‘No, no, no’: Jamie Carragher instantly disagrees with Ian Wright’s firm Liverpool claim | OneFootball

Jamie Carragher has disagreed with Ian Wright’s latest suggestion about FSG’s handling of Liverpool’s contract sagas.

Trent Alexander-Arnold looks to be the first of the so-called “contract rebels” to depart Anfield in the coming summer window.

This follows Real Madrid’s development of talks with the England international ahead of his current terms expiring in June.

The principles of the deal in question are understood to have been ironed out with local tax laws set to be the next major obstacle.

Jamie Carragher disagreed with Ian Wright on FSG

Carragher didn’t have any of it when Wright suggested that FSG should take some responsibility for allowing contracts to run down to their final year.

“Jamie, anything to do with FSG in the fact they let it get to a place where… because you have to think,” the former Arsenal star spoke on Sky Bet’s The Overlap.

“No, no, no,” Carragher responded.

Wright went on to add: “Three players? I’ve never seen… Three players’ contracts, Jamie. Three players! Gary, I can’t believe it.”

Gary Neville looked aghast as his Sky Sports colleague looked to explain the circumstances around Virgil van Dijk and Co.’s expiring contracts.

Who should take responsibility for Trent Alexander-Arnold’s exit?

(Photo by Julian Finney/Getty Images)

We have to agree with Carragher – it would be remiss of any commentator to overlook the fact that a major shakeup behind the scenes contributed at least partly to our current concerns.

Even putting the bombshell of Jurgen Klopp’s mid-season exit announcement to one side, we were also in the process of sorting out a new sporting director and recruitment team behind the scenes.

Whilst Van Dijk, Alexander-Arnold and Mo Salah’s contracts should have still been a priority, were they any more of a critical issue than replacing our former German tactician?

Foundations were being laid out for the long-term future of Liverpool Football Club – a future the powers that be may have not deemed the contract trio suitable for anyway.

That’s not to suggest we’re of the mind our No.4 and No.11 shouldn’t be handed contract extensions.

On the contrary, if it’s financially feasible and the data supports the notion that they’ll continue to have a positive impact on the side, we’re all for it.

Join our channel of readers on WhatsApp  to get the day’s top stories straight to your mobile