Ronald Koeman has claimed that he was forced to leave St Mary's after the club insisted he signed a new deal.

Ronald Koeman has finally spoken about why he left St Mary's and claimed that it was not about money, but about how Southampton were insisting that they could not go into the final season of his contract without him sgning a new deal.

Speaking to the press up on Merseyside Koeman said.

"My first option was to continue at Southampton, to do my last season of contract, but it was not possible,"

"They said it's not good because we like to know the future. I said it was not a problem because I signed three times a one-year contract with Feyenoord in Holland."

"I then got a proposal from Southampton and in my opinion, it was not what I liked to see."

"Then the whole Everton story came out and the interest and also the interest from my part."

"But Les Reed said to me that it was no possible to go through my last year of contract without knowing what would happen after. That made it more difficult."

This story will not please some Saints fans who will blame Les Reed for pushing Koeman out of the club, however before they point fingers they should also consider that there are two sides to every story.

Of course Saints would have been keen for the Dutchman to sign a new deal, indeed this is what every Saints fan was demanding and asking why the club had not done so long before the season ended.

Given that contracts for managers are not as binding as they are for players as we have just found out, we also have to question Koeman, this is a convenient excuse that paints the picture of a man who was willing to stay and is almost being forced to accept Everton's £6 million offer against his will.

The reality is that Koeman had little to lose by signing an extension to his existing contract, it is said that a new two year deal was on the table, this would have only extended his current deal by a year, it would have given him more money and little would have changed.

That being the case although as he says he was happy to work with a one year contract, in contrast in terms of being able to accept a bigger offer from the likes of Barcelona etc, he was in no different position really whether he had two or one year left on his deal.

Indeed if he was so against signing a three year deal, then why did he sign one at Everton ? only one reason and that is they like Saints would not accept him on a one year deal and it was three years or nothing, an easy choice when there is £6-7 million a year on offer

It is a sad end to a great two year period in Saints Premier League history, but the club will move on and the supporters have to, it is a disappointment losing Koeman, a big disappointment, but there are two sides to every story and both the Dutchman and the club will be keen to paint themselves in the best possible light, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Photo: Action Images

BUCK added 18:38 - Jun 17 I certainly wouldn't blame les reed. This man has ambition and doing it the right way.i agree he should have hassled koeman into signing a long term contract. But I for one am glad he's gone. Our youth have vanished off the face of the earth and we was supposed to have the best academy in the country. Where did it go with koeman in charge. Forgotten that's where. Goodbye and good riddance.

2

landerwal added 19:09 - Jun 17 Saints put what wanted on the table, an extension to Koeman's contract. He rejected the terms took up the Everton offer and if it was not for money he went, why is he now the 7th highest paid manager in the world. Saints have every right to put to the manager (a servant of the club) what they want and as he Koeman, has done , if he does not like it, leave! It is the players who get the results and we have a very good team. Any good new manager should be able to improve on this season.

1

SanMarco added 19:26 - Jun 17 I would like to see a Saints response to this asap. I don't buy the poor old Ron desperate to stay but forced to leave narrative. It looks to me like he is slightly concerned that his reputation has been damaged and is therefore looking to cobble together a story. If Saints did force the point about the extension then it shows that they maybe were less bothered about him staying than most of us thought!

2

pintsizedsaint added 19:33 - Jun 17 I'm sorry but I just don't buy this. I don't think RK is lying, but I think RK is being a bit selective with the truth here. I'm starting to wonder if the rumours circulating via the Sotonian website are closer to the truth. I totally get that Saints said they would want him to sign as it would leave them in an uncertain position. That sounds pretty normal negotiations to me. The key issue here is the "ultimatum" part. It is interesting RK doesn't actually say what Option B was. We can: that Saints were going to sack him if he didn't sign. Surely that option is more favourable for him? Saints would have had to have paid the remaining contract and he then could sign for Everton with a picture of being the "wounded manager" wronged by Saints. Yes Saints could have stalled and Everton may not have waited, but then Saints would have been left with a bad relationship for the remaining year or sacking RK close to the start of the season (or even during) which is not good preparation. I also thought that it wasn't really a confident response from RK. If he had been told "sign or get sacked" surely you would have been milking that? Instead he failed to say it (possibly because Saints would outright contest that) and has left the press to "fill the gaps". He also cut it short by saying he wants to move on. As I say, I don't think he's said anything that is an untruth , but rather carefully selected what to say so it makes it sound something else. I am beginning to believe that he did try to use Everton to get a better deal with Saints but it backfired. Oh well - it's time to move on. I don't expect Saints to say anything in response and I would actually prefer they didn't: let's not move this into a slagging match. What's done is done. Bridges are definitely now burned though!

3

simmo400 added 20:13 - Jun 17 Doesn't really matter how/why he left face is he has. Who we bring in is, I'm sure we have a good pick of people out there. Last two managers have done well no need to think the next will be any different.
0

ChristchurchSaint added 20:57 - Jun 17 If the sotonia article is correct, Koeman had agreed to a new 2 year deal (which actually was only a one year extension). He has signed a 3 year deal with Everton! Also if the board had agreed to his request to work out next season, they would have been crucified by fans as having no ambition, and how they were not making efforts to keep Koeman. Hopefully our new manager will be equally as good as Koeman, but probably better, so let's just now forget him and move on and support our club as we improve on last season.

1

SanMarco added 23:00 - Jun 17 Why's Pellegrini suddenly favourite with Garcia out to 19-2 ??
0

PezzaSaint added 06:26 - Jun 18 I would like to see a response from Saints if they can justifiably claim Ronald is telling porkies about his contract negotiations. Without a response from the club it seems to the outsider that the club do in fact lack ambition and of course that then leads to agents and media performing their dark arts of moving players away and starting the rumour mill going on player exits. I think in this instance we should be sending out a clear message of what we are and how we like to act.

0

ericofarabia added 07:29 - Jun 18 Pezza - I think by keeping out of a tit for tat public airing of any dirty laundry is showing the way that the club likes to act!! I'm sure that there are 2 sides to the story, but The Club has to act in it's best overall interest rather than pander to a manager's ego!! Pretty sure it wasn't a simple straight up sign up or go ultimatum - that would have been his easiest choice of saying No Thanks and getting sacked and saving his new employees 5 million!!

2

TeamCortese added 08:04 - Jun 18 I think there's a lot of myopia on this forum. Not so long ago we were crediting Roko as one of the best managers the club has ever seen. I'm curious which board members and owners are the best the club has ever seen? Why are people pandering to a board that isn't openly honest with the fans when it matters the most. Can you imagine if Fergie had left Man Utd in the same fashion as Koeman. Actually it can't be imagined because the Man Utd board would never allow it--let alone Liverpool with Klopp or Arsenal with Wenger. Again I question the board's ambition. If they offered him an ultimatum to extend his contract and he didn't want to, then why? That's the most important question. This cannot be ignored. The board need to be honest with the fans about that and then we can all move on. There's so much incompetence it beggars belief. Can someone tell me the value of Les Reed and co? What do they bring to this football club?! What is their so-called 5-year plan? Does that involve the continuation of selling our best players and effectively acting as a feeder club for the bigger clubs? If so, Roko had every right to move-on. This is getting ridiculous. Wanyama's on the cusp of leaving for Spurs for less than what we paid for him and we haven't even got a new manager. I suspect we'll have a response once we have a new manager. I must admit though we're taking a bloody long time to get one in!

-3

bstokesaint added 09:19 - Jun 18 Why do people think that the board owe them anything?! Koeman is no Fergie or Wenger. The bloke hasn't got a loyal bone in his body, so we shouldn't be bowing down to him. As I've said a million times before, whilst we continue to progress in the right direction it's insulting to say we lack ambition. We just do things our own way. None of this underhand, yobbish behaviour from our rivals.

1

corkcitysaint added 10:25 - Jun 18 Now that the dust bass settled and upon reflection of the last couple of weeks, form what Ron is quoted as saying above, I believe that this reasons is a handy "out" for him. I wouldn't blame the club or Les Reed for giving him a 3 year contract. As Ron had talked of showing him the 5 year plan / ambition etc, what use is planning for this period when the manager is only on a year to year contract?? He was asking the club to show him the future whilst he was not committing to it himself!! I believe that he jumped ship as he realised himself that he could not take us that extra step. After season 1, he said the expectation for us to achieve more in season 2 was high and the expectation of all was high. Ok, we achieved more (slightly) in season 2. I believe that deep down, he couldn't achieve more himself regardless of how much money we gave him to spend. So, while keeping his reputation of being a good manager intact, he goes to Everton, more money personally, yes but he has been giving the job of re-building Everton. if he fails, it's not his fault as he had to start from scratch in effect… In any case, he's now part of Southampton's history. Thanks Ron, now let's move on.

2

1970 added 13:17 - Jun 18 Everton wont be letting him go into the final year without knowing his plans just like Saints and any other club, its only a matter of time before this is proven, at least we had two good seasons and he has done the decent thing and taken the rest of his team (Erwin & Jan.P) with him I hope we can employ a manager that can do well in the Europa coyr
2

IWOZTHERE added 16:00 - Jun 18 Quite right to push him into a decision and the board have done well to get compensation the way they've handled it. The one thing we will know, is that we'll never know the full facts. Was it primarily for money? Or with yet another major departure, is there substance to the questions raised again by some about the ambition of the board.
0

SanMarco added 16:40 - Jun 18 Team Cortese - you obviously believe Ron's version but isn't there a good argument that saying sign or go was actually an ambitious move? I don't actually believe that was what happened but I can see why they would be keen to avoid a 'lame duck'.
2

landerwal added 21:52 - Jun 18 Steve Davis has just agreed a three year contract, why couldn't Koeman show the same commitment?
0

Saintsfaninoz added 08:18 - Jun 19 I think the fact that Steve Davis has signed a contract extension (following VvD, Prowsie and Fraser) shows that neither the club nor the players lack ambition. I don't think RK can justifiably use that excuse for his decision to go to Everton. I wonder if the Saints already know, or have a very good idea, who the next manager will be and let the players (or at least the most senior ones) know who that was. In any case, this is great news as SD is one of the unsung heroes of our squad.

0

ThereIn76 added 12:29 - Jun 19 RK wanted to see out his Saints contract then move to the club of his choice without that club having to pay compensation to Saints, which could have restricted his choice. In the same way as Wanyama could see out his contract and leave on a free, which is why it makes sense to sell him now if he doesn't want a new deal from Saints. As it is Saints have £5million but must appoint a new manager 12 months sooner than would otherwise have been the case. Everton have paid massively over the odds.

0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Southampton Polls