Mason Mount

[ROTG]

4 minutes ago, kev61 said:

Yep.I'm sick of chasing fairies from the bottom of my garden

Then, follow me down to a bridge by a fountain, where rocking-horse people eat marshmallows pies 

[kev61]

5 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Then, follow me down to a bridge by a fountain, where rocking-horse people eat marshmallows pies 

Sounds like the singing ringing tree by the brothers grim.

[ROTG]

10 minutes ago, kev61 said:

Sounds like the singing ringing tree by the brothers grim.

Nope - 60’s Kaleidoscope music 

[kev61]

1 minute ago, ROTG said:

Nope - 60’s Kaleidoscope music 

I'll take your word for it.

[Proud-Blue]

These last few posts are almost as relevant to the club as Mason Mount is now.

[Bob Singleton]

33 minutes ago, kev61 said:

I'll take your word for it.

Seriously?  You don't recognise the lyrics of 'Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds'?

[Ham]

4 hours ago, Bob Singleton said:

Seriously?  You don't recognise the lyrics of 'Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds'?

I would have made the point about the true meaning/inspiration of the song but we're banned from using abbreviations/initials....

😵‍💫

[Bison]

Performances matter. 18+ months of bad football just can't be ignored. And he was dropped by England during this period after being bad for them too. 

Edited July 5, 2023 by Bison

[Blue Moon]

23 minutes ago, Ham said:

I would have made the point about the true meaning/inspiration of the song but we're banned from using abbreviations/initials....

😵‍💫

You can’t spell lysuric licergic liserjik? Oh bugger, neither can I.

[Michael Tucker]

6 hours ago, Ham said:

I would have made the point about the true meaning/inspiration of the song but we're banned from using abbreviations/initials....

😵‍💫

No, you're not, and you never have been. You were asked pleasantly, to refrain from using initials so everybody here knew who you were talking about. For example: The first time you use it in a post, type the player's name. After that, use his initials if you want to. Shouldn't be that hard, should it?

[Ham]

😂

 

[Chelsea_Matt]

Interesting how Chelsea didn’t even say where Mount was going - and the goodbye was very muted. No goals video etc. 

[Bob Singleton]

12 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

Interesting how Chelsea didn’t even say where Mount was going - and the goodbye was very muted. No goals video etc. 

It was the perfect "send off" in my view.

[chrisb]

He’s now saying it was clear over the last couple of months he wasn’t in Chelsea’s plans going forward so that’s why he left. Doesn’t really ring true for me, even just hearing his voice is annoying now. Hope he flops miserably.

[paulw66]

3 minutes ago, chrisb said:

He’s now saying it was clear over the last couple of months he wasn’t in Chelsea’s plans going forward so that’s why he left. Doesn’t really ring true for me, even just hearing his voice is annoying now. Hope he flops miserably.

I think said for the last 6 months..........complete nonsense IMO.

There is no way he wasn't in the clubs plans, he was playing regularly up until about March. 

[Blue Moon]

Seeing as he no longer plays for us, surely we should lock this thread? It seems about as appropriate as having a de Bruyne thread on the grounds he once played for us. He’s gone and good riddance.

ps I’ve just noticed there is no Lukaku thread. Surely he justifies that for his contribution to the burger economy, if nothing else?

Edited July 6, 2023 by Blue Moon

[thevelourfog]

1 hour ago, paulw66 said:

I think said for the last 6 months..........complete nonsense IMO.

There is no way he wasn't in the clubs plans, he was playing regularly up until about March. 

Felix was playing until May tbf. Mendy got a start, and Koulibaly and Loftus-Cheek were featuring. The guy picking them wasn't in the long-term plans himself. Mount playing to March says nothing about what longer term plans for him were.

I keep saying this and it seems very much like it isn't something that has stuck with people. The club very aggressively briefed from around October last year that they would sell him this summer if he didn't sign a new contract. There was a very clear message being sent that the club would move on without him, that he was not indispensable to the club. This can't really be seriously disputed, and it doesn't take much imagination to consider how a player might interpret that. Especially if, rightly or wrongly, they feel the offers being made to them at that time aren't good enough. The club has been briefing the media today that they just didn't think he was good enough to warrant a Reece James wage.

I think it's far more likely that both parties have really pissed each other off and are seeing the same, one set of events through the own self-serving frame of reference than it is either side is more actively lying. It's a shame that things have clearly ended on such a sour note. 

[xceleryx]

25 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Felix was playing until May tbf. Mendy got a start, and Koulibaly and Loftus-Cheek were featuring. The guy picking them wasn't in the long-term plans himself. Mount playing to March says nothing about what longer term plans for him were.

I keep saying this and it seems very much like it isn't something that has stuck with people. The club very aggressively briefed from around October last year that they would sell him this summer if he didn't sign a new contract. There was a very clear message being sent that the club would move on without him, that he was not indispensable to the club. This can't really be seriously disputed, and it doesn't take much imagination to consider how a player might interpret that. Especially if, rightly or wrongly, they feel the offers being made to them at that time aren't good enough. The club has been briefing the media today that they just didn't think he was good enough to warrant a Reece James wage.

I think it's far more likely that both parties have really pissed each other off and are seeing the same, one set of events through the own self-serving frame of reference than it is either side is more actively lying. It's a shame that things have clearly ended on such a sour note. 

Despite this though there was a contract on the table for Mount to sign prior the the World Cup, with Mount choosing to delay a decision on this citing he wanted to focus on the upcoming tournament. This offer was then pulled in conjunction with the reworking of the footballing department. Subsequently that now famous one year extension was then presented to Mount and swiftly turned down. 

Reading between the lines a little if you will, Mount seemingly chose to gamble on himself having a big World Cup with the intention of returning to negotiations in a stronger position to leverage himself a better deal - this ultimately backfired. With the prior deal gone, the wage restructure, and an underwhelming World Cup (on top of 18 months of poor club form),  his bargaining position was worse and therefore the terms put forward reflected that. 

[paulw66]

1 hour ago, thevelourfog said:

. The club very aggressively briefed from around October last year that they would sell him this summer if he didn't sign a new contract.

Quite right. 

Couldn't afford another AC or Rudiger.

[thevelourfog]

25 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Despite this though there was a contract on the table for Mount to sign prior the the World Cup, with Mount choosing to delay a decision on this citing he wanted to focus on the upcoming tournament. This offer was then pulled in conjunction with the reworking of the footballing department. Subsequently that now famous one year extension was then presented to Mount and swiftly turned down. 

Reading between the lines a little if you will, Mount seemingly chose to gamble on himself having a big World Cup with the intention of returning to negotiations in a stronger position to leverage himself a better deal - this ultimately backfired. With the prior deal gone, the wage restructure, and an underwhelming World Cup (on top of 18 months of poor club form),  his bargaining position was worse and therefore the terms put forward reflected that. 

All conjecture, and not unreasonable (which is the best any of us here can aspire to). My point was that Mount apparently saying he wasn't in our plans doesn't seem especially out there and fits completely with the very public ultimatums issued.

Everything briefed the public screams to me two parties double-bluffing each other to the point of the relationship completely breaking down.

[thevelourfog]

Just now, paulw66 said:

Quite right. 

Couldn't afford another AC or Rudiger.

Not commenting on the rights or wrongs of it. Again, it's perfectly understandable that a player threatened with being sold would hear "you're expendable".

[Mark Kelly]

1 minute ago, thevelourfog said:

 

Everything briefed the public screams to me two parties double-bluffing each other to the point of the relationship completely breaking down.

In a nutshell.

[paulw66]

3 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Not commenting on the rights or wrongs of it. Again, it's perfectly understandable that a player threatened with being sold would hear "you're expendable".

 

If you are being offered a new deal, that is hardly "not being in the clubs plans"

[paulw66]

6 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Not commenting on the rights or wrongs of it. Again, it's perfectly understandable that a player threatened with being sold would hear "you're expendable".

There isn't a key player in the world who that doesn't apply to

[thevelourfog]

12 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

There isn't a key player in the world who that doesn't apply to

And yet not all contract negotiations end terribly. If you want to act like "I wasn't in their plans" is a huge, incomprehensible leap from "take it or leave it, and if you don't take it we'll get rid of you" (and again, I'm not interested in the rights or wrongs of that approach), that's up to you.