Sometimes it does but usually it only comes out years later when the player has long retired, the manager and directors have all moved on, and no one cares anymore. Fowler, Agger and a few others have openly talked about being pushed out or having promises broken, but only long after they’d left.
Right now everyone assumes Mo is simply angry about being dropped, and that the “broken promise” relates to playing time. But the way this summer went, I doubt that’s the real issue. We’ve spent over £300m on young forwards. The far more likely “promise” is that the club convinced him to stay, sign a new deal, and then changed the strategic plan immediately afterwards. Salah even says: “It seems like someone doesn’t want me in the club.”
If the board can bank £100m plus his wages, the books look cleaner. From a financial perspective it makes sense but from Salah’s standpoint it would be a betrayal. He could’ve run his deal down and left for free. Instead he trusted the club and signed a new contract in April.
If the hierarchy persuaded him to extend, with a plan on cashing in (or just bad planning getting Ekitike, Writz and Isak), then yeah that’s a pretty shitty move. Understandable from a business perspective… but still scummy. To be honest I think that’s what’s happened.
However instead of it being phased over a longer period, the club reacted to opportunity of Isak. To quote Salah from the outburst “I thought ‘I’m going to renew here and end my career here”
