"""Alan Shearer could be set for a reported £3million pay rise depending on how much United offer Kieron Dyer to stay at St James's Park. The former England international has a clause in his contract that stipulates that he will be on the top wage while at the club, and with Dyer in contract negotiations Shearer could then be entitled to a pay rise depending on what wage The Magpies offer the midfielder. Shearer has been the club's top earner on £40,000 a week since his arrival from Blackburn Rovers back in July 1996. However, Dyer is expected to sign a new deal reportedly worth around £55,000 a week and this could mean that Shearer may be boosted up to £60,000 a week to keep him as the highest paid player at St. James's Park for the next three years of his contract."""

This is the most stupid thing I have ever heard. No matter how bad Shearer gets, no matter how hard he tries, no matter how good other players are he has to recieve the top wage!

If we were to sell Shearer now we wouldn't get 5 million for him because of his age and he's nothing like the player he used to be.

Secondly, the day he stops playing for us will be the day he stops playing proffesional football.

He is very lucky to still be getting the wage of someone worth 15 million. When there are much better stikers at other clubs earning less. So I cannot believe that we are prepared to up his sallery further!

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2002

Answers

If it's true it's true.

You can't really blame him for wanting to earn the top salary if it's been offered to him, but you'd like to think that he would be prepared to accept what he's on for the good of the club.

Are there much better strikers at the club though? Bellamy as a striker isn't much good as he doesn't score enough. I wouldn't say Cort was as good but we may be proved wrong, he's only 24.

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2002

the best situation to get yourself into is to have a few players all guaranteed to be the top earners

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2002

Nice work if you can get it. ;-)

Where did this story come from, Jim? My first reaction is to think it's just media speculation trying to stir things up(again). But if it's true, Shearer knows he's getting paid for his name as much as his talent. His presence still has a fear factor among opposing players. He's a shrewd man if he really did work that kind of deal into his contract.

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2002

This story is ringing some vague bells with me. If it's true it raises all sorts of issues as it effectively means we'll have to pay several million extra pounds to keep Dyer. There may well be a way around it though - like paying Dyer a large signing on fee up front instead of jacking up his basic wage, or giving him a completion of contract bonus, win bonuses, European qualification bonuses etc as presumably these can't be included in Al's deal. At least I hope not!

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2002

Unbelievable. Which means I don't believe it.

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2002

Paul, Jim said, "When there are much better stikers at OTHER clubs earning less."

Sorry mate, just being extra pedantic today!

;7)

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2002

You've got to hand it to those cockneys; not content with knocking us out of the cup they have to try to destabilise in the hope that Chelsea can grab fourth place.

For the record, we are going to come third whilst Arsenal win by 7 points.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2002

Bloody Hell Softie, you're on the booze early this morning. I'll have whatever you're drinking, thank you. In fact, make it a double. This looks like the happy hour. Even Gav's smiling. Mybe Saturday didn't happen.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2002

Why not offer £50,000 and a penny?

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2002

Doesn't even sound like Alan Shearer.

I mean, what would he do if it was true, but the club decided that they weren't going to honour it ?

Bang in a transfer request ?

Who'd sign him at the money he'd have to ask to match Dyer's ?

Just doesn't make sense.

Oops, in that case, it's exactly what's going to happen. :-{E}

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2002

Such a clause is ridiculous and if true, the club should never have accepted such a thing. But is it true? One could possibly imagine this making even a little sense when he was first signed in 1996 but when he re-signed as a 29/30-y-o it would be be ludicrous to include this clause for a player who had suffered serious injury, was nearer the end of his career than the beginning, and wanted to finish his career where he was. Personally I doubt this story but if it is true the main blame would fall on the club for accepting it and not Shearer for asking for it.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2002

More media b*ll*cks, zzzzzzzzzzz

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2002

"Teamtalk"

Yeah I know, I am currenly hanging my head in shame, please don't respond to this thread.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2002

Sorry for responding Jim. If it gives you any consolation, it's denied in yesterday's Ronnie. So it could very well be true :)

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2002

This was the main back-page story in the Sunday Sun - so The S/Sun and The Ronnie are clearly playing their usual games!

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2002