Transfer Tweets - Summer 2015 | Stop Spamming - Discussion Should Relate to Tweets

Status
Not open for further replies.
saivet said:
Lfc are a joke :lol:
Click to expand...

People moan when we let our players go for peanuts yet Liverpool are rightly paying hardball and it's a joke?

The balls in their court. Sterling has 2 years left. Aidy Ward has screwed him up. Good on them.
 
Orc said:
Please let them bleed City for £45-50m.
Click to expand...
That would be great on the one hand, but on the other hand we don't want Liverpool getting £45-50m to spend.... Oh hold on I've just remember how Rodgers spends his money. Yep ok I agree with you :devil:
 
Boycott said:
People moan when we let our players go for peanuts yet Liverpool are rightly paying hardball and it's a joke?

The balls in their court. Sterling has 2 years left. Aidy Ward has screwed him up. Good on them.
Click to expand...
As Kay mentioned what makes no sense about their stance is that they value him at £50 million yet are only willing to offer him £100,000 a week. If they think he's work that sort of money they should be offering him twice that.
 
Boycott said:
People moan when we let our players go for peanuts yet Liverpool are rightly paying hardball and it's a joke?

The balls in their court. Sterling has 2 years left. Aidy Ward has screwed him up. Good on them.
Click to expand...
They ARE a joke in many ways but agree with you. They got 50 for Torres and 75 for Suarez, both exceeding what most thought they could get in the circumstances. Their issues are with overpaying, not underselling.
 
Redo91 said:
As Kay mentioned what makes no sense about their stance is that they value him at £50 million yet are only willing to offer him £100,000 a week. If they think he's work that sort of money they should be offering him twice that.
Click to expand...

They won't sign which is the problem. Liverpool have a wage structure but money isn't the issue because the player and his agent don't want to be there. He's got 2 years left so again, why should the club be forced into a battle in the first place? Usually you don't see a rush like this so it's clear he won't sign regardless of the offer. The club are rinsing him and fair play. He fecked himself over.
 
Redo91 said:
As Kay mentioned what makes no sense about their stance is that they value him at £50 million yet are only willing to offer him £100,000 a week. If they think he's work that sort of money they should be offering him twice that.
Click to expand...

Seems pretty obvious to me that the salary offered is what Liverpool think he's worth to them at the minute but any club will have to pay a huge fee based on the potential (or at least the buying club's belief) that he'll become a player worth £50m+.
 
Guys, there's plenty of things to criticise or make fun out of Liverpool for. Fleecing City for Sterling is not one of them.
 
shabadu84 said:
They ARE a joke in many ways but agree with you. They got 50 for Torres and 75 for Suarez, both exceeding what most thought they could get in the circumstances. Their issues are with overpaying, not underselling.
Click to expand...

They are a joke in general but I commend them on this. If he wants out he'll go on the clubs terms.
 
shabadu84 said:
They ARE a joke in many ways but agree with you. They got 50 for Torres and 75 for Suarez, both exceeding what most thought they could get in the circumstances. Their issues are with overpaying, not underselling.
Click to expand...
We don't exactly undersell, either. On the rare occasion we have sold our best players in the past, we've done very well - notably Ronaldo for a world record fee.

De Gea is just one big embarrassment on our half - we should've tied him down to a long contract years ago and to completely avoid letting him go into his last year.
 
LennonNL said:
We don't exactly undersell, either. On the rare occasion we have sold our best players in the past, we've done very well - notably Ronaldo for a world record fee.

De Gea is just one big embarrassment on our half - we should've tied him down to a long contract years ago and to completely avoid letting him go into his last year.
Click to expand...
Well we apparently have tried since 2013.
 
LennonNL said:
We don't exactly undersell, either. On the rare occasion we have sold our best players in the past, we've done very well - notably Ronaldo for a world record fee.

De Gea is just one big embarrassment on our half - we should've tied him down to a long contract years ago and to completely avoid letting him go into his last year.
Click to expand...

We undersell, certainly. Mostly because when players are disposable we tend to ensure they get the best, most fair move possible. Kagawa heading back to Dortmund for pittance last summer being a more recent example. Phil Neville, Butt and Gibson were let go on the cheap, too.
 
LennonNL said:
We don't exactly undersell, either. On the rare occasion we have sold our best players in the past, we've done very well - notably Ronaldo for a world record fee.

De Gea is just one big embarrassment on our half - we should've tied him down to a long contract years ago and to completely avoid letting him go into his last year.
Click to expand...

It's all well and good in hindsight saying we should have tied him down before, but thats still making the assumption he would have actually signed at some earlier point. We've been offering him a new contract basically all season and he's refused to sign, who's to say he would have signed when Moyes was our manager? It's not as if the link to Real Madrid has appeared out of nowhere, it's been pretty clear that Madrid would come knocking at some point since Casillas's form dropped dow a well a couple of years ago, De Gea would have been well aware of it.
 
Kag said:
We undersell, certainly. Mostly because when players are disposable we tend to ensure they get the best, most fair move possible. Kagawa heading back to Dortmund for pittance last summer being a more recent example. Phil Neville, Butt and Gibson were let go on the cheap, too.
Click to expand...

Beckham for £25 Million was a classic United undersell, however, the one that annoyed me the most is Van Nistlerooy for a mere £10 Million, again to Real Madrid. He went for £10 Million and Shevchenko went to Chelsea for £30 Million despite them being the same age and having identical scoring records in the Champions League.
 
Sied said:
That would be great on the one hand, but on the other hand we don't want Liverpool getting £45-50m to spend.... Oh hold on I've just remember how Rodgers spends his money. Yep ok I agree with you :devil:
Click to expand...
Wouldn't care if Liverpool had another £100m to spend like they did last summer. They can't attract anyone that'll propel them into the top 4. They'd spunk it all on mediocre players like they always do.
 
Sied said:
That would be great on the one hand, but on the other hand we don't want Liverpool getting £45-50m to spend.... Oh hold on I've just remember how Rodgers spends his money. Yep ok I agree with you :devil:
Click to expand...

Frankly I'd be all for sending Rodgers 30m of LVG's budget and watching him piledrive Liverpool further into the ground with some more of his genius buys.
 
Kag said:
We undersell, certainly. Mostly because when players are disposable we tend to ensure they get the best, most fair move possible. Kagawa heading back to Dortmund for pittance last summer being a more recent example. Phil Neville, Butt and Gibson were let go on the cheap, too.
Click to expand...
Well yeah but at the point all of those players you mention were sold, they were fringe players. The point made earlier was that Liverpool don't undersell because they sold Torres for £50m and Suarez for £75m - but they were their best players! How often have United undersold their best players? How often have United sold their best players in their prime at all? As I said, Ronaldo is the obvious one and he was a world record transfer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.