Cheick Tioté (1986-2017)

[Guest firetotheworks]

Btw it makes me laugh that this forum and the likes of Colocho are labelled overly negative when you look at the reaction to news like this elsewhere.

 

What do you mean?

[Punk77]

 

 

This is great news but some of the arguments given in favour of selling Carroll don't quite stack up.

 

In addition to what Northerngimp has mentioned: The club was interested in giving him a new contract. But Carroll decided he wanted to be the best paid player in the club. And that's an absurd demand they couldn't say yes to. And Carroll was already on a much better contract than Tiote.

[Dave]

Carroll getting an offer from a top club (unofficially, as otherwise it would be 'tapping up') and approaching the club for a pay increase is deemed unreasonable. How do we know the same hasn't happened with Tiote?

 

I'd rather they were both here, I just think some of the double standards on show are a little strange.

[Dave]

 

 

This is great news but some of the arguments given in favour of selling Carroll don't quite stack up.

 

In addition to what Northerngimp has mentioned: The club was interested in giving him a new contract. But Carroll decided he wanted to be the best paid player in the club. And that's an absurd demand they couldn't say yes to. And Carroll was already on a much better contract than Tiote.

 

Source for all that?

[NG32]

How do you know who asked who?

 

There is NO issue with Tiote signing this contract from my perspective, please don't think that of me.

 

I dont think Tiote walked into Pardews office and demanded a new contract...to me it looked like the club was nailing another key player down on a longer term contract.

 

I cant be arsed to go looking but this is not the first long term contract handed out, so to me it looks like a stratergy they are employing.

 

 

 

 

[Ketsbaia]

SIX AND A HALF YEARS!!!!!!!!

 

Absolutely excellent news, hopefully this has a knock-on effect for Enrique too.

 

Some people around here need to wake up, like. Our best player signs a 6 year deal and you can't even be happy for one day? Maybe this'll end in tears, but in the mean time can we enjoy things please?

 

 

[Ishmael]

But it really isn't good practice for a club to continually give into a players demands, regardless of the circumstances.  Barriers must be drawn in the current way of operating.  Sad, but true.

[Jill]

To celebrate I'm going to stomp around the office Tiote-style for the rest of the afternoon.

[Guest Roger Kint]

But it really isn't good practice for a club to continually give into a players demands, regardless of the circumstances.  Barriers must be drawn in the current way of operating.  Sad, but true.

 

How many have we gave in to?

[Dave]

How do you know who asked who?

 

There is NO issue with Tiote signing this contract from my perspective, please don't think that of me.

 

I dont think Tiote walked into Pardews office and demanded a new contract...to me it looked like the club was nailing another key player down on a longer term contract.

 

I cant be arsed to go looking but this is not the first long term contract handed out, so to me it looks like a stratergy they are employing.

 

They've given out a number of long contracts in recent times, to staff and players.

 

I just can't see how you can so easily assume one player did something and another did differently, without actually knowing about either. Bit too convenient for me, that's all.

[JH]

Not my opinion, but I can see why people would have that opinion.

 

Tiote is more proven now than Carroll, not in the PL but he's more proven. Plus Carroll had already had a pay increase two months previous.

[Skirge]

NUFCTV Interview with him

[Guest Roger Kint]

Not my opinion, but I can see why people would have that opinion.

 

Tiote is more proven now than Carroll, not in the PL but he's more proven. Plus Carroll had already had a pay increase two months previous.

 

And in the January before i think

[NG32]

But it really isn't good practice for a club to continually give into a players demands, regardless of the circumstances.  Barriers must be drawn in the current way of operating.  Sad, but true.

 

You really think Tiote barged into Pardews office and demanded a 61/2 year deal ?

 

While other players have also been tied in to long  term contracts pre season and during the season.

You cant see a stratergy going on here from Ashley and Decker?

 

[Ritchie]

Remember when Nicky Butt was our holding midfield player?

[Punk77]

 

 

This is great news but some of the arguments given in favour of selling Carroll don't quite stack up.

 

In addition to what Northerngimp has mentioned: The club was interested in giving him a new contract. But Carroll decided he wanted to be the best paid player in the club. And that's an absurd demand they couldn't say yes to. And Carroll was already on a much better contract than Tiote.

 

Source for all that?

 

Unconfirmed source, so you nailed me there.. But, what i do know is that Pardew has confirmed that Carroll came into his office asking for a new contract, but Carroll turned and left when Pardew asked how much he wanted..

 

But you can't have both, that's the reality. Without Carroll money= no longterm Tiote contract.Sad but true.

[Jill]

Remember when Nicky Butt was our holding midfield player?

 

I've just been sick in my mouth.

[Dave]

But it really isn't good practice for a club to continually give into a players demands, regardless of the circumstances.  Barriers must be drawn in the current way of operating.  Sad, but true.

 

You really think Tiote barged into Pardews office and demanded a 61/2 year deal ?

 

You really think Carroll barged into Pardews office and demanded £80,000 per week?

 

 

Just saying, it's amusing how people change their perspective. If Tiote had gone in the summer presumably some would have called him a cunt.

[Ishmael]

But it really isn't good practice for a club to continually give into a players demands, regardless of the circumstances.  Barriers must be drawn in the current way of operating.  Sad, but true.

 

How many have we gave in to?

 

I think the Carroll affair is the precedent to this.  My current knowledge is that he had 2 wage increases in the space of roughly a year.

 

Even if he was worth more than the contract he was on in January (ok, so he was), the club couldn't justify a further increase in his wage, as there was too much potential for a range of damaging repercussions.  That, and hello to £35m.

[Ishmael]

But it really isn't good practice for a club to continually give into a players demands, regardless of the circumstances.  Barriers must be drawn in the current way of operating.  Sad, but true.

 

You really think Tiote barged into Pardews office and demanded a 61/2 year deal ?

 

You really think Carroll barged into Pardews office and demanded £80,000 per week?

 

 

 

Strong possibility.

[Ishmael]

Remember when Nicky Butt was our holding midfield player?

 

I've just been sick in my mouth.

 

Sad, would love the 2002 variety back.

[JH]

But it really isn't good practice for a club to continually give into a players demands, regardless of the circumstances.  Barriers must be drawn in the current way of operating.  Sad, but true.

 

You really think Tiote barged into Pardews office and demanded a 61/2 year deal ?

 

You really think Carroll barged into Pardews office and demanded £80,000 per week?

 

 

Just saying, it's amusing how people change their perspective. If Tiote had gone in the summer presumably some would have called him a c***.

 

But it's a different situation. Even if he demanded it, Tiote didn't sign a contract two months before this deal. Carroll did.

[NG32]

How do you know who asked who?

 

There is NO issue with Tiote signing this contract from my perspective, please don't think that of me.

 

I dont think Tiote walked into Pardews office and demanded a new contract...to me it looked like the club was nailing another key player down on a longer term contract.

 

I cant be arsed to go looking but this is not the first long term contract handed out, so to me it looks like a stratergy they are employing.

 

They've given out a number of long contracts in recent times, to staff and players.

 

I just can't see how you can so easily assume one player did something and another did differently, without actually knowing about either. Bit too convenient for me, that's all.

 

I think the stats prove that we ar a better side with tiote in it.

 

Anyway, its cracking news regradless, we have either sealed a player long term or will make another club play insane money for a player.  I want him to stay but you have vultures like Man City and Chelsea kicking about.

 

I'll be gutted if he goes but the reality is, until UEFA an FIFA get a grip on this sugar daddy thing in football.  then everyones players are vunerable.

 

Best you can do is tei em up with long contracts.

 

i'm going for lunch.

[Dave]

But you can't have both, that's the reality. Without Carroll money= no longterm Tiote contract.Sadly but true.

 

Completely disagree. Can't prove it without the next set of accounts but I refuse to believe we are still so poor.

[BottledDog]

Risk getting shot down in flames as this isn't /   /  

 

Will Tiote's new £50k (around £2.6m a year) wages over a six and a half year period (around £16.9m) be taken out of the Carroll money?

 

By the way, I've been accused/called a lot of names in this thread - if any of you knew my personally you'd realise how pleased I am about this news. It's just I find this board is a good place to voice concerns, amongst mainly reasonable people. And before anyone tries any low blows towards United For Newcastle, please check the Facebook/Twitter profiles as to how the news has been received.

 

On a day where an obviously a piece of good news has been announced, your first two comments were "Why have they done it now? Should have waited until the summer." and "What are win going to do if Chelsea bid £18 million for him. Carroll situation all over again", you can surely understand why people are being frosty with you.

 

But it's not like I'm saying he shouldn't have been offered a new contract, or got a wage rise ... just think we should have waited until the summer to offer it. If that's worthy of being called a negative bastard etc etc then well, I'll keep any thoughts that question the actions of the hierarchy of this club to myself.

 

Why though? While others have given reasons for doing it now, you still haven't given us any decent explaination of why we should have waited until the summer.

 

I have actually. I would have waited until the end of the season as it is closer to the transfer window opening.

 

The point I'm trying so hard to make is that - As we saw with Carroll, players signing a long-term contract make little difference to clubs with a lot of cash that want their man. Carroll signed a 5 year contract at his hometown club, did that deter a club from making an offer only 3 months later (as well as others showing interest?)

 

And nobody has suggested otherwise. It is an arguement that has been used countless times against those who bang on about us suddenly becoming 'a selling club' because a mad bid came in for Carroll.

 

What people have argued is that an increased contract both ups his price (therefore protecting the player against leaving on the cheap), and that the increase in wages means there is less chance of having his head turned by wages offered by other clubs, but keeps him within the structure we have in place.

 

 

I just feel that offering a new contract at the end of the season would be a better signal to other clubs that he is not for sale.

 

So this is the core of your arguement.

Trying to tie him down during the madness of the summer window, in what may look like desperation, sends out a stronger signal to other clubs than showing faith enough in him to get things sorted as soon as possible?

 

Well, I couldn't disagree more.