Chung Yong Lee contract

Riviman · Post by **Riviman** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:14 pm

It's reported he's signed a new 3 year contract, good news as anyone coming in for him will have to bid a goodly sum of money.

http://www.goal.com/en/news/9/england/2 ... ith-bolton

TANGODANCER · Post by **TANGODANCER** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:28 pm

Riviman wrote:It's reported he's signed a new 3 year contract, good news as anyone coming in for him will have to bid a goodly sum of money.

http://www.goal.com/en/news/9/england/2 ... ith-bolton

Or he could stay with us for three years and lead us to glory.

Armchair Wanderer · Post by **Armchair Wanderer** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:37 pm

BIG increase in wages!

Fair play to him, he's always going to be in the starting XI!

TKIZ! · Post by **TKIZ!** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 6:31 pm

Just needs to continue with the type of progress we saw last season. Capable of turning the game for us and we certainly need players of his ilk in the side

jk4714 · Post by **jk4714** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:09 am

So how much is he making now?

Prufrock · Post by **Prufrock** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:14 am

If their number is right, which there's no reason for it to be, about £35k per week, which is nice if you can get it.

midnitefooty · Post by **midnitefooty** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:20 am

According to local papers, there is a clause allowing him to get out of the contract if a team in the CL comes knocking during the 3 years. But CYL and agent have also made it clear that he will not go to a team where he won't be a regular starting XI.

hisroyalgingerness · Post by **hisroyalgingerness** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:10 am

Club continuing to do a good job of tieing the key players, especially the younger ones for a few years

seanworth · Post by **seanworth** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:21 am

Smart move because if he keeps improving someone will come knocking.

BWFC_Insane · Post by **BWFC_Insane** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:23 am

35K a week?

Jeez.

Its good that the club are tying up players on contracts.

But I hope come the January window that people aren't moaning when the inevitable "need to reduce the wage bill before we buy" statements are released.

Armchair Wanderer · Post by **Armchair Wanderer** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:38 am

BWFC_Insane wrote:35K a week?

Jeez.

Its good that the club are tying up players on contracts.

But I hope come the January window that people aren't moaning when the inevitable "need to reduce the wage bill before we buy" statements are released.

It's different having big earners on the pitch than it is on the bench/reserves imho.

Lofthouse Lower · Post by **Lofthouse Lower** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:41 am

I've heard it's £27,000 per week after tax.

When does the new contract expire?

Having said that - we've let Hunt and Shittu leave, that's nigh on £50,000 per week off the wage bill - so doubling the lad's wages is not that much of a stretch.

BWFC_Insane · Post by **BWFC_Insane** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:47 am

East Lower wrote:I've heard it's £27,000 per week after tax.

When does the new contract expire?

Having said that - we've let Hunt and Shittu leave, that's nigh on £50,000 per week off the wage bill - so doubling the lad's wages is not that much of a stretch.

We've paid Shittu and Hunt considerable portions of their wage in order to release them.

Imagine they'll both effectively be on the wage bill for a lot of the season.

Lofthouse Lower · Post by **Lofthouse Lower** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:56 am

BWFC_Insane wrote:
East Lower wrote:I've heard it's £27,000 per week after tax.

When does the new contract expire?

Having said that - we've let Hunt and Shittu leave, that's nigh on £50,000 per week off the wage bill - so doubling the lad's wages is not that much of a stretch.
We've paid Shittu and Hunt considerable portions of their wage in order to release them.

Imagine they'll both effectively be on the wage bill for a lot of the season.

True enough, but seeing as they both had another year on top of this one at (say) a combined £50,000 per week then we will have saved a fair old portion that can be allocated elsewhere.

Good to see that our main men are getting tied down anyway.

CAPSLOCK · Post by **CAPSLOCK** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:27 am

East Lower wrote: True enough, but seeing as they both had another year on top of this one at (say) a combined £50,000 per week then we will have saved a fair old portion that can be allocated elsewhere.

You're a woman, aren't you

thebish · Post by **thebish** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:28 am

CAPSLOCK wrote:
East Lower wrote: True enough, but seeing as they both had another year on top of this one at (say) a combined £50,000 per week then we will have saved a fair old portion that can be allocated elsewhere.
You're a woman, aren't you

he clearly is.... the two of you can talk about shoes! result!

Lofthouse Lower · Post by **Lofthouse Lower** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:03 pm

CAPSLOCK wrote:
East Lower wrote: True enough, but seeing as they both had another year on top of this one at (say) a combined £50,000 per week then we will have saved a fair old portion that can be allocated elsewhere.
You're a woman, aren't you

boltonboris · Post by **boltonboris** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:03 pm

East Lower wrote:
CAPSLOCK wrote:
East Lower wrote: True enough, but seeing as they both had another year on top of this one at (say) a combined £50,000 per week then we will have saved a fair old portion that can be allocated elsewhere.
You're a woman, aren't you

Indeed

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:25 pm

East Lower wrote:
CAPSLOCK wrote:
East Lower wrote: True enough, but seeing as they both had another year on top of this one at (say) a combined £50,000 per week then we will have saved a fair old portion that can be allocated elsewhere.
You're a woman, aren't you

Think it was a joke...

Lofthouse Lower · Post by **Lofthouse Lower** » Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:27 pm

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
East Lower wrote:
CAPSLOCK wrote:
East Lower wrote: True enough, but seeing as they both had another year on top of this one at (say) a combined £50,000 per week then we will have saved a fair old portion that can be allocated elsewhere.
You're a woman, aren't you

Think it was a joke...

So was my response. Thanks for pointing it out to me though.