' CARDIFF CITY STAR SHOULD NOT BE MADE TO WAIT '

My personal opinion is,that I believe Whittingham is currently on £25,000 a week,so if he's offered a new one,I would be offering£10,000?

OPINIONS?

' CARDIFF CITY STAR SHOULD NOT BE MADE TO WAIT '

Peter Whittingham should not be made to wait for a new Cardiff deal

Whittinghams contract runs out next June.

By Scott Johnson

Monday 14th November 2016

It might be pushing it a bit to label Peter Whittingham an unsung hero, but he still has his fair share of doubters out there, even after all these years.

He may have gone in and out of fashion at times, but Whittingham has certainly proved that class is permanent by finding favour with every Cardiff manager that has passed through the club during a decade with the club.

In fact, 11 January will be the 10 anniversary of his arrival at the club, which would be a remarkable achievement at any club, but is particularly impressive at a club that has been as turbulent as Cardiff. He will soon be entitled to a testimonial, but whether a new contract will follow remains to be seen.

Whittingham’s existing deal expires in the summer and while the club were keen to tie down both Stuart O’Keefe and Anthony Pilkington earlier in the season, Whittingham, who turns 33 in September, has been left to stew.



Frankly, he deserves better than that. Maybe talks have already commenced behind the scenes, but if that is the case, it would be advantageous to try and reach agreement ahead of the January transfer window to avoid any unnecessary speculation. A new deal would not be a mere sentimental gesture. Whittingham is still punching his weight and I doubt there would be a shortage of suitors were he to become available.

Whittingham demonstrated his worth at Newcastle ahead of the international break when he emerged from the bench to inspire a late Cardiff rally. Unexpectedly dropped from the starting line-up, Whittingham reduced the two-goal deficit within three minutes with a trademark strike from the edge of the box.

The goal was Whittingham’s 92 for the club, scored against 41 different opponents. The label legend is bandied around far too freely these days, but Whittingham is a bonafide Cardiff great and it has been a pleasure to witness his career. It pains me to imagine the Cardiff squad without him and here’s hoping that he will still remain with the club for a fair few years yet.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

The club have to be pragmatic and not let sentiment cloud their judgement. As the article states PW is 33 in September so his natural self life is coming to an end. As a club we can't afford to dish out generous contracts on the back of previous exploits.

PW has already been well rewarded for his efforts by way of lucrative past contracts. He is already a very wealthy man and it would be wrong for the club to pay him more extravagant contracts at his age.

He can stay on reduced short term deals by all means but he has to accept the days of him earning mega bucks for playing are over, well at Cardiff City they are.

Whitts is the best footballer at the club so like other clubs get the best wage whitts is 32 10 mths till his next b day he deserves new contract now

Exactly

In my opinion PW remains the best player at the club and it beggars belief that his contract situation hasn't been resolved yet with a little over 6 months before his current deal expires. Age catches up with every player eventually and PW will be no different but, he is still just 32 years of age. In the summer the club gave Rickie Lambert a 2 year contract will will run past his 36 birthday so on that basis , and in my opinion, PW deserves a 2 year contract with an option for a further year. But on what terms

In the 2015 / 16 season the average salary for a Championship player was £600k per year, about £11,500 per week. Is Whitts an average player, absolutely not, but with FFP rules surely the club would have other priorities when it comes to paying above average wages.

Annis mentioned £10k a week,I think that is a bit low, but £12k-£13k per week would be about right. If that is to big a drop for Whitts then it's thanks for the fantastic memories of 10 fabulous years at the club and good luck for the future.

He will be offered a minimum 18-20,000 if he leaves. With our current midfield he is by far the best footballing cm we have. The closest to him is probably Ralls but he still has a lot of developing to do to get up to Whit's passing range and vision. He's never relied on pace anyway so the fact he's 33 doesn't really matter as much.

No brainier for me on ability alone he deserves a new contract the fact he's a club legend makes his case even stronger.

I don't see why he should be deducted £15,000 just because of his age.

He is 32 and top scorer under Warnock from midfield, he is showing no signs that the Championship is getting out of his depth in anyway and someone who rarely gets injured and looks comfortable playing 90 minutes a game from Tuesday to Saturday.

If you gonna drop his wages then drop to 20,000.

I don't see why he should be deducted £15,000 just because of his age.

He is 32 and top scorer under Warnock from midfield, he is showing no signs that the Championship is getting out of his depth in anyway and someone who rarely gets injured and looks comfortable playing 90 minutes a game from Tuesday to Saturday.

If you gonna drop his wages then drop to 20,000.

We all need to be realistic here...yes Whitts has been a great servant and is a really decent player, however his best years are well behind him...if you watch him closely in games it is plain to see that he no longer has the legs to play to play a full game/season and he is going to get slower year by year.

20k a week when you add in extras, win bonus, goals bonus, pension etc etc is nearly 1.5million a year. In 18 months time when our parachute payments stop our total annual income as a club is going to fall to under 10million a year.

If we offer these sort of salaries we will be able to afford about 6 players!!!!!

We simply cannot afford to pay Whitts anywhere near 10k a week anymore....that's the reality of the situation we are in!!!!

whitts is not worth 20-25k a week his best days are behind him 10k on a 2 -3 year contract would be realistic

whitts is not worth 20-25k a week his best days are behind him 10k on a 2 -3 year contract would be realistic

offer him 10k and he will leave, i think hes still our best player and has been for yrs,knock it down to say 18k with a 2k goal bonus and keep him for another 3yrs

whitts is not worth 20-25k a week his best days are behind him 10k on a 2 -3 year contract would be realistic

offer him 10k and he will leave, i think hes still our best player and has been for yrs,knock it down to say 18k with a 2k goal bonus and keep him for another 3yrs

if he leaves I can't see any other club paying him 20k a week

Well weve just signed lambert on something ridiculous like 35k a week and hes 34 so lets put things into perspective. You think we should slash his wages to less than a third of Lamberts wages? Is lambert 3x more valuable to us than whitts? I dont think so...

whitts is not worth 20-25k a week his best days are behind him 10k on a 2 -3 year contract would be realistic

offer him 10k and he will leave, i think hes still our best player and has been for yrs,knock it down to say 18k with a 2k goal bonus and keep him for another 3yrs

18kpw works out @ £936kpa or just short of £1m per season. When the parachute payments run out next season our turnover will be something like £25m per season. So just on Whitts' wages we would be splashing 2.25% of our turnover when we still have 24+ other players and backroom staff to pay, a stadium to maintain, running expenses such as travel, tax, the academy and transfer liabilities to service.

We simply can't afford extravagance anymore on a 33 year old player. We either cut our cloth or cut our financial throats.

Well weve just signed lambert on something ridiculous like 35k a week and hes 34 so lets put things into perspective. You think we should slash his wages to less than a third of Lamberts wages? Is lambert 3x more valuable to us than whitts? I dont think so...

My understanding is that Lambert's contract is dependent on him making a certain amount of appearances this season which would activate a second year. Basically if he continues not to score then in the second half of the season he will probably find himself benched and first team opportunities restricted meaning we don't have to offer the second year.

But for arguments sake lets say I have got the situation wrong and Lambert has a nailed on 2nd year. That would mean even less resources left over to pay Whitts a high salary and fund the rest of the team. The perspective is understanding the maths and the fact there is no bottomless pit anymore.

whitts is not worth 20-25k a week his best days are behind him 10k on a 2 -3 year contract would be realistic

offer him 10k and he will leave, i think hes still our best player and has been for yrs,knock it down to say 18k with a 2k goal bonus and keep him for another 3yrs

18kpw works out @ £936kpa or just short of £1m per season. When the parachute payments run out next season our turnover will be something like £25m per season. So just on Whitts' wages we would be splashing 2.25% of our turnover when we still have 24+ other players and backroom staff to pay, a stadium to maintain, running expenses such as travel, tax, the academy and transfer liabilities to service.

We simply can't afford extravagance anymore on a 33 year old player. We either cut our cloth or cut our financial throats.

HI Tony,

How do you work out we will be getting income of 25 million pa when the parachute payments run out? I was under the impression it is only going to be between 10-12 million...am I missing something?

whitts is not worth 20-25k a week his best days are behind him 10k on a 2 -3 year contract would be realistic

offer him 10k and he will leave, i think hes still our best player and has been for yrs,knock it down to say 18k with a 2k goal bonus and keep him for another 3yrs

18kpw works out @ £936kpa or just short of £1m per season. When the parachute payments run out next season our turnover will be something like £25m per season. So just on Whitts' wages we would be splashing 2.25% of our turnover when we still have 24+ other players and backroom staff to pay, a stadium to maintain, running expenses such as travel, tax, the academy and transfer liabilities to service.

We simply can't afford extravagance anymore on a 33 year old player. We either cut our cloth or cut our financial throats.

HI Tony,

How do you work out we will be getting income of 25 million pa when the parachute payments run out? I was under the impression it is only going to be between 10-12 million...am I missing something?

TBH it was a guess. I remember that we used to have a turnover of £20m under Ridsdale so I was being generous with my estimate considering that FL TV money may have increased over the past few years.

If you know better then I bow to your knowledge and a turnover of £12m would mean PW's wages being 12% of turnover if we paid him £18kpw. That would be utter madness.

Well weve just signed lambert on something ridiculous like 35k a week and hes 34 so lets put things into perspective. You think we should slash his wages to less than a third of Lamberts wages? Is lambert 3x more valuable to us than whitts? I dont think so...

My understanding is that Lambert's contract is dependent on him making a certain amount of appearances this season which would activate a second year. Basically if he continues not to score then in the second half of the season he will probably find himself benched and first team opportunities restricted meaning we don't have to offer the second year.

But for arguments sake lets say I have got the situation wrong and Lambert has a nailed on 2nd year. That would mean even less resources left over to pay Whitts a high salary and fund the rest of the team. The perspective is understanding the maths and the fact there is no bottomless pit anymore.

I understand that. But we also have to consider player politics behind the scenes, I couldn't see whitts more than halving his salary when some other lesser regarded players will Continue to make considerably more. I wonder how much Anthony Pilkingtons new contract was for?

Well weve just signed lambert on something ridiculous like 35k a week and hes 34 so lets put things into perspective. You think we should slash his wages to less than a third of Lamberts wages? Is lambert 3x more valuable to us than whitts? I dont think so...

My understanding is that Lambert's contract is dependent on him making a certain amount of appearances this season which would activate a second year. Basically if he continues not to score then in the second half of the season he will probably find himself benched and first team opportunities restricted meaning we don't have to offer the second year.

But for arguments sake lets say I have got the situation wrong and Lambert has a nailed on 2nd year. That would mean even less resources left over to pay Whitts a high salary and fund the rest of the team. The perspective is understanding the maths and the fact there is no bottomless pit anymore.

I understand that. But we also have to consider player politics behind the scenes, I couldn't see whitts more than halving his salary when some other lesser regarded players will Continue to make considerably more. I wonder how much Anthony Pilkingtons new contract was for?

The problem with that is at some point we will have the lunatics running the asylum. VT has rightly taken stick for running up debt in the past by paying stupid wages to players who on balance didn't justify the outlay. Your suggestion is to return to that system which is bound to end in a financial car crash.

The answer is not to up PW's wages to AP's (or Lambert's for that instance) in order to keep the peace, it should be AP's coming down to PW's level. If they don't like it then show them the door. FFP is changing footballing fiancé and players are slowly losing the dominance they have enjoyed for the last 20 years. As I said in another reply PW has been well rewarded for his efforts in previous contracts and the club is under no obligation to reward him again for those past deeds the only exception being a testimonial.

In modern football sentiment is a luxury and the hard truth is the club comes before the players.

Well weve just signed lambert on something ridiculous like 35k a week and hes 34 so lets put things into perspective. You think we should slash his wages to less than a third of Lamberts wages? Is lambert 3x more valuable to us than whitts? I dont think so...

My understanding is that Lambert's contract is dependent on him making a certain amount of appearances this season which would activate a second year. Basically if he continues not to score then in the second half of the season he will probably find himself benched and first team opportunities restricted meaning we don't have to offer the second year.

But for arguments sake lets say I have got the situation wrong and Lambert has a nailed on 2nd year. That would mean even less resources left over to pay Whitts a high salary and fund the rest of the team. The perspective is understanding the maths and the fact there is no bottomless pit anymore.

I understand that. But we also have to consider player politics behind the scenes, I couldn't see whitts more than halving his salary when some other lesser regarded players will Continue to make considerably more. I wonder how much Anthony Pilkingtons new contract was for?

The problem with that is at some point we will have the lunatics running the asylum. VT has rightly taken stick for running up debt in the past by paying stupid wages to players who on balance didn't justify the outlay. Your suggestion is to return to that system which is bound to end in a financial car crash.

The answer is not to up PW's wages to AP's (or Lambert's for that instance) in order to keep the peace, it should be AP's coming down to PW's level. If they don't like it then show them the door. FFP is changing footballing fiancé and players are slowly losing the dominance they have enjoyed for the last 20 years. As I said in another reply PW has been well rewarded for his efforts in previous contracts and the club is under no obligation to reward him again for those past deeds the only exception being a testimonial.

In modern football sentiment is a luxury and the hard truth is the club comes before the players.

I think you've misunderstood me slightly because I am agreeing with what your saying. I know we've got to cut wages and I don't think PW should have a pay rise I just think he's worth more than the 10k a week that the OP implied.

Well weve just signed lambert on something ridiculous like 35k a week and hes 34 so lets put things into perspective. You think we should slash his wages to less than a third of Lamberts wages? Is lambert 3x more valuable to us than whitts? I dont think so...

My understanding is that Lambert's contract is dependent on him making a certain amount of appearances this season which would activate a second year. Basically if he continues not to score then in the second half of the season he will probably find himself benched and first team opportunities restricted meaning we don't have to offer the second year.

But for arguments sake lets say I have got the situation wrong and Lambert has a nailed on 2nd year. That would mean even less resources left over to pay Whitts a high salary and fund the rest of the team. The perspective is understanding the maths and the fact there is no bottomless pit anymore.

I understand that. But we also have to consider player politics behind the scenes, I couldn't see whitts more than halving his salary when some other lesser regarded players will Continue to make considerably more. I wonder how much Anthony Pilkingtons new contract was for?

The problem with that is at some point we will have the lunatics running the asylum. VT has rightly taken stick for running up debt in the past by paying stupid wages to players who on balance didn't justify the outlay. Your suggestion is to return to that system which is bound to end in a financial car crash.

The answer is not to up PW's wages to AP's (or Lambert's for that instance) in order to keep the peace, it should be AP's coming down to PW's level. If they don't like it then show them the door. FFP is changing footballing fiancé and players are slowly losing the dominance they have enjoyed for the last 20 years. As I said in another reply PW has been well rewarded for his efforts in previous contracts and the club is under no obligation to reward him again for those past deeds the only exception being a testimonial.

In modern football sentiment is a luxury and the hard truth is the club comes before the players.

I think you've misunderstood me slightly because I am agreeing with what your saying. I know we've got to cut wages and I don't think PW should have a pay rise I just think he's worth more than the 10k a week that the OP implied.

Fair enough but I would state that I agree with the OP that £10kpw is the maximum we should offer considering PW's age and the depreciation rate of return he can offer because of it.

He has to be looking at 15k surely? Agree with nubbsy ' s post about lambert being on 35k approx. So whitts has to be worth at least 15-18