As I've just said, what's wrong about it is doing it in public. And no, I don't buy the "all of a sudden and we'll panic" argument - not one bit. If we sold Barkley,
then at that point explained he refused a contract over three months beforehand, then it's common sense why we sold him. But the difference would be that we hadn't embarrassed the player for a month before he left and put him in a corner, turning the fans against him.
Those saying Koeman hasn't villified him? Look at this thread - "call yourself an Evertonian?", "a home grown superstar doing this?", "bang out of order" and so on - all because Koeman has publicised this nonsense when the player is under contract and just getting on with his job.
Who's to say he doesn't want to play for us? You don't know that. Barkley hasn't said it, his agent hasn't said it - all you're going on is Koeman's big trap, and that's the point; if Koeman had shut up and been professional, this thread doesn't have the above content.
How do you know that Barkley and his agent aren't simply waiting for the season to end to discuss a new deal? He signed in July in 2014 -
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jul/29/ross-barkley-everton-new-contract-manchester-united - maybe his policy, like a professional and like
I'd do it, is that he want to concentrate on football when there's still football to be played?
But no - because of one person alone - Ronald Koeman - Barkley is now a Judas who, even if he signs a new contract, will be perceived as doing so as a mercenary.
Bang out of line from Koeman, the whole thing.
