Barnsley are facing a battle to keep goalkeeper Luke Steele.

The Star understands former Manchester United shot-stopper Steele has been offered reduced terms to stay at the Championship club.

And that will surprise many fans with the 28-year-old one of the club’s best performers last season – and in seasons gone by.

Now a free agent though, Steele, who has been at the club for five years, could look to find a new deal elsewhere.

The keeper is unlikely to be short of options. He has earned himself a good reputation for some special performances for the Reds during 178 appearances for the club since penning a permanent deal back in 2008.

Steele has been offered only a one-year deal to stay at the club, while other players like Martin Cranie and Tom Kennedy have been offered two-year contracts. Defender Kennedy yesterday agreed his two-year deal which officiallywill start on July 1.

Steele confirmed he had been offered a new deal and that “I’m considering my options.”

Striker Jason Scotland is the only player to so far sign a new deal at the club, a one-year contract having impressed last season.

Defenders Cranie, Bobby Hassell and Jimmy McNulty have all been offered new deals, as has winger Tomasz Cywka.

Hassell, McNulty and Cywka have all been offered one-year deals to stay at the club, but have yet to put pen to paper on their respective contracts.

“We’re delighted Tom Kennedy has agreed his new contract,” Reds’ director Don Rowing told The Star.

“It’s pleasing because we’re gradually getting there with new contracts, although people need to be patient because it takes a bit of time to get these deals done.

“We’ve got 11 players now for next season and ten development players, but I know [manager] David Flitcroft has a list of new players he’d like to sign.”

 

Looks like we aren`t too serious on the Steele front. Save face though by not getting rid, by giving him a **** deal.

 

I can understand needing to offer reduced terms but a 1 year deal for a 28 year old keeper? May as well send him a letter saying "Cheers Luke, nar sithi."

If that's true (and I recognise that that's a big if) it sounds as if the club is trying to get rid whilst still being able to tell the fans that they tried to keep him.

 

If that's true why are we not at least offering him the same terms that he's on, there is no way we can attract a better keeper to the club, if anyone deserves a 2 year deal its Steele

 

Yep thats what I put but yours meks more sense.

am turning into Hemssy.

 

I'm pointing at my ipad and laughing at thi now....it's in a mate kinda way tho

 

Slow news day.

 

New era

 

Sums up my feelings too, mate. I wonder whether Flitcroft will want to have some input into this sort of aspect within the club?

 

Bless thi cotton socks.

 

New error

 

the club directors must be going for it next season,eleven players on the books already...ffs get steele on a contract asap.

 

I just don't understand the logic of the club's offer of a one year contract. That's if the Star is being accurate.

 

I don't know how the Star would have managed to get details on the length of the contract offered Steele. I can't imagine it's something that the club would disclose and if it is agent trickery then it's not the Star that you'd leak it to.

 

How do you know that. your guessing at best.
Luke Made mistake after mistake.
Peterborough away and Charlton at oakwell been two games off the top of my head.

If he leaves, he leaves. I would prefer for him to stay but I demand that the club stick to a plan and if Luke thinks he can do better elsewhere then he should go. Let him go to Leeds and sit on bench.

 

Evening phil.

 

I don't put much faith in the paper that claimed in 2011 John Sheridan was to be our new manager and in January this year said Sean O'Driscoll was Keith Hill's replacement.

 

Never ending

 

For the star, there is quite a bit of detail there that suggests there is likely some accuracy to the comments.

If we have only offered a 12 month deal on reduced terms to a player approaching his prime, who was instrumental in us avoiding the drop, who was captain, who spoke mid season about wanting to stay here and has played over 175 games for the club... i'm staggered.

I can understand looking at wanting to reduce his terms if he's seem as an expensive luxury, but again... assets. It's not a new era when we're treating players as a cost and a burden. That's not going to help in negotiations for other players either.

I've friends who support other clubs in our division and they regularly cite Steele as one of our better players they might like to covet.

12 month contracts just aren't the way forward. If the club have a better value better quality option, let him find a new club, thank him and just say... Luke, we can't afford you. Wish we could, but we can't. If he was to re-sign, we're back in the same position next year. So we get peanuts in January, or we get nothing in the summer.

We don't seem to be learning. The club have to get full and best value for our players when they gain admiring glances.