johnnyk 158 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Hopefully this is crap, I thought we were not paying any wages? RANGERS could be hit with a �£350,000 bill to off-load wantaway winger Jerome Rothen next month. Rothen has made it clear he wants to rip up his loan deal at Ibrox five months early after falling out of favour with boss Walter Smith. But his club Paris Saint-Germain don't want his �£36,000-a-week salary back on their wage bill. At the moment Gers pay Rothen about �£18,000-a-week with PSG picking up the other half. And a spokesman for the French club said: "Jerome has a loan arrangement with Rangers until the end of the season and the terms of that deal have not changed. "If the player wishes to leave, or the club no longer want him, then that is a concern for Jerome and Rangers - not us." PSG boss Antoine Kombouare, when asked if he would take Rothen back, said: "The player wants to leave Paris Saint-Germain and as far as I know he's still with Rangers." Now Gers must hope a team coughs up �£750,000 to buy Rothen next month. http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/2782264/Rangers-fear-350k-Rothen-pay-off.html 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,529 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Conflicting stories about his wages and who pays them... Hopefully we'll be able to move him on as that kind of money is a complete waste. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 The guy was a defending nightmare. If we have to pay his wages then i would say keep him as back-up as there is no point in paying him for nothing. If we don't then let him go. If he walks away himself then i don't see why we should be paying him. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 That pretty much says that to keep him or to let him go costs exactly the same. If that is truly the case, it's probably best to keep him just in case we need him. However, it does seem a bit strange. Can't believe he's on 36k a week; he makes most of our team look like complete bargains in comparison. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 This mess is becoming a sorry affair. And the reason he is on 36k is the way he played in Germany. Which has been forgotten by just about everyone. I am not outright defending him, but I do also feel he has been made a scapegoat, and was never even wanted in the first place. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totti 0 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) We don't help ourselves. I'd thought we would have learned from all the previous duds we've paid off. We're like the Scottish version of Leeds United, entirely backwards economically. The reason he's on so much money is because he used to be worth that but he won't see another contract like that. Edited December 23, 2009 by Totti 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totti 0 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) The guy was a defending nightmare. If we have to pay his wages then i would say keep him as back-up as there is no point in paying him for nothing. If we don't then let him go. If he walks away himself then i don't see why we should be paying him. Defending isn't really particularly important for a wide midfielder. What a Scottish attitude . More to the point, he's entirely slow, plays the odd half decent ball but other than that added nothing and brought back painful memories of a certain Charlie Adam. Walter probably just bought him because he was good in the champions league 6/7 years ago and then looked ok in a friendly against us. Typical pathetic scouting. Edited December 23, 2009 by Totti 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Harsh on Charlie. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totti 0 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Yeah you're right. Charlie fairly mastered those long punts out for goal kicks and managed to appear even slower than Neil Lennon on a bad day. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,998 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 I guess you are taking a chance on every player you sign, especially foreign ones. Still, it sickens me to think so much money is being wasted on this clown. I thought thought the days of big pay offs were behind us. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.