Koeman on contracts: Lukaku ‘close’ and hopeful on Barkley

Why? As far as I know, Barkley is under contract for a significant length of time remaining (similar to Lukaku) and would be far less likely to jump than Lukaku due to him playing for his boyhood team. So, as far as I'm concerned, there is little to worry about sorting Barkley's contract imminently when the player himself has not publicly uttered a word about casting eyes elsewhere.

And as regards the boyhood club thing; if he's ambitious and wants to cement a place in the England team then he needs to be playing Champions League regularly.

The new stadium announcement and summer acquisitions will go a long way to determining if that's likely with Everton.

In other words, Rom signing a 5-year contract does not mean Everton may not sell him within the next couple of years.

The lad was poor for a while and has been much better of late, think he needs to continue this for a while longer to merit a new contract.

Personally I reckon Ron doesn't fancy him. Tbh not too bothered if he didn't stay. Far more important getting Rom tied up.

And, by pure coincidence, Jamie Redknapp can't keep his trap shut about how Ross should be ready to move on.

It would be commercial suicide to allow him to get into the final year of a deal without signing up to new terms. The player knows it, his agent knows it, and the club knows it.

So expect a deal to be done. In reality, it makes no difference whether he's here for the long term or not, just the same as Lukaku.

Standard stuff.

What is this subterfuge all about? It's about the protagonists taking the piss and the supporters being made mugs of.

And so it will be until the day the Sky satellite is zapped out of the sky.

He wanted to focus on discussing the next match, but got asked questions about Barcelona (first question!) and then Rom's and Ross's contracts.

These are not exact numbers as I have no idea how many players have actually played for us. Just a thought. Might e-mail the club. What does anyone think?

Answers on a postcard or a sealed down envelope

My guess is that over 1000 players have worn the Everton shirt, so you'd either need very small numbers or very big players.

I base that guess on my just-acquired information that 833 players have played for Real Madrid, which is a younger club than Everton by 33 years.

Of course that numbering scheme would alter our debates here significantly... instead of opining that we need a true #10 behind Lukaku, we'd be suggesting a number 1012.

Definitely email your suggestion to the club, and share the response with TW. Can't wait to see it.

But here IS a great idea to copy and follow, all the more so given how good our EITC is.

Last night, my Brazilian team Cruzeiro, played a Brazilian Cup match on International Women's Day. The players took to the field with their usual squad numbers on their backs, but with one small difference:

To flag up the violence and inequalities of women in Brazil, below each number was a statistic that corresponded to the shirt number. Some examples (and they make shocking, depressing reading in many cases):

2 - every 2 hours, a woman is killed
5(th) - highest country in the world for femicide
11 - every 11 MINUTES a woman is raped
30 - women's salaries are 30% lower than men's
etc, etc.

I'm sure Everton could one day take a similar initiative for a good cause linked to their EITC work. We're very good at this sort of thing.

Jay good point mate. I think the club has done quite a bit for ladies over the years, pink shirts, ladies day etc. But something like your suggestion would make a massive statement.

Or would that be too much pressure on our millionaire players?

The big proviso is ambition of course. If EFC keep their promises to improve the squad and push for European football then perhaps the player may want to stay. If the player maintains top form then the top clubs will be offering huge money for his services. If the player has a long contract the club will benefit by selling the player for the best possible price.A really top striker can fetch anything up to £100 million especially if he is performing well and showing improvement. Lukaku has so much going for him ie; he is only 23 years old, scores pretty freely in a less than top quality side, is big, fast and works hard. He stays out of trouble both on and off the pitch. He is a mega asset to Everton as the player to build a team around or a player to sell for vast profits.

If Barkley is to increase his value then he must add goals to his game.

It would kill me to see him become the player a lot of us thought he could become in another shirt than our own.

Sign up, Ross lad.

This could have the additional advantage that loads of folks would wonder what the hell those symbols are, which could prompt a proportion of them, including youngsters, to find out (easy nowadays, with the Internet), thereby increasing the chances of more people learning maths and then physics and engineering, in turn advancing society technologically, with all the net positive results that that provides, including the knock-on effects of reducing other problems.

I think the number idea is a good idea but it's probably too late to start it now; however, if we move to a new stadium, perhaps that would be the time to implement it – a fresh start and all that.

School of Science indeed!

In many ways he's a model footballer, as is Barkley, role models for youngsters and good representatives of Everton. Lukaku is also very robust, seldom getting injured (important for us), and also seldom gets yellow cards and the like.

It's players like Lukaku and Barkley who really help raise our profile for attracting and keeping other players.

# 30: Mason(ry)

# 19: Tempera

# 10: Smooth Finish

# 9: Eggshell

# [Number Withheld By Order Of The Management]: Link

Ross is our diamond. As long as we pay him fairly, I suspect he'll always be with us and I, for one, am very happy with that.

I know you mean well, but no, thanks.

I'd rather Kevin Jones' unusual idea for shirt numbers, to seeing the players used as placards for any number of political "Messages" or worse, "Awareness".

Let's keep the pitch for sport.

What about loan players? Do you just have to play for the first team, or do you have to sign on the dotted line...?

Players will love it – they're always looking for an excuse to have a new tattoo... something to have embroidered into their boots – ta-da!

I can see it now – big pad with big gates with big numbers welded onto them. In the tiles in the swimming pool... on the pocket of the dressing gown... slapped all over the helicopter pad for the more mischievous Evertonian... one might even change his name to it like Prince did to "Symbol" – the possibilities, and branding opportunities, are endless – they'd love it!

My daughter received a birthday card, on it being a picture of a bluebottle smearing a brown Nutella-like spread on a piece of bread. On the side of the tub containing the spread, it said 'I can't believe it's not shit'.

Will @41: True about piggy-backing of sound bites. And actually, I wonder if aspects of the poppy debacle itself fall into this. Poppies are a powerful symbol, but that symbol seems to be hijacked by politicians and celebrities (and seemingly some ordinary folks, judging by some of the posts you see on Facebook around Nov 11th) for the purpose of looking good.

"Let's keep the pitch for sport [rather than] seeing the players used as placards for any number of political "Messages" or worse, "Awareness" [only] to be hijacked by politicians and assorted media people, who try to look good on the back of them."

A couple of things. On the back of Kevin's (self-confessed) 'off-piste' post @ 21, I reported a (fine, praiseworthy, IMO) ONE OFF initiative taken by a top Brazilian team with their own shirts on a commemorative day.

I then suggested it was an idea that EITC could possibly adopt a similar ONE OFF awareness campaign that the club supports (and is good at doing, as I said).

I'm glad you (and others) referenced the poppy Remembrance campaign, because if you were both consistent in your views, you would oppose the club (and by extension, ALL clubs) from pasting a poppy on match day shirts during Remembrance week. However, to me, that would be surrendering to the rather weak viewpoint you offer that such awareness campaigns tend to be hijacked and piggybacked on by dubious public figures, milking them for their own self-serving interests.

Now I don't necessarily disagree with either of you that politicians, celebrities and the like do piggyback on 'awareness campaigns' to advance their own interests and elevate their profile. Such is the vanity of such individuals. Equally, there are many a public figure who are genuinely concerned and active in the cause they support.

That some are a tad exploitative should not in any way diminish the 'cause' they try to milk. Many a charity and good cause has benefited from the association with many a sports club. Everton is very active and accommodating on this front, I am proud to say.

I reiterate: I thought the Cruzeiro shirt initiative was an honourable, imaginative and inspiring one. I would have no objections, only praise, if my club Everton chose to support a worthy cause for a 'heightened awareness one.'

Because, like it or not, sport – and in the UK and the city of Liverpool in particular – football, is part of the fabric of wider society, something that EITC clearly acknowledges.

So sorry, Will, I find your "Let's keep the pitch for sport" line a tad glib, trite and lazily dismissive.

I'll stick with the hexadecimals.

If you don't see a difference between what is represented by poppies, and tradition, and the present menu of faux social conscience "Intitiatives" being inveigled into and across the arena of sport, we'll not agree.

It is not the haphazard work of vain politicians, it's the work of globalism. 20-stone NFL footballers wearing pink adornments, the event you mentioned in Brasil, many others all around the globe.

With all the really pressing problems there are, locally, nationally and around the world, have a look who Manchester United chose to "Partner" with, complete with tweet hashtag, allredallequal. Strange how the same themes are cropping up everywhere.

Never mind the local homeless, let's batter and distract the masses with initiatives, keep reminding them of the hugely vital issue of peoples' sexuality. Lest we forget.

For my small part, I'd rather none of that came anywhere near this club. Not the content – the mechanism. I'd just rather watch football than be told I can celebrate being an inclusively minded chap.

By the way, the genuine and meaningful charity work undertaken by this club and everyone involved, is a different thing altogether. That's real, with the best intent.

Adds to the sense of history. Being an older club, it would be cool I think. Very similar to the stars for World/European Cups.

Space and significance on a shirt is an issue as there is a sleeve sponsor next season I think. For loan players, yellow and or italics? Permanent signings white maybe.

But back to Ross. I think we should be careful. I think perhaps the lad himself has had cause to pause for thought. A lot of stick has come his way, and some of it warranted.

The club, has in all that's happened under Moshiri been a touch blasé regarding this contract. I think it's far from a formality, I even think 6 months ago, Koeman might not have cared, but has changed his mind with Ross.

I hope he signs but not sure he will.

Yes Stan. I did and do consider Will's post addressed to me 'glib.' A 5-line post of little or no content doesn't demonstrate (to me) "a lot of thought behind the statement" as you attribute to it, and him

Will's lengthier post at 49 (again, to me) only serves to reinforce my original observation. It's a string of trite (and a tad resentful, angry even...) stereotyping on not necessarily related issues, expressed by a reactionary, seemingly indignant that long-standing social issues are given (justifiably, IMO) a platform and a voice they previously never had.

Will throws a blanket label over such issues: "faux social conscience "initiatives".

So, attempting to elevate awareness on issues such as domestic and institutional violence and exploitation of women on International Women's Day – as per the one-off shirt campaign by Cruzeiro I flagged up – in as extremely a macho society as Brazil, is (if Will is to be believed) little more than a 'faux social conscience initiative.'

Not to put too fine a point on it, I rather think Will is talking bollocks. His stance rather neatly demonstrates exactly why, what he regards as 'faux social conscience initiatives', need to put in the public domain: to enlighten and educate others who are truly ignorant of, or who have little or no knowledge of, issues that impact negatively on the lives of many individuals and wider society as a result.

And Stan. Thanks for crediting me with the idea of flagging up International Women's Day as Cruzeiro did, but you do understand – as much as I would be proud to claim the idea as my own – I merely reported their admirable (IMO) initiative.

I repeat from my original post in this thread, if the club (who are very good at this sort of thing) ever took a similar initiative to heighten awareness of a just cause, they would get my support and approval.

How about you and Will?

Yes Stan. I did and do consider Will's post addressed to me 'glib.' A 5-line post of little or no content doesn't demonstrate (to me) "a lot of thought behind the statement" as you attribute to it, and him

Will's lengthier post at 49 (again, to me) only serves to reinforce my original observation. It's a string of trite (and a tad resentful, angry even...) stereotyping on not necessarily related issues, expressed by a reactionary, seemingly indignant that long standing social issues are given (justifiably, IMO) a platform and a voice they previously never had.

Will throws a blanket label over such issues: "faux social conscience "intitiatives."

So, attempting to elevate awareness on issues such as domestic and institutional violence and exploitation of women on International Women's Day - as per the one-off shirt campaign by Cruzeiro I flagged up - in as extremely a macho society as Brazil, is (if Will is to be believed) little more than a 'faux social conscience intitiative.'

Not to put too fine a point on it, I rather think Will is talking bollocks. His stance rather neatly demonstrates exactly why, what he regards as 'faux social conscience intitiatives', need to put in the public domain: to enlighten and educate others who are truly ignorant of, or who have little or no knowledge of, issues that impact negatively on the lives of many individuals and wider society as a result.

And Stan. Thanks for crediting me with the idea of flagging up International Women's Day as Cruzeiro did, but you do understand - as much as I would be proud to claim the idea as my own - I merely reported their admirable (IMO) initiative.

I repeat from my original post in this thread, if the club (who are very good at this sort of thing) ever took a similar initiative to heighten awareness of a just cause, they would get my support and approval.

How about you and Will?

Some folks talk the talk, others walk the walk. 'Initiatives' can talk, walk, or both. They're worth doing so long as they walk, not just talk.

In my life I try to focus on walking. I can certainly talk the talk, but prefer to walk the walk.

For example, rather than focus on wearing poppies and talking about how awful war is, I prefer to help ensure service personnel are suitably protected, both in terms of their safety in the field, and in terms of their welfare. I focus and prioritise with regard to action, not words.

If you have confidence that 'initiatives' like the one in Brazil actually help reduce the rate and/or severity of the wrongdoings they purport to heighten awareness of, then support them.

This has little to do with Everton or its social credentials, with respect, as far as I can see.

A lot of long posts and long words though.

I am delighted when I hear about Everton's social /charitable initiatives insofar as they are targeted and beneficial but they are incidental and secondary to what I pay my money for, which is the hope of seeing winning football.

For so long as Everton falls short as a tough-minded football club, then I am afraid that I cannot regard our charity work as a compensation and, indeed, I am increasingly inclined to suspect that it may be part of what makes us a soft touch because it is overplayed and has become an almost equivalent objective to (or is a distraction from the lack of) success on the pitch.

I'm not sure that our recognition of social responsibility and our achievements on the football field are mutually exclusive .

Sadly we are excellent at one of these and not so good at the other.

It would be great if we could be excellent at both.

"Jay, I think you did suggest, @24, that the Brazil thing was a good idea to follow."

Uhm . yesssssss . and...?

As for the rest of your post Stan, good for you.

Personally, I have a self-imposed rule here on TW. That is, not to reveal any personal details about myself. They are irrelevant, by and large, to the issues I like to post on.

I'm neither so insecure, nor so vain, that I need to talk about myself, my work, my family, my education, etc, etc, as an attempt to somehow 'legitimize' my point of view.

Back to the issue you and Will raised, like yourself, any time Everton plays I like to 'lose' myself in the game and shut out the rest of the world.

Where we evidently disagree is I see Everton as very much part of its surrounding community. The club itself, with its award-winning EITC initiatives, evidently takes seriously its role in the community.

You - and others in this thread - seemingly resent or have little or no regard for that side of the club. Tony Hill, for example, goes as far as to say Everton's charitable work "may be part of what makes us a soft touch" [on the playing side].

Really? Sorry, but that strikes me as more hyperbole and bollocks.

As Chris Williams mentions, the club's recognition of our social responsibility and our achievements on the football field are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to achieve both simultaneously.

A successful football team that wins trophies is, I'm sure, the primary interest of most, if not all, football supporters. Again, it is not a mutually exclusive notion to also support and take pride in the club and all it does in the community.

And EITC and its work, for this supporter at least, is worthy and meritorious, fully deserving of any praise that comes its way.

Sport is political because of the vast number of people it reaches. Jay's idea is laudable and the issue that Corinthians tackled was serious in intent and impactful in its effect.

I personally don't see the daily murder or abuse of women as a "faux social conscience initiative". It devastates lives right now but we are still allowing it to happen. Why does that equate as less serious in your mind than commemorating our servicemen? Both are necessary and important but only one can save lives now.

Oh, I see. It's the ignorant, uninformed public's fault.

That paragraph could've been written by the PR consultant to any number of shadily-funded quangos, and God knows there are plenty of them. You nailed many of the essential elements. Bit of tidying up round the edges, you could be a Change Agent or Future Leader. Now that's what I call bollocks.

"Truly ignorant", are you serious. A little patronizing there perhaps. I'd say that about 99% of the sentient adult population capable of feeding themselves and tying their own shoe laces are well aware of the ills facing society. They live in it. The very few unable to understand are likely uninterested in standing and clapping an unrolled banner before the game.

No, the issues don't need to be pushed any further into the public domain. There are already papers, TV, radio and the internet for that. I go to the match and other sporting venues for the sport.

OK, so we're all aware. Now what? Outside of the laudable work done by a small number of ordinary people, and those able to make donations, just what is the average subject/citizen supposed to do with this enlightenment?

Many might believe it's the job of governments and associated authorities to properly operate society on behalf of the people. I see that happening less and less. Talking, messages, awareness, hashtags, it's all so easy. Many seem to love it too, drink it in. Best of luck to them.

Just to clarify, in case I was implicated along with others in your previous postings: I have no problem with genuine charity, nor the work of the club and people involved, as I made clear earlier.

Those commemorating the events of Hillsborough, are commemorating the lives of those lost, not the political cover-up.

Sport is political because political forces have relatively recently chosen to make it so. Was it like this in the 50s, 60s, 70s? 10 years back... a century ago?

"I personally don't see the daily murder or abuse of women as a "faux social conscience initiative". It devastates lives right now but we are still allowing it to happen".

Nor do I view murder or abuse that way, but WE are allowing it to happen? Who's "We"? Who at the match is actively allowing it to happen? Who at the match is not aware that there are sometimes (thankfully rare in this country), murders, and abuse?

It should be taken as an absolute given that the supposed government of a developed country is doing everything it can to maintain and improve society. I'd simply rather they stopped reaffirming the obvious and just got on with it. Sadly, they're not always doing that quite as they should.

On the subject of women at risk, whilst people are advocating more and more initiatives and parading their virtue and "Support", you might like to look into the current ongoing closures of women's safe houses in our modern, caring society... being replaced with, yet again, the amorphous "Support" in the community, and certain commercial "Partnerships" for housing. I've heard that song before.

For a lot, being faced with campaigns, awareness or otherwise, is perhaps the last thing they want. Give them a break.

You seem quite evangelical, which is fine up to a point. But give folks some credit, in addition to the break.

I could suggest a campaign to raise awareness of the irritation caused by awareness campaigns. But then I'd have to raise a campaign against my own campaign, and then a campaign against that campaign, ad infinitum. I'd quickly disappear up in my own arse, through a black hole of inconsistency.

I'd rather just watch the match. And, ermmm, consider the central theme of the present thread, which is the important matter of whether Rom and Ross sign new contracts.

As for Lukaku and Barkley, just get them signed to big contracts and announce the new stadium.

Well, in addition to your earlier posts, that was revealing.

Let me take you by the hand and gently lead you through some misconceptions you appear to have.

Awareness campaigns that evidently enrage you for some reason are designed to do what they say on the tin: improve and heighten awareness of an issue people otherwise - errrr - might not be aware of. Capiche?

Now they may be social issues, health issues, whatever. Unless information is shared in the public domain, by various means (including via a community sports club like Everton), some people may indeed be 'ignorant' (that is, unaware of the issues and possible steps and solutions available to them).

You clearly take exception to my legitimate use of the word 'ignorant' and try to distort the context in which I use it to portray me as 'patronising' to the wider public.

How you leap to your genuinely baffling statement "Oh, I see. It's the ignorant, uninformed public's fault" from my words - well, frankly, I can't begin to fathom your thought process that led to such a conclusion.

That you describe my post as something that "could've been written by the PR consultant to any number of shadily-funded quangos; [that I] could be a Change Agent or Future Leader" is far more revealing about yourself and your political view than it is of me.

Let me give you a couple of examples of those 'oh so offensive' awareness campaigns you seemingly despise.

I note in today's post match interviews that both managers sported the 'Men United' emblem on their lapels. Now being the well-informed person you are (or not, as the case may be) you will know that symbol represents Prostate Cancer UK.

Again, you will know (or not, as the case may be) that Prostate Cancer kills 10,000 men in the UK alone each year, leaving many women widows and children orphaned. 1 in 8 of all men in the UK will get prostate cancer and 1 in 4 black men.

Men United has targeted sports like football to heighten awareness about prostate cancer because of the demographic football attracts: overwhelmingly male, many of the age group most prone to get prostate cancer (50+).

Then there is the campaign about Male Testicular Cancer in which our own Evertonian Alan Stubbs is heavily involved with, having survived the illness himself.

Everton memorably promoted this campaign when Mr Testicles (I kid you not - see this video here - Link) entertained the Goodison crowd a few years back.

Yes, it provided much comic light relief at the game and here on TW at the time. But maybe, just maybe, 1 or 2 in the crowd who had dismissed the growing lump in their own ball sack, or who were starting to have problems having a half time piss, were prompted to have a check up only to discover they indeed needed treatment.

And yet you would deny there is any need to "to push [such issues] any further into the public domain. There are already papers, TV, radio and the internet for that".

Well - dur, Will - if the issues are already in the media it is because campaigners are ensuring they get the much-needed publicity to as wide an audience as possible. Because without it, there will be people blissfully unaware that they are at risk.

I rather think that answers your (tad belligerent question): "OK, so we're all aware. Now what? Just what is the average subject/citizen supposed to do with this enlightenment?"

Uhrm - in the case of prostate or testicular cancer - having been made aware of the risks, men could save/prolong their lives by going for a check up. Simples.

As for your closing thoughts on the role of "governments and authorities to properly operate society on behalf of the people" and somehow associating that with the advent of social media. Well sorry again, but that reads as pure gibberish.

Not for the first time in this thread, you seem to be repeating a couple of popular reactionary cliches and fuzzy opinions, but making no sense (or point) by doing so.

Good result today, wasn't it Will?

Excellent result today, solid performance. As my dad said to me when he first took me to the match, when a team plays below the level it can play, and still win, then that's a sign of a good team. COYB