Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

whatawaster

Mitch Connor wrote: »

in fairness, they tried to get rid of him last year, and now he has found a club interested that he wants to go to, Liverpool are digging their heels in. They showed him a lack of loyalty last season, hawking him around europe

How did they try and get rid of him? Juventus bid for him and it didn’t match Rafa’s valuation (something every player has) so he stayed. Just because we were clearly willing to do business at a certain price doesn’t mean we were “trying to get rid of him”

Glico Man

What Real but Perez and Valdano in particular have done these past few months has been nothing short of tapping up players.

It's one thing declaring an interest but to do it on a consistent basis is very disrespectful to the other club who I'm sure would like to keep business private.

I'm not having a go at Man U when I say this but it's very similar to the way they handled the Hargreaves transfer.

Chardee MacDennis

whatawaster wrote: »

How did they try and get rid of him? Juventus bid for him and it didn’t match Rafa’s valuation (something every player has) so he stayed. Just because we were clearly willing to do business at a certain price doesn’t mean we were “trying to get rid of him”

ah yeah but putting it that way wouldnt get up as many people's noses now would it

Karmafaerie

I heard Rafa tried to sacrifice Alonso in a satanical rite to the dread God Crom.
He had him splayed out over the alter with the ceremonial dagger in his hand and everything, but Alonso managed to escape with the help of the White Knights of Madrid.

That's why he wants to leave now.

Jesus Wept

Karmafaerie wrote: »

I heard Rafa tried to sacrifice Alonso in a satanical rite to the dread God Crom.
He had him splayed out over the alter with the ceremonial dagger in his hand and everything, but Alonso managed to escape with the help of the White Knights of Madrid.

That's why he wants to leave now.

Sun?

Boggles

Very simple with Alonso.

He was kept in the dark over his future last summer, this obviously stuck in his craw.

This season he is more or less in charge of his future with one of the biggest clubs in the world after him.

Simples.

jesus_thats_gre

Everything is so simple when it comes to Liverpool FC. Tis always black and white.

Chardee MacDennis

does anyone really think that if last summer never happened, Xabi's head wouldnt be turned by this Madrid team now? if you do, it's foolish...

Mr Alan

exactly, in reality Alonso just wants a move to Real, back to Spain with his new family, amazing team being built and he wants in.

its as simple as that tbh.

mayordenis

and he probably wouldn't be exactly dejected at the money on offer as well, not saying that the reason or anything but certainly a perk.

Karmafaerie

Or the tax breaks.

kida

he might have been more loyal though if he hadn't been pimped around Europe last summer.

mike65

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Chardee MacDennis

bah

mayordenis

kida wrote: »

he might have been more loyal though if he hadn't been pimped around Europe last summer.

looooooooooooooool

like go back 5 posts a most.

PiE

Mitch Connor wrote: »

in fairness, they tried to get rid of him last year, and now he has found a club interested that he wants to go to, Liverpool are digging their heels in. They showed him a lack of loyalty last season, hawking him around europe

Cyrus wrote: »

he wasnt hawked around europe, he had a relatively (by his standards) poor season, juve showed an interest and the club were willing to sell him as the manager had identified a replacement,

it didnt work out, turns out for the best, why should liverpool sell him, he is a very good footballer, in good form and they own him,

alonso has a lot to thank liverpool for, he shouldnt forget that,

there would never have been any saga last summer if he had played to his undoubted potential more consistently

kida wrote: »

he might have been more loyal though if he hadn't been pimped around Europe last summer.

Do people even read this thread? Rinse and repeat.

Kess73

I'll just be happy when we get to the end of the transfer window and can just bicker about team selections/results/Parry being blamed for everything/tabloids/haircuts/title race

Daemonic

A glimpse of hope...

missingtime

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Everything is so simple when it comes to Liverpool FC. Tis always black and white.

Red and White, no :pac:

Mr Alan wrote: »

exactly, in reality Alonso just wants a move to Real, back to Spain with his new family, amazing team being built and he wants in.

its as simple as that tbh.

the big selfish langer.

mike65

Daemonic wrote: »

A glimpse of hope...

Not much of a glimmer really

Real Madrid director general Jorge Valdano has ruled out making any more major signings until the Spanish giants can offload some of their existing players.

Madrid have splashed out almost €230m already this summer on bringing in Cristiano Ronaldo, Kaka, Karim Benzema and Raul Albiol, while Alvaro Negredo and Ezequiel Garay have also been added to the squad.

A deal for Getafe midfielder Esteban Granero to return to the Bernabeu also appears to be close, but that could well be the final addition until Madrid, who have been chasing Liverpool duo Xabi Alonso and Alvaro Arbeloa, manage to trim their squad down.

Players such as Javier Saviola, Javi Garcia, Fabio Cannavaro and Jordi Codina have already moved on, but Madrid will be keen to cash in on a number of other first-teamers in order to recoup some of their money and free up some squad space.

“The transfer door will remain closed until some players have left, other than for exceptional cases such as that of Granero,” said Valdano, who admits it has not been easy to offload players.

So they can tempt us with cheapish options like Klaas Jan Huntelaar or "Snidger"

8-10

mike65 wrote: »

So they can tempt us with cheapish options like Klaas Jan Huntelaar or "Snidger"

I'd take either or both plus cash no bother.

NukaCola

Boggles wrote: »

Very simple with Alonso.

He was kept in the dark over his future last summer, this obviously stuck in his craw.

This season he is more or less in charge of his future with one of the biggest clubs in the world after him.

Simples.

Didn't he sign an extension last summer?
He has a 3 year contract, Liverpool are in a strong position to keep him so he isn't really in charge of anything. Far from simple really, Liverpool value him at x and madrid are offering y, Liverpool can dig in their heels.

IMO i think we should sell and fast, get the best deal we can and get a replacement in ASAP. He hasn't come out and said he wants to say. He has been a great player for liverpool and although i'd be sad to see him go if he doesn't want to stay he should be left go. Great player Top Pro. If he goes Good luck to him but we need players for this season who want to play for the team.

monkey9

Boggles wrote: »

Very simple with Alonso.

He was kept in the dark over his future last summer, this obviously stuck in his craw.

This season he is more or less in charge of his future with one of the biggest clubs in the world after him.

Simples.

How is he in charge?? He's contracted until 2012! He'll be going nowhere if Real don't make an offer that matches Rafa's valuation. If they offer 30 million or close to it, then Alonso will be allowed to go.

Now that's simplicity, my friend!

Chardee MacDennis

so what do people reckon my chances are of getting tickets for the spurs game?

zing

Funny how real seem to be prepared to splash the cash for "imported" players (e.g. Kaka, Benzema & Ronaldo) but seem to be penny pinching a bit when it comes to spanish players (e.g. the likes of Alonso, Arbeloa & Villa ??). They seemed to have little or no problem meeting the asking prices for Kaka, Ronaldo & co. but are trying to haggle over the others. Almost seems to be the complete opposite of the premier league where the local players command significantly higher fees over foreign players.

zing

Tomorrow is widely believed to be d-day as far as the current loans go.

From the Telegraph today:

Liverpool owners' talks with RBS over loan may extend beyond deadline

Negotiations between Liverpool owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett and RBS over refinancing a £350 million loan may extend beyond Friday's deadline.

The two parties have been in talks for several months and both sides have expressed confidence that a deal will be done.

It may not be concluded by the end of this week however, despite that being the date for the loan's expiry given in the most recent accounts for the club's holding company.

Last month RBS took the extraordinary step of publishing an open letter to supporters in which it expressed faith in the financial position of the club and said it looked forward to establishing "a long-term relationship" and looked forward to it "continuing for many years to come".

The letter suggests a deal will be struck. The football club are liable for £105 million, with the remaining £245 million lying with the holding company, Kop Football Ltd, and secured by Hicks and Gillett.

The holding company made a loss of £42.6 million last year, largely as a result of paying interest on the loans from RBS and Wachovia.

The owners have thus far committed £185 million of personal guarantees and other collateral for the loan.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/liverpool/5889411/Liverpool-owners-talks-with-RBS-over-loan-may-extend-beyond-deadline.html

Now as I understand it - failing to meet tomorrows deadline for refinance would technically put the club and/or it's parent company in default on those loans and most likely put the club in breech of premier league rules (bankruptcy).

However if an agreement isn't reached by tomorrow it would suggest that the terms being offered are not to the liking of G&H which may mean they'll have to put their hands in their own pockets and come up with some more money all by themselves - which in Hicks case may not be easy given his own financial situation.

Boggles

monkey9 wrote: »

How is he in charge?? He's contracted until 2012! He'll be going nowhere if Real don't make an offer that matches Rafa's valuation. If they offer 30 million or close to it, then Alonso will be allowed to go.

Now that's simplicity, my friend!

Get real monkey, contracts arn't worth a fook these days.

If you need me to explain that to you, you need to get your head out of the sand.

monkey9

Boggles wrote: »

Get real monkey, contracts arn't worth a fook these days.

If you need me to explain that to you, you need to get your head out of the sand.

Yeah but the fact he has three years left gives leeway to his valuation. It's not like in the case of Owen etc where we needed to sell on the cheap to avoid losing him for nothing

Karmafaerie

Boggles wrote: »

Get real monkey, contracts arn't worth a fook these days.

If you need me to explain that to you, you need to get your head out of the sand.

Yeah like when both Ronaldo and Real wanted and tried to engineer a move last summer.

How did that work out?

I can't remember Ronaldo scoring many goals for Real last season.

NukaCola

Boggles wrote: »

Get real monkey, contracts arn't worth a fook these days.

If you need me to explain that to you, you need to get your head out of the sand.

A 3 year contract is far from worthless.

The difference between a 3 year contract and say a one or two year contract is money, its the reason why Liverpool can hold out for more money, similar to Villa holding on to Barry, last summer they wouldn't take 18mil this year they took 12mil....

see...?

Kess73

Boggles wrote: »

Get real monkey, contracts arn't worth a fook these days.
If you need me to explain that to you, you need to get your head out of the sand.

If the player does not make a transfer request, then the ball is in the court of the team that owns his contract.


Even if he does make a transfer request, then the buying club would still have to meet the selling club's valuation.

With three years left on the contract, it is most defo worth a fook.

daithijjj

Alonsos contract term is worth something in regards to negotiation of a price but it is essentially not worth alot if the player has become unhappy for whatever reason.

Alonso is a great footballer and would be a big loss, however, if the man has his heart now firmly in a move back to spain/sushine/home/family then it could be detrimental to his form on the pitch.

Last summer i believe no club wanted to pay the asking price of 14mil. This summer it seems the price has doubled. If no agreement is made and a dip in form happens due to the players unrest at his situation, then alot of folk may regret that the opportunity to sell did not go through. Its not really a contract issue per se at this point, its more a question of alonso and benitez having a proffesional conversation about each others feelings and aspirations. Im sure they have done so, but i wouldnt expect either camp to flick over their cards and reveal their hand just yet.

The only guarantee at this point is that Real will continue to be a parasite until deadline day has passed or they get the player.

Personally, i would let him go, if indeed his heart is set on going home, i think an agreement will be reached at some point and all the posturing is due to alot of time left in the transfer window. I wouldnt be to dissappointed if sneijder came the other way in any deal.

zing

From the times.

Liverpool supporters group planning serious takeover bid
Oliver Kay

Tom Hicks, the Liverpool co-owner, is under pressure to provide guarantees for the club’s £350 million loans as the clock ticks on his efforts to refinance the debt before today’s deadline.

Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and Wachovia agreed a refinancing deal in principle with Liverpool’s owners two months ago, but while George Gillett Jr has raised the necessary funds by selling his stake in the Montreal Canadiens ice hockey franchise, Hicks, whose business empire in Texas has been hit hard by the credit crunch, has spent the past weeks trying to secure the cash, the loans or the outside investment to satisfy the banks.

The banks are expected to give Hicks a little leeway, rather than call in the loans as soon as today’s deadline passes. However, even if the Hicks-Gillett regime is propped up for another six months by an extension to their refinancing plan, their credibility has long been shattered in the eyes of Liverpool’s fans. Last night ShareLiverpool FC and Spirit of Shankly, influential supporter groups that rose out of the dissent with the owners, warned against another short-term fix and stepped up their efforts to launch a serious bid to buy the club.

ShareLiverpoolFC launched a revised initiative to raise £150 million that would be used to make an offer to buy 60 per cent of the club, with an additional £100 million sought from a commercial partner. The remaining £100 million debt would be exchanged for convertible loan stock in the club, which would be bought from the banks in instalments over a 20-year period.

The Spirit of Shankly group said: “This new proposal is a sound plan which offers the only real solution for the club: long-term financing that isn’t supported by short-term — and expensive — bank debt.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/liverpool/article6725544.ece

and the beeb:

Fans revise Liverpool buy-out bid

Supporters groups Spirit of Shankly and ShareLiverpoolFC have unveiled a new, joint proposal to buy Liverpool.

The supporters' organisations are unhappy with the financial structure of the club following the takeover by Americans George Gillett and Tom Hicks.

The key change to the original "member-share" proposal is a reduction of the share price from £5,000 to £500.

Gillett and Hicks were expected to complete a refinancing of the club's £350m debt on Thursday.

A statement from the SLFC board said: "This is a realistic plan that squares the circle: How to get broadly based fan ownership of the club, and relieve the level of debt, by offering Liverpool fans an affordable entry fee and a chance to get a modest return for their additional financial support.

"Now we need all those Liverpool fans to carefully consider the proposals in detail on our website - and let us know what they think."

The supporters' groups first proposed a takeover - the model of which is based upon that operated by Barcelona, Real Madrid and other European clubs - in January 2008.

Initially they hoped to raise £500m from 100,000 fans each paying the £5000 'entry fee', but this has now been reduced.

The aim is to acquire a 60% stake in the club by raising £150m while seeking a "commercial partner" to invest £100m for a 40% stake.

In June 2009, it was announced the parent company of the club, owned by Tom Hicks and George Gillett, lost £42.6m in the year to August 2008, largely as a result of interest payments that had to be made to service the debt taken on by Kop Football Holdings when it purchased the club in February 2007.

On Tuesday, the BBC learnt that the club were close to renegotiating its debt with the Royal Bank of Scotland - one of the two banks to which it owes money.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/8166334.stm

Karmafaerie

I'd buy a share at £5,000 let alone £500.

~Rebel~

Karmafaerie wrote: »

I'd buy a share at £5,000 let alone £500.

I too, am most definately 'in' if this comes to anything.

kingshankly

Me too , if there is a god I will soon be the proud owner of Liverpool football club(god that sounds good)

Boggles

Karmafaerie wrote: »

Yeah like when both Ronaldo and Real wanted and tried to engineer a move last summer.

How did that work out?

Pretty good actually, another successful season and a world record transfer fee. Both parties got what they wanted, bore from an excellent working and personal relationship between Ferguson and Ronaldo, Fergie kept his promise and it has been a love fest between the 2 in the press since.

But then again my point was contracts arn't worth a fook these days, the Ronaldo situation again proves that as one of the biggest clubs in the world could not keep the best player in the world and eventually had to let him go allthough he had 3+ years left on his contract.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Pretty good actually, another successful season and a world record transfer fee. Both parties got what they wanted, bore from an excellent working and personal relationship between Ferguson and Ronaldo, Fergie kept his promise and it has been a love fest between the 2 in the press since.

But then again my point was contracts arn't worth a fook these days, the Ronaldo situation again proves that as one of the biggest clubs in the world could not keep the best player in the world and eventually had to let him go allthough he had 3+ years left on his contract.

Yeah, but united didn't have to let him go. Obviously they were going too @ £80m !

A longer contract just means the club has more power in negotiating the fee.

If he really wants to leave, they should let him, at the right price.

Kirby

It depends on the situation. In some circumstances, contracts are very important, in others they aren't. Take that lad at cardiff for example. He signed a 4 year contract last week, and is now putting in a transfer request. If a premiership club come in for him, he will leave.....because he wants to. In that sort of situation the player has the power.

But ultimately, the club doesn't have to sell. They would be stupid not to in a lot of situations, but its still their choice. Ronaldo staying an extra year is a good example. Okay, he had longer left on his contract , but he has wanted to leave for two years. They kept him because they could. And they sold him at the optimum price because he wanted to leave. Clubs arent stupid or spiteful....he would have depreciated in value. He had an average season last year. This coming season would've been worse with him whining and sulking. They made the right call. A player who is miserable isn't worth anything.

Boggles

Actually one example I thought of, when a club fought back was Wigan and Pascal Chimbonda.

He was told he would rot in reserves until the end of his contract or until somemade met there valuation, which Spurs eventually did.

Brilliant.

rarnes1 wrote: »

Yeah, but united didn't have to let him go.

Of course technically United did not have to let him go, in reality they did do, which makes contracts more or less worthless.

IF a player wants to go whatever the contract, enevitably these days he gets his way.

8-10

Boggles wrote: »

Actually one example I thought of, when a club fought back was Wigan and Pascal Chimbonda.

He was told he would rot in reserves until the end of his contract or until somemade met there valuation, which Spurs eventually did.

Brilliant.

Winston Bogarde

stevoslice

Boggles wrote: »

Actually one example I thought of, when a club fought back was Wigan and Pascal Chimbonda.

He was told he would rot in reserves until the end of his contract or until somemade met there valuation, which Spurs eventually did.

I think thats against fifa regulations


from bbc gossip page:-

Liverpool have emerged as shock contenders to bring striker Peter Crouch back to Anfield in a £12m deal.
Full story: Daily Star

Rafael Benitez's bid to sign Spain winger David Silva has been boosted by bankruptcy-threatened Valencia's failure to sell David Villa.
Full story: The Independent

Come Back Crouchie?
Voronin heading for the exit door? anyone heard more on this?

COME BACK CROUCHIE
ABOVE: Peter Crouch 24th July 2009 By Dave Armitage
Liverpool have emerged as shock contenders to take Peter Crouch back to Anfield in a £12m deal.

The England hitman was thought to be heading to Tottenham after he spurned Sunderland approaches.

But Kop boss Rafa Benitez has the 28-year-old striker on his radar and has asked to be kept informed with Liverpool currently on tour in Thailand. Spurs and Fulham had looked set to fight it out for the 6ft 7in star with Portsmouth boss Paul Hart resigned to losing him.

But Liverpool’s emergence in the race is a surprise – the striker spent three years at the the club before Benitez sold him to Pompey in an £11m deal last year.

However, with Andriy Voronin heading for the exit door, Benitez would welcome Crouch back to the fold.

Benitez is also ready to go head-to-head with old adversary Martin O’Neill in a fight to land French international defender Sylvain Distin from Pompey.

Aston Villa boss O’Neill and Benitez are hardly best of chums after their protracted fall out over Liverpool’s attempts to prise Gareth Barry away before the player opted for an £18m switch to Manchester City.

O’Neill has already had a £2.5m offer laughed out of court by Portsmouth – and Benitez is vowing to match any offer they make to get his man.

Silva

Benitez will swoop for Silva if Valencia cash in

By Ian Herbert and Pete Jenson

Friday, 24 July 2009

David Silva (centre) is more likely to be sold by Valencia now his team-mate David Villa is set to stay

The Liverpool manager, Rafael Benitez is ready to intensify his interest in Valencia's David Silva, his negotiating position enhanced by the Spanish club's diminishing prospects of selling their other prime asset, David Villa.

Valencia, a club in severe financial crisis, may be forced to reduce their initial £25m demand for Silva, which put Benitez off in May and the manager will be able to offer the entire amount up front if Real Madrid adhere to his own demands that their £30m-plus outlay on Xabi Alonso comes in one upfront payment, as did their £80m to Manchester United for Cristiano Ronaldo.

Valencia's hard initial negotiating position arose because Villa seemed destined to leave the Mestalla and there was a desire to keep Silva. But Barcelona's part-exchange move for Internazionale's Swedish striker Zlatan Ibrahimovic means that Villa may well not be leaving Spain. Samuel Eto'o's agent yesterday confirmed that the Cameroonian would be the makeweight in a deal for Ibrahimovic. "He will start working with Inter next week" said Josep Maria Mesalles.

The 23-year-old Silva can play wide, as a withdrawn striker or as an attacking midfielder and is not a straight replacement for Alonso. Valencia have been on the brink of bankruptcy all summer and will accept nothing less than a straight cash deal for him.

Where Alonso is concerned, Benitez is also holding out for a Madrid player to be included in the deal, with striker Alvaro Negredo still a possibility. If Real agree to include Negredo then the defender Alvaro Arbeloa would be likely to join Alonso in moving to the Bernabeu. Silva is reluctant to switch to England but will make an exception for Liverpool where he would be joining Spain team-mates Pepe Reina and Fernando Torres.

Alonso seems more likely than Javier Mascherano to leave, as the midfield uncertainties that have plagued Benitez all summer continue to drag on. Barcelona had coveted Mascherano and had wanted to deploy him in front of Kolo Touré, but the £50m Liverpool would expect seems, as they had hoped, to have priced the European champions out of the market. The player's agent, Walter Tamer, has been sounding desperate over the last couple of days. Juventus's Christian Poulsen appears to be a cheaper option for Barcelona.

Real Madrid technical director, Miguel Pardeza, said yesterday that the club still held out hope they can persuade Liverpool to part with Alonso, though not at any price because the player would not sell many shirts.

Real's general director Jorge Valdano has ruled out new signings until the club starts offloading players. After confirming that Klaas van Huntelaar had turned down a move to Stuttgart because he had "other expectations", Valdano said: "Until some of the players leave it is going to be very difficult." Madrid had rather unrealistically hoped to bring in around €100m (£85.6m) with the sale of up to seven players, but stars such as Arjen Robben and Ruud van Nistelrooy have shown no interest in leaving.

Boggles

thebhoy wrote: »

I think thats against fifa regulations

How?

All Wigan have to say is he is not good enough.

Crouch left because he couldn't get a regular run of games. The situation would be the same for him now unless Rafa is going 4-4-2

Kirby

Crouch would have to have suffered a bout of amnesia to consider moving back. I really, really doubt this will happen. Rafa didn't rate him then, so why buy him now? And why would crouch choose bench warming at liverpool over first team football anywhere else?

stevoslice

Boggles wrote: »

How?
All Wigan have to say is he is not good enough.

Something to do with legislation protecting workers from being frozen out by their employers, just remember it coming up last year when berbatov was sulking to the press about not getting his dream move to united, think spurs threatened to let him rot in the reserves until the end of his contract.

I think that was the situation that brought it up IIRC.

Kirby

thebhoy wrote: »

Something to do with legislation protecting workers from being frozen out by their employers, just remember it coming up last year when berbatov was sulking to the press about not getting his dream move to united, think spurs threatened to let him rot in the reserves until the end of his contract.

I think that was the situation that brought it up IIRC.

Dont be so naive. It happens all the time. Short of coming out and stating it publicly, clubs get away with it all the time. Just leave them out, bench them, and answer any questions by either stating they dont fit into the system, arent in form etc.....or just pull a benitez and talk about how the training is going well after any question that you dont want to answer.

Boggles

thebhoy wrote: »

Something to do with legislation protecting workers from being frozen out by their employers, just remember it coming up last year when berbatov was sulking to the press about not getting his dream move to united, think spurs threatened to let him rot in the reserves until the end of his contract.

I think that was the situation that brought it up IIRC.

Thats not a Fifa regulation though, they havn't got into European Parliment Yet.

It's up to the manager to pick the player, there is no where in the contract that states he has to play, easily got around.

Spud83

Boggles wrote: »

How?

All Wigan have to say is he is not good enough.

Well then they should be willing to let him leave. I don't think it is a FIFA I think it could challenged under EU employment law though.

Kirby

So anytime a player is left out, but the "fans and media" think he should be playing, he can sue?






:rolleyes: