Jump to content

Steve Harper


Tooj
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 226
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm sure the club would have prefered to pay Harper no wage,but maybe realised his `loyalty' need to come with a wage of £25,000.Would you stay with your current employers and continue to show `loyalty' to the company if you were going to be paid nowt.Staying at NUFC for 20 years has suited both parties.if Harper had been offered another contract and decided is wasn't for him,would he be showing `disloyalty' to NUFC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Harper left Newcastle United to join a unique band of monks in the Himalayas that celebrate the music of George Michael on a daily basis whilst only eating twixes (with rice) would THAT be disloyal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£20k a week is roughly what he is on now. He certainly would have earned a lot less a few years back.

 

I always think its different for keepers to outfield players. 1st choice keepers tend not to get injured very often and its not as if there is another position you could stand in for temporarily.

 

Additionally, you don't see keepers getting a run out in the second half once a game is won. If you're a second choice full back, you know you'll get a run out every now and again to show what you can do.

 

Harper could have left. But he would have no guarantee that he would be first choice. PL clubs change managers so often that things could change and he call fall out of favour.

 

I reckon there is a slight lack of ambition, but there's also a sense of self-awareness. He knows he isn't a world beater and knows that NUFC is about the best level he could aspire to. He also knows that he is financially sorted here and gets to stay close to family and friends.

 

So yes, I think he has shown a slight lack of ambition, but so what? I would have done the same, given his ability as a keeper and his happiness at staying in the north east.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the height of his abilities what could have he aspired to - and would it have been a gamble?

 

Ambition is no good if you flat on your face. I like Harper, he's a good keeper, a loyal servant to the club & a decent bloke.

 

He's about the least objectionable player in the squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats what i am saying.He's been happy with his package.Loyalty has never entered his head,and it wouldn't enter ours if we had accepted his package.He saw the contracts,he signed them.They suited him.So £500,000 after tax.We'd all be `loyal' for that amount.

Edited by essembeeofsunderland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's shown `loyalty' to himself (and family ).Living and working in the north east has suted him ( and the £25,000 ) a week. The package has suited him ( being mainly the number 2 keeper ).Would his `loyalty' have been tested if Man City had come calling ( to repeat myself because no one has addressed this scenario and we know why ) and offered him £100,000 to move his` loyalty' to Manchester.

 

Yeah, we all know why; if it's a ludicrous idea. Say instead Villa came knocking. Would Harper have left? Probably not, no. the sum they'd offer him isn't so vast as to unbalance scales which has loyalty and home-life on one arm and greed on the other. If a Dubai group came in when he was, say, 30 and threw £100k a week after tax at him, would he have left then? I'd say no. Harper just isn't as motivated by money as you discredit him by suggesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The package,including the money,has suited Harper,so why the need to imply i am saying only the money has kept him here for 20 years.I have never said only the money has brought `loyalty' from Harper.He's a local lad.He and his family are settled in the area.He's playing for a local team.The package has suited him.If he moves to another club,he will go because the package suits him.If he'd decided to leave at anytime,would that mean he would have been `disloyal'. If you believe he has been `loyal' then surely the answer has to be YES.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he decided to leave he wouldn't have been disloyal because he's served the club for 20 odd years in an arrangement that served both parties. The club have been loyal to him & he has been loyal to the club. Simple. No hypothesis required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After how many years can the words `loyal' and or `disloyal' be used.Most players leave before their contracts are up.Are they being `disloyal' if they leave before the contract is up or been `loyal' during their time at the club prior to them leaving.

Edited by essembeeofsunderland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After how many years can the words `loyal' and or `disloyal' be used.Most players leave before their contracts are up.Are they being `disloyal' if they leave before the contract is up or been `loyal' during their time at the club prior to them leaving.

 

 

Depends on the nature of the relationship with the club prior to the departure, and the nature of the departure.

 

Sami Hyypia was loyal to Liverpool for the duration of his employ. Ole Gunnar Solskjær was loyal to Man Utd. Were they well paid? Yes, does this mean they can't be loyal? No.

 

How are you struggling with this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what a debate gets to a stage where it's basically about nothing? That's about now.

 

I'm in the abyss. I've bought a house in the abyss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.