWP's influence in the dressing room as an experienced Manchester City man is very important.

Deep down, I think we should pay him enough to ensure he stays. But if his demands are unreasonable then he can do one.

Agree with everything apart from the bit in bold mate. Ali B? Berkovic??

[Goaters 103]

At the end of the day the main fact to come out of all this is that Ian Wright needs to take his face for a $hit on a regular basis, rather than finding a microphone.