How has it come to this? An eight-year servant of Liverpool Football Club, covered from head to toe in tattoos honouring the club, Anfield and the 96 who died in the Hillsborough disaster, feeling the need to publicly blast his latest contract offer as ‘unacceptable’?

Martin Skrtel may not be remembered as one of the Premier League’s or Liverpool’s greatest ever defenders, but there’s no doubt he’s been one of a rare few consistent and positive influences at the back throughout Brendan Rodgers’ defensively chaotic reign.

Now 30 years of age – the peak year for the vast majority of centre-backs – the Slovakian international should be rewarded for the experience he’s accumulated, the leadership he provides and the performances made over the last three seasons – particularly his seven goals last year and the solidity he’s demonstrated this term. What shape Liverpool’s back four would be in without him holding it all together just doesn’t bear thinking about.

But instead, the Liverpool hierarchy are too busy attempting to find value-for-money wherever possible, and have resultantly attempted to put Skrtel on series of performance-based criteria. Summarised, in the three-year deal proposed to the thuggish centre-half, his salary will be largely dependent on appearances; the less time on the pitch, the less of his weekly wage is received.

It may well be a smart deal for Liverpool Football Club; I’m sure every chairman in world football would want players’ wages completely proportional to appearances and performances. But it’s a terrible deal for Martin Skrtel, who could break his leg on the first day of pre-season training, who could suddenly find himself no longer one of Rodgers’ logic-defying favourites two weeks into next season.

[ffc-gal cat=”liverpool” no=”5″]

Why would he agree a deal that none of his centre-back counterparts at Arsenal, Chelsea or Manchester United are on? Or more importantly, why aren’t Liverpool offering their best centre-back the best deal possible?

Unfortunately, it reverts back to the ever-debated FSG model, which has had a profound effect on Liverpool’s contract negotiations over the course of the season. Skrtel’s recent debacle is just the latest episode.

Episode One was of course, Steven Gerrard. Considering his sharp decline over the course of the season and the wages he previously received, perhaps it was in Liverpool’s best interests that the former England international opted to bow out this summer before becoming a shadow of his former self.

But you never saw Manchester United turning away Ryan Giggs, Gary Neville or Paul Scholes – in fact, Sir Alex Ferguson even convinced the latter out of retirement – and the Reds skipper revealed in January that he would’ve signed a new contract if it had been offered in pre-season instead of November. On-pitch performances regardless, the influence of a leader, a role model and a talent like Gerrard can’t be quantified in fiscal terms.

So why the delay? Money – the same reason Liverpool didn’t offer Raheem Sterling an improved contract until earlier this year. He too has claimed he would’ve put pen to paper in pre-season following Liverpool’s inspiring runner-up campaign last term. In fact, you could argue it to be common practice – a club offering their brightest prospect a better salary following a season in which he emerged as an integral component of the starting XI.

But the Reds hierarchy were well aware that Sterling would expect a sizable increase and therefore strung out the winger’s £35k per-week deal as long as possible. The lack of progress at Anfield during the intermittent period has now convinced the England international he’d be better off at another club. Call that a rather disloyal or callas approach for such a young player, but the whole saga could have been easily avoided if FSG’s penny-saving hadn’t entered into the equation.

Of course, I’m not suggesting Liverpool concede to the wage demands of their players left, right and centre, have them bloated on outrageous contracts that inflate with every passing transfer window and tie them all down to five-year deals. The torrid tenures of Joe Cole and Alberto Aquillani, who were both on huge salaries but made a combined 44 Premier League appearances for Liverpool despite spending (again, a combined) six years at the club are stark warnings from the past.

But if Liverpool were a little less concerned with streamlining their wage budget where ever possible, Brendan Rodgers wouldn’t be facing a summer window in which he’ll be replacing an iconic skipper in Gerrard and potentially two of his key first team players in Skrtel and Sterling. Unfortunately, successful finance, not success on the football pitch, remains the primary motivation under the FSG model.

[n5lbanner type=”london”]

[ad_pod id=’ricco’ align=’center’]

[interaction id=“none”]