Liverpool Rumours And General Discussion 2007/2008

IrishMike

PHB wrote: »

In all fairness, would anybody really be that sad if Gillete, Hicks and Parry all went? It's only about which one people hate the most.

Exactly, ultimately they all have to go, thing is which is the bigger problem and should go first?

galwaydude

The average baseball player your talking about is alex rodriguez who now plays for the yankies. The reason why is because hicks gave him a 100 million + contract then payed the yankies to take him of their hands. I wouldnt call A ROD average, one of the best baseball players in the states and just signed a 150 million dollar contact to stay with the yankies. Hicks own the texas rangers who are the worst team in baseball.

monkey9

galwaydude wrote: »

The average baseball player your talking about is alex rodriguez who now plays for the yankies. The reason why is because hicks gave him a 100 million + contract then payed the yankies to take him of their hands. I wouldnt call A ROD average, one of the best baseball players in the states and just signed a 150 million dollar contact to stay with the yankies. Hicks own the texas rangers who are the worst team in baseball.

Fair enough. I thought i'd read he wasn't the best, but i don't know about baseball. It was the business end of it really that i was interested in. Paying a team to take a player of your hands. I hope he doesn't think Gerrard or Torres are being paid too much

walshki

IrishMike wrote: »

Exactly, ultimately they all have to go, thing is which is the bigger problem and should go first?

Hicks first. If Parry goes first and Hicks gets a yes man in (e.g. Ayres) Hicks gains power - if Gillett goes - Hicks gains power. Anything where he gains power increases the likelihood of him staying and us having to put up with him as the majority shareholder.


Therefore - Hicks first - no question. All 3 in one swoop would be my preferred option.

Charlie

monkey9 wrote: »

I know this is already on these pages but can't find it. Can someone tell what happened when he bought some player for his baseball team. He was an average player or something but they paid over the odds? In fact i think broke the transfer record or wage structure? Then paid a rival team to take the player off their hands.

Not an average player son, a great Player - Alex Rodriguez, who, if he is not already, will go down as one of the all time greats.

Hicks signed A-Rod to a ridiculously fat contract. Then, he realised his team were struggling and needed to shore up some cash. Instead of clearing out a few of the driftwood players who were also on large contracts (e.g. your Stephen Carr's, Lee Bowyers, Winston Bogardes of this world) he decided to axe A-Rod. However, he made it public that he was in a bind and thus any negotiating team had him over a barrell.

The resulting deal saw him give A-Rod away for free and continue to pay a large chunk of his contract. It was the equivalent of giving Torres free to Chelsea and still paying £60,000 a week on his wages for the next 7 years. It has gone down as one of the worst and most idiotic deals in Baseball, and as another said, the Texas Rangers are languishing now, doing sweet fcuk all.

As A Newcastle fan I had to put up with years of idiocy from Fat Shepard that put the club where it is presently trying to recover from now. However, Liverpool's situation is much graver. It's never good when two egotistical yanks play chicken with your club.

galwaydude

You only have to look at the texas rangers now, they have a great stadium but nothing else. All this man wants to do is make a quick buck. I think i read somewhere that he just wants to make money out of liverpool to help his rangers team out. They are the laughing stock of the MLB.

DeadSkin

galwaydude wrote: »

All this man wants to do is make a quick buck. I think i read somewhere that he just wants to make money out of liverpool to help his rangers team out. They are the laughing stock of the MLB.

DIC were offering him a nice healthy profit of £80m recently, not bad for a year's work.
And that's a lot of $$$'s

gucci

charlie mchugh wrote: »

The resulting deal saw him give A-Rod away for free and continue to pay a large chunk of his contract. It was the equivalent of giving Torres free to Chelsea and still paying £60,000 a week on his wages for the next 7 years. It has gone down as one of the worst and most idiotic deals in Baseball, and as another said, the Texas Rangers are languishing now, doing sweet fcuk all..

Sounds a bit like the Robbie Fowler and Leeds united deal.......yet another comparison im making in my brain about board room/financial trouble that im liking Liverpool to leeds....man i hope this somehow sorts itself out before too much damage is done.

PHB

80 million isn't that much though. If they can get the funding for the stadium together, built it up, the value will jump massively.

Dub13

Dub13 wrote: »

Tickets out :John Barnes/Jan Molby

We now have the tickets for:-

The next legends night

17th May Saturday - 8pm

JOHN BARNES & JAN MOLBY

in the Tram - st James Street, Dublin 8.

Tickets are €25.00 each

See Here for more info.

Link

This will be a sell out so try to get in fast,I am sure a few on this thread will testify that these are great nights in a good venue.

NEW VENUE

DUE TO THE TRAM CLOSING - WE HAVE BOOKED THE
SUBMARINE BAR, CRUMLIN

Tusky

PHB wrote: »

80 million isn't that much though. If they can get the funding for the stadium together, built it up, the value will jump massively.

80m ($160m) profit on a one year low risk investment would be seen as a great return surely ?!?

The Rooster

Hicks has gone well up in my estimation by saying he wants rid of Parry.

The only thing Hicks has done wrong, IMO, is to admit to the media that he met with Klinsmann. The rest of the anti-Hicks brigade is based on hearsay, rumour and bullshat, and I'm embarrased as a Liverpool fan who the anti-Hicks campaign has snowballed, for absolutely no reason. Its laughable hearing people go on about how Dubai will be better owners!!

Jazzy

i think he makes a valid point about Parry standing on his record for the past decade. in all the areas hicks is talking about we are behind other big clubs and the man at the top has to take the blame for this

zing

Hasn't been posted here already but Gillet has hit back at Hicks.

George Gillett has called on his Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks to stop causing turmoil at the club and insisted he will never sell his shares to his fellow American.

Gillett and Hicks, who each own 50 per cent of Liverpool, have fallen out completely with neither prepared to let the other take over the club.

In an exlcusive interview with Sky Sports News, Hicks has also branded Liverpool chief executive Rick Parry's reign as "disastrous" and reiterated his demand that he resign.

But Gillett has thrown his weight full square behind Parry and says he is saddened by Hicks' outburst.

"I am saddened at this latest outburst from Tom Hicks," said Gillett in a statement.

Turmoil

"If Tom wanted a serious discussion on the issues to help the club move forward, he should bring his views to the board and not to Sky Sports.

"Here we are, a few days away from a vital Champions League semi-final match and Tom has once again created turmoil with his public comments.

"Tom should stop. He knows that Rick Parry has my support and that airing his comments in this way will not change my position.

"His failure to discuss this with the Board or the management committee is significant."

Hicks also claimed in his interview that it was Gillett and Parry who were the forces driving November's talks with Jurgen Klinsmann, something that Gillett disputes.

Taken aback

He added: "I was also taken aback by his version of the events as reported.

"Tom needs to understand that I will not sell my shares to him and that we need to find a way forward that is properly funded and truly in the best interests of Liverpool Football Club.

"The real business of winning matches and running and developing the club is what we should all be focused on at this moment."

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_3437128,00.html

LFC circus - coming soon to a town/media outlet near you

mike65

The Rooster

C'mon dont fall for Hicks stating the bleeding obvious. Parry has been a poor CEO but getting rid of him would not make Hicks any better an owner.

Mike.

zing

Jazzy wrote: »

i think he makes a valid point about Parry standing on his record for the past decade. in all the areas hicks is talking about we are behind other big clubs and the man at the top has to take the blame for this

The problem with pointing the finger straight at Parry and blaming him for the way the club has progressed over the last 10 years compared to the other big clubs is that it's too easy to do. It doesn't take into account that we were behind many of those clubs in terms of on the pitch success, ground size/gate receipts/etc.. We don't know why the club failed in some of these areas and while I've little or no time for Parry I don't think it's fair to blame the man entirely given the very conservative board he was reporting to. The stadium is an example of this - the club could have borrowed years ago to get this done but Moores didn't want to lump the debt on the club so spent 2 or 3 years looking for a sugar daddy to buy the club instead. What other areas were the board not willing to commit finances to over the years ?

Of course the flip side of that is that Rick was advisor to the board on many of those issues so maybe he was the one holding us back ? But as I said I don't think it's a black and white Rick is to blame scenario like Hicks is painting it to be but he certainly had a very large part to play in how the club developed off the pitch over those 10 years.

Again Hicks is just spinning things to suit his agenda.

Chucky the tree

the parry, hicks and gillet **** off the better.


None of them are any good for Liverpool football club.

GBX

Chelski beating Everton at the moment, hope it stays like that. Make it a bit more comfortable for 4th. :cool:

Tusky

So Hicks wont sell his shares full stop and Gillet wont sell to Hicks. Nothing can be done unless the two agree and they are not even on speaking terms, communicating to each other through the media. Awful.

How are we going to sign players with this going on ?

mike65

Everton 0 1 Chelsea

Cushty

Mike.

dc69

Tusky wrote: »

So Hicks wont sell his shares full stop and Gillet wont sell to Hicks. Nothing can be done unless the two agree and they are not even on speaking terms, communicating to each other through the media. Awful.

How are we going to sign players with this going on ?

I think we will continue to sign big players,I have a sneaky suspicion that David Villa is going come.He has said he wants to go to the premiership to either liverpool or arsenal.He also said he is very good fiends with torres off the pitch and loves playing with him:)

Graham Hunter said on newstalk that he is definitely leaving and that he will cost about 25-30 million and he also felt he would make as big an impact as torres.

Chelski are in the hunt but he wont go to them,so from what I got from listening to Hunter was that he was going to come to the PL to either Arse or us,I dont think wenger will splash 25-30 million(just cant see it happening,its not his style)

what better wayfor Hicks to drum up supports by signing him.

I think if we can afford him he will come,Spanish manager,Torres,spanish teammates=very likely.

I also think that if we got Villa,we have a very good shot at the league,If he makes as big an impact as torres,the two + Gerrard could single handedly win a league title.

jesus_thats_gre

While we could do with a handful more goals this season, our major shortcoming this season is the amount of silly goals we have conceded - how many own goals and penalties have we handed the opposition?

A return to fitness for Agger could prove to be a bigger deal than any new signing in my opinion.

While Ronaldo has been stunning this season, it is United's defence that should get a massive amount of credit for winning the league. If anything, this has been proven by how uncharacterically shakey Chelsea have been at the back compared to previous season.

Sky mentioned a stat that Chelsea have lost 8 points by conceeding goals in time added on. It is little stats like that show how 4 goals in 4 indidivual matches throughout the season can make a massive difference at the end of the season.

Tusky

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.

dc69

Tusky wrote: »

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.

he was asked what teams he liked,he said I like arsenals style of play,their attacking play.

he also said,all my friends are liverpool supporters and I get along very well with fernando torres.

To me that says he is going to either,take your pick David

PHB

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.

Dont be at yourself

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:

Liverpool must repay £31.5 million to banking institutions in little more than a year or risk having to sell Fernando Torres and Ryan Babel.

The Times has learnt that Liverpool borrowed the money to sign Torres, the Spain forward who has scored 30 goals this season and has already become a firm favourite on the Kop, from Atlético Madrid last summer. The club then refinanced that debt on January 25, at the same time as they secured a £350 million refinancing package.

Liverpool entered into an 18-month loan agreement with interest of 9 per cent — £2.8 million a year — with a letter of credit to pay back the £31.5 million at the end of the period.

Should Liverpool be unable to pay back or refinance the loan, banks could force the sale of Torres and Babel, who was also included in the smaller refinancing package.

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!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

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.

Cyrus

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!

that is the same for any other club that borrows money and buys players, its just a 'story' in the context of the current turmoil at liverpool

Dont be at yourself

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.

zing

The club has been mortgaging players for years and they're not the only club to do so. All that's different here is we then took all those existing loans and bundled them into the new finance deal. I don't see anything particularly unusual in it.

Buying players with tv money is all well and good as long as that money isn't being absorbed by other financial commitments.

Just another atempt at slightly sensationalist journalism imo and I usually like bits from Ollie Kay.

redspider

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

Great post Red

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

PHB

"Arsenal is now another team added to the list of teams interested in Amauri," the player's agent Mariano Grimaldi told Terra Brazil.

"We have already received proposals from Liverpool and Real Madrid, in addition to what we already had from Juventus."

Transfer season starting early.

IrishMike

PHB wrote: »

Transfer season starting early.

Anyone know anything about him?
Stats dont look all that great

spockety

IrishMike wrote: »

Anyone know anything about him?
Stats dont look all that great

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

Tusky

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.

BaZmO*

And for every Torres that is signed there's a hundred Djemba Djemba's.

spockety

Tusky wrote: »

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

I'm just saying, when Torres was being touted on his way to Liverpool, there were a lot of people hmming and hawing about his 'stats'.

Tusky

spockety wrote: »

I'm just saying, when Torres was being touted on his way to Liverpool, there were a lot of people hmming and hawing about his 'stats'.

Torres, at 22, was a household name and had 83 goals in 214 apperances. Not amazing but still pretty good. The only players to score more than him over the last 4 years in La Liga were Raul & David Villa. Anyone who questioned his stats was pretty silly to be honest.

This guy is 27 & has 44 goals in 180 apperances. Theres no comparison.

zing

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

Hero Of College

spockety wrote: »

I'm just saying, when Torres was being touted on his way to Liverpool, there were a lot of people hmming and hawing about his 'stats'.

Torres was stagnating at Atletico- the situation with Torres was the same as it was with Gerrard circa 2003-2004- big name player at a used-to-be-big Club with no real {no pun intended} of winning major stuff. Of course 2 European Cup finals and the "Gerrard" Cup Final prevented Stevie from going to a different club.

Hero Of College

Hero Of College wrote: »

Torres was stagnating at Atletico- the situation with Torres was the same as it was with Gerrard circa 2003-2004- big name player at a used-to-be-big Club with no real {no pun intended} of winning major stuff. Of course 2 European Cup finals and the "Gerrard" Cup Final prevented Stevie from going to a different club.

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.

Spud83

KaG1888 wrote: »

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

I thought the "Gerrard" cup final being referred to would have been the FA cup final v West Ham.

LuckyLloyd

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.

alanmurphy83

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

I thought the "Gerrard" cup final being referred to would have been the FA cup final v West Ham.

Ahhhhhhhhhh agreed

BaZmO*

sweetie wrote: »

you missed a 2 there - *

Sorry, 82 goals in all competitions.

Hero Of College

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

I thought the "Gerrard" cup final being referred to would have been the FA cup final v West Ham.

yes, thats what i meant!!!:D

whatawaster

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

DeadSkin

Hero Of College wrote: »

I don't want to turn this into a discussion about Ronaldo vs Torres but....

I'd say your 99.99999% of the way there tho' :pac:;)