- Oct 8, 2004
- 1,640
- 49
So, we've heard talk over the past couple of months that King is refusing to sign a pay-as-you-play contract and wants a 1 year rolling contract, but Levy seems to be playing hardball and refusing to give it to him.
I'm genuinely torn over this one.
On the one hand Ledley has been an outstanding servant to our club, surely even if he doesn't play a single game next season a 1 year deal is just a loyalty bonus for his years of service without ever wanting to go anywhere else, I mean it's not like he's cost us anything in the transfer market, so surely we can afford to give him the benefit of the doubt and award him a 1 year contract and see how it goes. The reason why I'm not that fussed if he doesn't even take to the field is that surely just having him around the team and dressing room has got to be worth something to the club, he has got so much to offer and to potentially lose him, and any future he may have at the club as a coach, over a years wages seems to me a little shortsighted from the club.
On the other hand the club did offer him a new 2 year contract in 2010, when they knew of all his knee problems, maybe that could be seen as his loyalty play off. They have stuck by him and allowed him to train and effectively play whenever he feels like it, when no other club would have taken him on. The club could easily have written him off 4 or 5 years ago, collected the insurance pay out and gone looking elsewhere for a replacement, but they stuck by him and gave him every opportunity to make his way back into the team. Then you have to look at it with your head and not your heart, take the loyalty out of the equation for a minute and is it really conceivable that a player in Ledley's condition would be offered a 1 year rolling deal at any other high level football club? His performances of late seem to have become more inconsistent, he still puts in a good shift and the odd world class performance, but his lack of pace and fitness does seem to be effecting his performances more regularly as time goes on.
I really don't know which side of the fence I fall on this one, my heart says give him the contract, repay him for his loyalty and give him another season to see if he can get back any kind of consistency in his performances. My head on the other hand says he is simply a liability and distraction we could do without.
So would you offer him the 1 year deal or stick to only offering the pay-as-you-play deal?
I'm genuinely torn over this one.
On the one hand Ledley has been an outstanding servant to our club, surely even if he doesn't play a single game next season a 1 year deal is just a loyalty bonus for his years of service without ever wanting to go anywhere else, I mean it's not like he's cost us anything in the transfer market, so surely we can afford to give him the benefit of the doubt and award him a 1 year contract and see how it goes. The reason why I'm not that fussed if he doesn't even take to the field is that surely just having him around the team and dressing room has got to be worth something to the club, he has got so much to offer and to potentially lose him, and any future he may have at the club as a coach, over a years wages seems to me a little shortsighted from the club.
On the other hand the club did offer him a new 2 year contract in 2010, when they knew of all his knee problems, maybe that could be seen as his loyalty play off. They have stuck by him and allowed him to train and effectively play whenever he feels like it, when no other club would have taken him on. The club could easily have written him off 4 or 5 years ago, collected the insurance pay out and gone looking elsewhere for a replacement, but they stuck by him and gave him every opportunity to make his way back into the team. Then you have to look at it with your head and not your heart, take the loyalty out of the equation for a minute and is it really conceivable that a player in Ledley's condition would be offered a 1 year rolling deal at any other high level football club? His performances of late seem to have become more inconsistent, he still puts in a good shift and the odd world class performance, but his lack of pace and fitness does seem to be effecting his performances more regularly as time goes on.
I really don't know which side of the fence I fall on this one, my heart says give him the contract, repay him for his loyalty and give him another season to see if he can get back any kind of consistency in his performances. My head on the other hand says he is simply a liability and distraction we could do without.
So would you offer him the 1 year deal or stick to only offering the pay-as-you-play deal?