What went wrong as Mason Mount’s Chelsea contract talks stall
What’s wrong as Mason Mount’s contract talks at Chelsea are on hold? Could there be a problem due to the Blues’ poor form and short-term Premier League prospects? The Pride of London gives its opinion.
I joined PoL at a particularly defining moment for the West London club. It was April of this year and the sale of CFC had not yet been completed. Fans and writers have gone from the highly successful and simple era of Roman Abramovich to the unknown of Todd Boehly and his colleagues.
Many issues had to be resolved. But I insisted from the outset in my articles that the extension of the contracts of Reece James and Mount respectively was paramount. Although, as none of the Chelsea star deals expire immediately, the board have decided negotiations could be postponed or even hijacked.
However, James reached a deal with the new administration in early December, just as the summer 2022 transfer window closed, leaving only his teammate to sign.
Basically, Mount has been in discussions about his Blues future for some time, according to mainstream reports. Although a deal is yet to be agreed between the England midfielder and his boyhood club. There have also been rumors that the Chelsea Academy graduate was hesitant to sign or that his head may have been turned.
Meanwhile, trustworthy outlet The Athletic claim there has now been a ‘breakthrough’ in regards to the 23-year-old’s stay in the capital. On top of that, the article suggests Mount’s talks were only put on hold due to his involvement with the Three Lions.
On the contrary, Evening Standard said on Wednesday that “an agreement is not close”. And this is the reason, according to Standard, why the renewal is postponed until after the international tournament. Regardless of any financial issues or the team not performing as well as in other seasons, Mount’s heart seems to belong with Chels.
Boehly would lead discussions between the footballer and his representatives; the president is a known admirer of Mount and believes the player to be relatively underpaid. With the No.19 so effective for CFC in his time on Fulham Road, an outcome similar to James’ scenario seems likely. Time is not of the essence in this case, due to an expiration date of 2024.