Liverpool Rumours And General Discussion 2007/2008

dc69 wrote: »

he has said he wants to go to the premiership to either liverpool or arsenal.

Woah there. Youre than the tabloids! He did not say that. He was asked direct questions and he answered them. He did not say he wanted to come to either of those teams. He said he has friends at Liverpool and he likes Arsenals style of play. Thats it.

You guys got a big boost today, Ballack was out injuried for Chelsea. He has been a man on a mission to win the CL this season, and if he's out of the game, it's a huge boost.

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Essien's out, with possibly Ballack and Lampard joining him? Chelsea will have a softer centre than a creme egg. Cech's back, but looks like Drogba's out too, so what's the likely line-up?

---

Cech
---Ferraira-Carvahlo-Terry-Cole
Wright-Philips-Makalele--Mikel---Cole

---

Anelka-Kalou

That's a very beatable team, if Liverpool are full strength.

Here's an interesting story from the times:

It's perhaps a bit of a non-story, but it's also yet another indication of the troubles the club has itself in. There'd be blood on the streets of The Boy Wonder was sold!

All the more reason to win the CL again. That Chelsea team looks annoyingly strong at the back.

According to the article, the way in which Torres and Babel were bought is unusual. TV money is normally used, which wasnt the case with these two.

So, with Gillet's recent set of statements, the civil war continues between these two co-owners of Liverpool. The war is now being played out in public which is an attempt to win hearts and minds of media and fans.

Lets retrace some of the history though. Gillet only brought in Hicks, his then friend, at the last minute of this deal as its scale had escalated beyond what Gillets assets could guarantee in terms of a loan (298m). G&H outbid DIC (their bid was 240m-260m or so?), and DIC did not reply with a counter bid as they were pissed-off. Maybe this was Parry's fault or Moore's fault or both, we have not been privvy to that. Maybe DIC were playing a cute bidding game that backfired. Moores was originally dealing with Gillet only. It is likely that Moores will stick with Gillet. And clearly Parry will stick with both.

G&H were confident that their personal relationship would be able to see them run Liverpool jointly on a 50-50 basis. Doing things together, all pally wally. But that very quickly unravelled, like a lot of friendships, where at the end of the day the large amounts of money, control, and power, are the root cause of problems. Hicks is being particularly aggressive, which is typical of his track record it would seem, and dare I say personal persona. Gillet is right that it is not doing the team good to be saying such things in public.

Okay, we all know that Parry may not be the best, although we dont know his daily dealings and I would suspect that 99% of Liverpool fans have not read the full set of accounts in details in each of the last 10 years. But if Parry was so bad, wouldnt Moores have got rid of him years ago (and the other co-owners) and wouldnt Gillet and Hicks have been calling for his head jointly from the start after they did their due diligence? Hicks has only had problems with Parry afterhe has fallen out with Gillet. Blaming Parry for not having a new stadium 3 or 4 years ago is an infantile and immature observation.

So, how do we get out of this mess? I think the only way is for Gillet and Hicks to both agree to sell the club a a whole to the highest bidder this summer, an auction. That will mean that both guys need to get down off their high horses, Hicks is on a higher horse, and agree to do this. And to see it as the best option for Liverpool FC, not necessarily the best option for them long-term financial-wise.

But the fans have a part to play in accelerating this. They should not side with either Gillet or Hicks per se, not argue the minutae, but instead use their collective protest and at the matches ask for G&H to sell up. Not "Americans out" not spitting at Hicks if any of his group would return to Liverpool (although in a way Hicks may understand that method!), but a calm thoughtful silent protest with banners. There may be a match in the league which doesnt matter (last home game) where Liverpool fans could do this, with protests before, during and after the game, perhaps turning their back to the pitch, etc.

Of course one problem is that Hicks has no intention of going to the games, so the protests wont be heard or felt. He may risk going to the CL final as that is on neutral territory but fans cant afford to protest there.

But I think the course of action, selling, is the only way forward at this point. Let them make their 80m or 100m or whatever on the back of LFC, sucking the money out of us, and all we can do is write it down as the final faux pas of the Moores era. Although to be fair to him, he was naive and too trustworthy of strangers rather than being out to diminish LFC. Ironically, at Man City Shinawatra's takeover has been plain sailing so far. His chequered pedigree had myself calling for us to stay well clear of him. Its impossible to tell how owners will perform, you cant trust their words - but instead only their delivered actions for LFC.

> Liverpool entered into an 18-month loan agreement with interest of 9 per cent — £2.8 million a year

By my calculations, 9% of 350m is 31.5m. My understanding, if that is the agreed interest rate although I dont know if that has been officially published, is that Liverpool would have to pay back 381.5m at the end of the 18-months and arrange another financing facility. The 18-month term doesnt end until July 2009, so this impasse and unhealthy 'status quo' may rumble on for a while yet.

Its all a sorry mess.

Redspider

Everton 0-1 Chelsea
A good result for Liverpool which gives us more leeway to optimise for the CL. A win at Fulham would cement the 4th position. All good.

From Chelsea's point of view, they had fewer chances I understand, so were fortunate enough to get the win. It keeps them in the title race, more good news for Liverpool, as they cant afford to optimise for the CL.

I would imagine that Lampard will be back for the Liverpool match. Chelsea have a strong squad so we cant underestimate them no matter which personnel are missing. Maybe Cech will be slightly rusty, and he is on the odd occasion susceptible to mis-judging a cross.

It is a good time for us, off-field distractions aside, and the players and the coaching staff have the wherewithal not to let that affect them, and its a 'bad time' for Chelsea, if you can call challenging for the title and being in the CL semi a bad time. Bu they are not the rock they once were when we played them a few years ago and are scraping results to a certain extent. We have always done well against them in recent years so there is no reason as to why not again.

I think we can do it ...... would a 1-0 from the 1st leg be enough, possibly. A 2-0 certainly would.

Redspider

spockety wrote: »

That's what most people said about Torres before he came..

C'mon now, theres a bit of a difference. This guy is 27 for a start. Everyone knew Torres was extremely talented.

I think more people questioned how well Torres would adapt to the premiership than his stats to date. I know I certainly did.

KaG1888 wrote: »

I'd give more credit to Hamman for changing that game. Gerrard played a huge part but Dietmar changed the game for us. I'll always remember him for that.

Hamman was immense in the second half of that game. Infact he was immense all round for us. Great player.

sweetie wrote: »

you missed a 2 there - *

Sorry, 82 goals in all competitions.

Rafa on Gerrard.


You mentioned Gerrard is a doubt - what is the problem?

He has a neck problem. Yesterday in training he scored three or four goals with his head so at the end he had a problem.


Must be a little delicate