Winston Bogarde the original money man?
There is a player currently achieving very little at Manchester City who is, apparently, unwilling to move unless he retains his current pay levels.
The player cost many millions when he joined City in the last few years and yet he has little or no re-sale value.
The player in question has had offers from other clubs for both loan and permanent moves but has been unwilling to take anything resembling a pay cut.
The problem, according to what I can figure, is that he is paid almost twice as much as he should be and so no team other club can even think about paying him wages AND City a fee.
But there is a possible third way.
City are so desperate to get rid of the player that they are considering paying his contract up and also allowing him to move on to another club with no transfer fee.
Time will tell if even those desperate measures will mean another club can manage to negotiate a package of wages and bonuses that would suit this particular money grabber, but I am not holding my breath.
There are, unfortunately, quite a few candidates for the honour of being this unnamed person.
It is staggering to think of how much money has been invested by the owners at City in the last several years with little or no expected further return.
Who is the man most likely to be City's Bogarde?
But that of course does not hide the fact that players are perfectly able to move on and earn less money, but play, yet choose not to.
These players should perhaps be known as 'Bogardes' in honour of the ex-Chelsea player Winston Bogarde who refused to move in order to remain very well paid.
He was never offered a professional contract by any other club and retired in 2005, aged 35 having played only 201 games in total.
So who do you think is City's Bogarde?