With the transfer window closed and no Premier League football for me to lose more money on I thought I'd look for a little audience participation this afternoon, so leave your comments on Martin Laursen and his supposed new contract below.

First things first, if Martin Laursen had no history of horrible injuries and was in his early to mid twenties he wouldn't be at Aston Villa; he'd be at United, Chelsea or Liverpool. He has looked superb and we wouldn't be on his radar at the moment.

He clearly put that Chelsea striker in his back pocket at the weekend and John Terry could learn a thing or two from him on his current form. But should he be given a new contract on the back of a few good games?

This is a serious question. Sure he's had some great games but it's possible his knee could go on him in his next game; unfortunately there are no guarantees and he is considered an injury prone player.

He's 30 years old and has only played 166 games at club level in twelve years. Now while I'm sure that in those 166 games he was excellent, it works out at 14 matches a season.

Is his £25,000 a week salary (£1.3mn a year) justified? I think you know where I'm going to go with this.

For me, (if I were the manager or the CEO) and this is where I was going, I'd give it to him simply because it's not my money but doesn't the manager and the board for that matter, have a responsibility to look after our club and not waste money?

We've now got five recognised centre backs; is this because Martin O'Neill fears we may lose him if goes again or is that Olof Mellberg is off? Either way; what contract would you offer Martin Laursen?

Comments (21)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

TON23 said:

injurys can happen to any player at any time so offer him the contract and make the most use out of the time we get with him playing. i do think that ollie has made his mind up to leave at end of season hence the 2 new centre backs

September 05, 2007

Robbie said:

Interesting question, but the guy is too good to let go, so for the reason of quality, he should definitely get a new contract. As to what type, i think we should show him the confidence that we have in him, and reward his form with a 3 year contract extension. The guy has been superb for us, and despite so many false dawns, looks as though he may have come through the knee troubles. Now I'm just about old enough to remember Paul McGrath, but we took him off Utd and he continued for another 8 or so years after he was told to retire by Fergie. If we show faith in Martin Laursen now with a good new contract, and he can repay us half as well as McGrath, we'd be silly not to.

September 05, 2007

VijayD said:

He's 30 now, so i would offer him a new 2 year contract at the end of the season

September 05, 2007

Villain of the North said:

His effect on the team is almost worth renewing his contract for, even if he does become injured. How many players have we had at villa over recent years who wear their hearts on their sleeve and put club before person, especially knowing their own ability is exceptional? I can't think of anyone before ian taylor. He certainly is our modern time, paul mcgrath. His attitude this week about thinking his place up for grabs after having played a blinder of a match can only be a good influence on our other potential primadonas. I say renew it, let's keep him and encourage him to stay on as a coach if he does retire injured.

September 05, 2007

itdoesntmatterwhatthissays said:

It doesn't matter how many centre backs we have, we only have one world class one. He should stay on a year on year contract, he has a genuine footballers brain and while injury prone when he plays he can only inspire and teach the youth. I don't think a new contract is in any way a waste of money and hope he stays, and continues to stay fit and aware of his fitness.

September 05, 2007

Bumhug360 said:

Paul McGrath had dodgy knees and he did a good enough job for us, and Laursen has proved his heart is just as big. We have brought in 2 new players but Davies is young and Knight inexperienced and we will need players like Laursen and Mellberg to guide them. If Mellberg goes, it will be a shame to see him go but we will be ok, if Laursen and Mellberg go then it will be a step back and we will have to spend a few million to replace them.

September 05, 2007

jinksy said:

Agree Mellberg is going i think he wants his 1 last big pay day. Regarding Laursen i would give him a contract that is partly based on apperances/being fit to play. But what ever contract he gets he deserves it because a fit Martin Laursen is a world class defender.

September 05, 2007

walshy said:

he has to be offered a new contract!the bloke is pure class!dstribution is a bit mixed but he really knows how to deffend at the highest level!!he excelled againts drogba!pure quality!!id say a 3 year contract!

September 05, 2007

woodyo said:

I'VE HEARD MELBERG IS GOING IN JANUARY, I DON'T KNOW YET HOW TRUE THAT IS. BUT ML SHOULD GET A 2 YEAR DEAL, NOT JUST BECAUSE HE'S A GREAT DEFENDER WHEN FIT, BUT BECAUSE HE'S NEVER SAY DIE ATTITUDE IS INFECTIOUS AND CAN ONLY HELP THE YOUNGER PLAYERS ESPECIALLY THE YOUNG DEFENDERS WE HAVE, THEY WILL NEED SOME EXPERIENCED GUIDENCE. YOU NEED TO GET THE MOST OUT OF YOUR QUALITY PLAYERS AND MARTIN IS ONE OF THOSE, WHO'S TO SAY HE WON'T PLAY MOST OR ALL OF THE SEASON, HE'S HAD THE BEST MEDICAL ATTENTION, GIVE HIM THE CONTRACT, LOOK WHAT MACCA DID FOR US AND HE'D GOT 2 DOGGY KNEES.

September 05, 2007

wagonwheel said:

He is certainly quality, and those defensive headers remind me so much of McGod. But on the flip side we took a gamble on him when no-one else did, and he repaid it with two years on the physio's bench - maybe he owes us something? This aside, logic would dictate a two year deal, or a rolling one year deal (with an option) on a higher wage? We need to keep his sort. I'd like to see Mellberg stay aswell, at the very least he is verstitie and competant cover.

September 05, 2007

Crusty Stain said:

Mellberg is definitely on his bike. I like him and it's a shame that he'll go just before something big happens, but that's his loss.... Andy Gray made the same mistake. That makes Martin Laursen the new Peter Withe - although anyone can see he is really Kent Nielsen in disguise. I'm sure he'll get a new contact because MON loves him, which is good enough for me. Sadly, I can't work out where Derek Mountfield fits into all this.

September 05, 2007

greg said:

the thing about martin laursen is that unless he really was class he wouldnt have ended up at ac milan, he was a shwed investment by dreary o leary, if he had been to steadman 3 years ago whos to say he wouldnt have played more regulary. hes not a real sicknote because its wisely recognised hes fights to get back and doesnt jsut sit back waiting for his wages, when hes recuperating hes probably goin through more pain than if he was injury free. --- no doubt about his class. curtis davies can learn from him and he seems to be well able to play now without any recurrence or new injury. in my eyes hes a major factor when we win. when he plays we hardly ever lose- i think since xmas with him in the team we only lost to the pool and we were robbed even if we played poorly. bouma seems to have brushed up his distribution to but we need a real attackin right back to be more of a threat on teh right with gabby feeding off that. and boumas getting the ball to young on the left. back to teh point laursen is class would u swap him for rio?? no chance

September 05, 2007

Villa_Rules said:

Yeh i reakon he deserves a new contract 5year contract he should get we now have the money to take that sort of risk and he to me is well worth the risk...Just from his performance against chelsea proved he deserves one As for getting injuerd i think he is over that now and can last NEARLY the full season i say nearly because like all players he will need a rest time to time... Would like to see him partner either davies or knight in the middle as i think mellberg should play right back till we get a rb playing mellberg right back would be the safer option in my eyes.... Ashley young to score for england

September 05, 2007

Astonmilan said:

Laursen had a bad injury on top of a niggle that plagued him for two and a half years when he joined us, and if Villa had been on the ball he should have had his surgery as soon as it happened, but as it stood we never had decent physio staff, in fact we never had decent anything behind the scenes. He only left AC Milan bevause Nesta and Maldini kept him on the bench, nothing to be ashamed of really is it !!. We have fantastic support staff and facilities now, so why not give him a three year contract, he is one of the best in Europe on his day so lets look after him. And on the reason he came to Villa, DOL knew him and sweet-talked and bulls****ed him to join, promising him the world no doubt. But now he's here lets appreciate the man, he should become a legend. Maybe it was fate, and now we can see the best of him under MON....UTV

September 05, 2007

Abz said:

A 2 year contract is probably the sensible option. We all love Laursen and everyone can see he puts his heart into every game, just a shame about his injuries because he is a top defender. That tackle on Drogba towards the end of the game summed it all up. Personally I hope Mellberg doesn't go becuase I could see him finishing his career at Villa, and I've had his name printed on my shirt!lol! I think Mellberg's served us fantastically well and if he does want to leave, then he's given us 6 years outstanding service. A recent legend at Villa Park.

September 05, 2007

merlin1 said:

I'd love him to sign an extension but he needs to stay injury free. He played really well against Chelsea and those are the types of performances that are too few and far between.

September 06, 2007

PaulE said:

He's a match winner, and its not often you can say that about a centre-back! I'd reward his Chelsea display alone with an extra year extension. If we can rest him periodically and make sure he doesn't play if he's in a bit of pain (which we should be able to, now we have 5 players in that position), he should stay injury-free for much longer. I'd give him 2 years with the option of a third, providing he hasn't picked up a serious injury by December. That would keep him at Villa until he's 33. Its worth the risk, simply because he's class.

September 06, 2007

mickeywya said:

id offer him a 2 year pay as you play contract at a reduced wage than he is on now, but also give him substantial bonuses for clean sheets we keep when he plays so it adds back up to the 25k.

September 06, 2007

Reg_Villa said:

A 2 year deal would be fair, Any player can get injured at any time, Micheal Owen for example, kieron dyer more recently. Lets hope Martin Laursen has used up his share of bad luck with injuries and has an injury free end to his career. If he has only played 166 times in 12 years, he should in theory be able to play on to his mid-thirties, so another 5 years...if he plays like he did against Chelsea week in week out, he'll be remembered like the other centre half we had with dodgy knees - ooh ar Paul McGrath! UTV

September 06, 2007

Holte1970 said:

I think that Laursen is a great player. I first saw him against WBA a few seasons ago in a 1-1 draw. In the second half when we were under the cosh he was majestic and gutsy at the same time. It was obvious to me that here was a player who would "die" for the cause. He is certainly worth a contract. I understand the concern for "value for money". Hence, a contract guaranteed for say 50% of the £25k per week plus the remainder based on the number of match selections / appearances. We do not want to lose him to another club and then he turns out for them as a world class player for the next three seasons without missing a match. That would be egg on the face.

September 06, 2007

ste23 said:

1 martin laurson theres only 1 martin laurson 1 martin laurson NUFF SAID

September 06, 2007

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

Add Comment