kryogen wrote: » It actually is, its kinda impressive
bucketybuck wrote: » We all know the "Net spend" rubbish is just an attempt to deflect attention away from some horrendous transfer dealings but really, how stupid do Liverpool fans believe the wider public are?They say that it doesn't matter that Carroll cost €35 million, because they got €50 million for Torres. They got €15 million profit so its ok. :rolleyes: Even a child can spot the flaw in that argument, ie: paying less for Carroll would have resulted in even MOAR profit!!! "But no", they cry, "we told Chelsea they had to pay €15 million more than we paid for Carroll, so we were always only going to get €15 million". What a crock'o'****e. What muppet works a transfer like that? You mean to say Abramovich demanded to see the deal sheet for Carroll before he signed off on Torres? Bollox. If Abramovich was prepared to go to €50 million then Liverpool should have been able to negotiate that fee independently to the Carroll transfer. If they couldnt then their staff should all be dumped as the idiots they clearly are. Carroll should have been signed for circa €15 million, AND Torres sold for €50 million. That would have been good business. What actually happened was inept business, and later transfers continued that ineptness. No amount of blathering about "net spend" can hide that.
bucketybuck wrote: » We all know the "Net spend" rubbish is just an attempt to deflect attention away from some horrendous transfer dealings but really, how stupid do Liverpool fans believe the wider public are? They say that it doesn't matter that Carroll cost €35 million, because they got €50 million for Torres. They got €15 million profit so its ok. :rolleyes: Even a child can spot the flaw in that argument, ie: paying less for Carroll would have resulted in even MOAR profit!!! "But no", they cry, "we told Chelsea they had to pay €15 million more than we paid for Carroll, so we were always only going to get €15 million". What a crock'o'****e. What muppet works a transfer like that? You mean to say Abramovich demanded to see the deal sheet for Carroll before he signed off on Torres? Bollox. If Abramovich was prepared to go to €50 million then Liverpool should have been able to negotiate that fee independently to the Carroll transfer. If they couldnt then their staff should all be dumped as the idiots they clearly are. Carroll should have been signed for circa €15 million, AND Torres sold for €50 million. That would have been good business. What actually happened was inept business, and later transfers continued that ineptness. No amount of blathering about "net spend" can hide that.
Iang87 wrote: » one thing that must be said is that its a shocking state of affairs that people have been calling for Kennys head since January. He is about to finish his first full season in charge and he has been retired by some people on here. So the options I present Spend big on players, transfers dont work manager gets sacked. (as some want to happen King Kenny) Spend big on manager to bring quick success, success doesn't come immediately cos you're team isn't very good/unwilling to adapt (as happened AVB at chelsea) third option you stick with the manager and give him the time to put his plan in place and support him (similar to what united did to ferguson when they finished 11th in the 88-89 season)
mike65 wrote: » Manchester City: £430.77 million and they still won't win the league this year. Wonder will we have a "Are Roberto Mancinci and Manchester City Done" thread in May?
Xavi6 wrote: » mike65 wrote: » Manchester City: £430.77 million and they still won't win the league this year. Wonder will we have a "Are Roberto Mancinci and Manchester City Done" thread in May? Given how you were exposed earlier in the thread you were probably itching to start it.
zerks wrote: » What £100 million and tactics Dalglish clearly isn't up for the job,outdated tactics,poor transfers and the debacle that was the whole Suarez incident.I'd say he'll leave at the end of the season but as a United fan,I hope he stays.
Morricone wrote: » We sold out best player last season in Meireles. We sold Torres who win he left us was bang in form and still one of the best strikers in the world.
zerks wrote: » Just watching a roundup of the 96/97 season atm on Sky,Roy Evans was in charge of Liverpool then & they were 5 points clear at Xmas and played some decent stuff.Just shows how much they have regressed and are now on a par with any midtable side who just raise their game for the big boys ala United,Chelsea etc.
niallo27 wrote: » They were top of the table at Christmas 3 years ago as well and one of the best teams in Europe. I don't know why your going back 16 years.
zerks wrote: » No winding up or trolling intended,it's just that I was watching the show & Liverpool were challenging for the title and everything seemed rosy.3 years ago was just an anomoly,I think even the most die hard fan will admit that it was a false dawn.A league title challenge is even further away than ever now.
Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: » All it takes is cash! Look at City and Chelsea Huge injection of money and suddenly........ Although judging by the reaction to the 2 teams in question, it seems most pool fans would turn it down
Sappy404 wrote: » If there's a huge injection of cash it should go towards a new stadium or redeveloping Anfield and the immediate surrounding area, but there's too much red tape holding things up for the latter option it would seem.
Father Damo wrote: » What I still cant fathom about the "he needs time" brigade is that Hodgson, who remains one of the best managers in the league, was a target for the boo boys from about a month into the job. How in the name of god did he not deserve time, yet Dalglish does? Anyone with half a brain surely could see from the second he got the job that this would not work out (I had no doubt he would fail to succeed, although I had truly no idea of how Steve Staunton like the whole thing would become). Maybe it was from being an Ireland fan that I had more of an idea of how and why this was to be bad, as we know all too well the folly of appointing poorly qualified people based on sentimentality and old boys clubness.
firemansam4 wrote: » Well did Woy win us our first trophy in 6 years?
cambo2008 wrote: » Not the best angle to approach that argument at seeing as he was sacked in January,before all cup finals. I'm not saying he should have been kept on before ye get the pitchforks out.
zerks wrote: » 3 years ago was just an anomoly,I think even the most die hard fan will admit that it was a false dawn.A league title challenge is even further away than ever now.
firemansam4 wrote: » Come on not this chest nut again!! why did we sack Woy and not want to sack Kenny!! Well did Woy win us our first trophy in 6 years? did he get us to the semi's of an FA cup? did he show any signs at all of improving Liverpool and getting them to play well? Yes in Kenny's time there have been some very high price signings for mediocre players (which were more than likely more down to Camoli) And he has had a disastrous run of about 7 league games, but up until then we weren't doing too bad. At least under Kenny we have shown signs of some decent football and that has been shown in our cup runs, under Woy there was just no signs of anything happening except us going backwards
LuckyLloyd wrote: » Well, the mighty Northampton had already scuppered his interest in one of them anyway...
LuckyLloyd wrote: » cambo2008 wrote: » Not the best angle to approach that argument at seeing as he was sacked in January,before all cup finals. I'm not saying he should have been kept on before ye get the pitchforks out. Well, the mighty Northampton had already scuppered his interest in one of them anyway...
