Chelsea to snap up Sturridge

[the scud]

Why the hell is he thinking of going there for?? More likely to get more games at Man City as City were trying everything they could to keep hold of him. I have a feeling Sturridge will be the same as scott sinclair or Ben Sahar at Chelsea.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/8067000.stm

[chrisobee]

Not to mention Sean Wright-Phillips and he was given little chance by Scolari, result of course he returned to Man City !

[Doctoroncall]

£55k a week that he's holding out for would be the main reason.

[Chris Larkin]

Even if he hardly plays, they can sell him on in a year and make money.

 

See what they did with Tal Ben Haim and Steve Sidwell - they took them on frees, got a year of improved squad depth out of them, then sold them for around £5m each, covering more than the money they would have spent on the contracts through that year. It's good business if you can afford to pay the enormous wages in the first place.

[Andy_Porter]

Sturridge won't be a free transfer though since he's under 24.

 

He will probably be third choice striker at Chelsea, not a terrible career choice but not a great one either.

[Smirking_Saint]

Sturridge won't be a free transfer though since he's under 24.

 

He will probably be third choice striker at Chelsea, not a terrible career choice but not a great one either.

 

Free if offered the same or greater terms then original club.

[Andy_Porter]

Free if offered the same or greater terms then original club.

 

No, that's not how it works. So long as Man City offered him a contract extension then it will go to a tribunal where they decide the fee Chelsea have to pay.

[Saint Martini]

No, that's not how it works. So long as Man City offered him a contract extension then it will go to a tribunal where they decide the fee Chelsea have to pay.

 

And since City offered around 45.000 a week that sum could be quite big.

[Smirking_Saint]

No, that's not how it works. So long as Man City offered him a contract extension then it will go to a tribunal where they decide the fee Chelsea have to pay.

 

I am wrong, just checked it out.

 

Apologees all round. :smt090

[Chris Larkin]

Sturridge won't be a free transfer though since he's under 24.

Good point, I didn't think of that. Are tribunal fees meant to reflect the market price of the players, or are they just a fee to cover the costs of training the player? I always thought it was the former, but some on here told me last year that actually it was sopposed to be costs only.

 

Still, it's Chelsea we're talking about, so it's not like money is an issue.