Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2013

bluefinger

Kerrigooney wrote: »

I hope our ex-City scouts haven't had anything to do with this :eek:

seems a bit strange when you look at the diverse range of targets we seem to be connected with this summer.

Hidalgo

Carroll deal should be decided upon next week From F365

West Ham near Carroll decision
West Ham United manager Sam Allardyce has confirmed Andy Carroll is just days away from giving his answer on a £100,000-a-week permanent move to Upton Park.

Last Updated: 16/06/13 at 12:26 Post Comment Premier League Top 6 Finish 13/14. Click here to bet.




Andy Carroll: Making his mind up on future

Both Allardyce and Carroll are currently abroad on holiday but the striker is expected to sign a six-year deal worth more than £15m when he returns.

The 24-year-old England international spent last season on loan with the Hammers from parent club Liverpool, who will not only lose £20m on the player they bought from Newcastle United in January 2011, but also hand him a £2m 'golden goodbye' payment because he did not request a transfer.

"We are both out of the country but most of the negotiations are done and the financial agreement between us and Liverpool is in place," Allardyce told the Sunday People.

"It's about communicating with Andy and his agent between London, here in Spain where I am and Florida where Andy is.

"I've no real need to speak to him over his decision. I've spoken to him enough times so he knows what I think and it's up to him.

"He's back in the next few days so we should have a definitive answer by the end of next week."

Kirby

If Carroll turns that down, he is a moron. He isn't going to be a starter and on 100k a week at any other club. It's a perfect fit for him. What is there to even think about? Even if Newcastle did come in for him, they aren't going to pay him that wage and he would have competition upfront. Is he mad?!?

Vicxas

100k, Oh Andy. That ship has sailed mate. Take the West Ham offer and go be happy.

LiamoSail

Regarding the banner, I'm assuming those in favour of reduced ticket prices will accept the trade off with competitiveness that comes with reduced revenue?

YouTookMyName

LiamoSail wrote: »

Regarding the banner, I'm assuming those in favour of reduced ticket prices will accept the trade off with competitiveness that comes with reduced revenue?

The new TV deal will subside any lost ticket revenue.

PRAF

Kerrigooney wrote: »

There's more money than ever in the game. The team that finishes bottom next season will earn more than Man City did when they won it last year but still the prices go up? It's bull****.

The EPL is living right in the middle of a bubble. Astronomical wages, gigantic transfer fees, sky high revenues. All of this means increased prices for the fans (be they armchair fans, season ticket holders, or whatever)/ None of it makes long term economic sense. It has all gone a bit crazy.

If it isn't managed properly, it's quite possible that the whole thing could fall flat on its face in a few years time. Not only is the average punter priced out of the stadium, he is also priced out of the Sky Sports subscription, can't afford the replica jersey for his son, and can barely afford the Panini stickers anymore!

Prices have to come down eventually. Hopefully FFP is the first in a series of initiatives which curtails some of the madness and brings football back closer to the ordinary fan.

LiamoSail

YouTookMyName wrote: »

The new TV deal will subside any lost ticket revenue.

Every other club benefit from that too. Revenue may increase as a result of the tv deal, but relative to other clubs, our revenue will drop as gate receipts do, leaving us competitively worse off

5starpool

LiamoSail wrote: »

Every other club benefit from that too. Revenue may increase as a result of the tv deal, but relative to other clubs, our revenue will drop as gate receipts do, leaving us competitively worse off

It's not going to happen obviously, but if all clubs could reduce their ticket prices by 20% based on increased tv income then it wouldn't be an issue. This protest is aimed at all PL clubs, not just Liverpool, although LFC fans seem to be the main drivers behind it from what I can see.

Increased ticket prices probably aren't a concern at all for those that don't attend matches, but it really is a big cost. Sadly, the only place it goes nowadays is players pockets, and I can't see that happening. Fans are mostly just a revenue stream with occasional platitudes thrown their way. I would wager that the decrease in atmosphere in general at games is as a result of the increased prices. Stadiums are still full so it's not an issue really as far as the clubs are concerned, but all is not as rosy as it seems imo.

NukaCola

AC wants 100k a week and someone is willing to pay it......what the **** has happend to football...

Kerrigooney

Fixtures are out on Wednesday. Hopefully a bit of an easier start than last season.

Knex*

Maybe we can win our first game of the season for a change. Wouldn't that be great!

Bowlardo

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Fixtures are out on Wednesday. Hopefully a bit of an easier start than last season.

we better not get ****ed over with a mental start of season like last season

LiamoSail

5starpool wrote: »

It's not going to happen obviously, but if all clubs could reduce their ticket prices by 20% based on increased tv income then it wouldn't be an issue. This protest is aimed at all PL clubs, not just Liverpool, although LFC fans seem to be the main drivers behind it from what I can see.

Increased ticket prices probably aren't a concern at all for those that don't attend matches, but it really is a big cost. Sadly, the only place it goes nowadays is players pockets, and I can't see that happening. Fans are mostly just a revenue stream with occasional platitudes thrown their way. I would wager that the decrease in atmosphere in general at games is as a result of the increased prices. Stadiums are still full so it's not an issue really as far as the clubs are concerned, but all is not as rosy as it seems imo.

Firstly, I am in favour of reduced ticket prices even if it results in loss of competitiveness, I'm simply playing devils advocate here

It won't happen that all clubs will reduce price, unless the Government or FA oblige them to

Fans are just a revenue stream to the big English clubs, but its impressive to see other European clubs look after fans. Germany is the obvious example where a season ticket are very affordable, as are match tickets at many clubs. I recently paid €12 (iirc) for a ticket at St Pauli, and €20 at Ajax. Celtic have also recently knocked £100 off the cost of a season ticket while also introducing reduced rate kids tickets. In my opinion, this is absolutely necessary to ensure the next generation continue to support their club, while also ensuring the club remains part if the community, and accessible, as oppose to just a weekend tourist attraction

For me, the only way forward for Liverpool is safe standing. A redeveloped Anfield with safe standing could hold in the region of 60k. This would allow for reduced prices in standing areas, while maintaining the same level of revenue. You could then add to that the additional revenue generated from other services, such as catering, merchandise etc, all the while making tickets more accessible, affordable, and allowing the next generation to grow up as match goers, just as the previous did, with the club as part of the community

Mr Alan

Bowlardo wrote: »

we better not get ****ed over with a mental start of season like last season

Getting the excuses in early!

NukaCola

Bowlardo wrote: »

we better not get ****ed over with a mental start of season like last season

We gots to play them all anyways.....it should be a bit different than last time anyway being honest. It was a tough start with a new manager, the team has had a year now so with the new "philosophy".....what i'm basically saying is a bad start will all be on BR shoulders this time.....

Dub13

More on the protest.




The Story
#FootballWithoutFansIsNothing

For too long supporters have been exploited with their loyalty taken for granted. Ticket prices have risen far beyond inflation and this has already seen supporters priced out of their game. With the ever increasing money in the modern English game, the benefits for supporters should be improving alongside the increase in wealth. But instead the football clubs and authorities rely on the rivalries of supporters to allow them to exploit those same supporters.

In the FA's 150th year we find that the ethos of the game in this country does not represent the same values with which the game was formed. Clubs tell us they need more money to be able to compete, that they need to charge more for tickets because other clubs do. The Premier League tell us that it is the clubs' choice and that they are powerless in changing anything. All parties hide behind excuses expecting supporters to just accept them and begrudgingly continue to pay the high ticket prices to pay high paid footballers further extortionate amounts. They expect us to want to pay more to be able to pay a footballer who wears our shirt for a brief time even more money in the hope that it allows the club to finish higher to get even more money to pay those footballers even more.

Supporters from different clubs are uniting to make a stand so that clubs cannot use the line they charge more so we have to, or that the Premier League cannot just say well attendances are good so everyone must be happy. In May 2013, we organised a meeting in Liverpool and in London on the issue in which supporters from different clubs came together to discuss the issues. The following actions where agreed:

Joint action by supporters of all clubs at the Premier League Headquarters in London on the 19th June, which marks the day of the 2013/14 fixtures release.

Joint action by supporters of all clubs targeting Premier League sponsors such as Sky and Barclays. This also included mention of sponsors such as Chevrolet, who sponsor both Liverpool and Manchester United.

Bring supporter representatives together to work and act as one, using existing channels such as the Football Supporters’ Federation and Supporters’ Direct where possible.

These actions are just the start. Supporters from all clubs are now saying Enough is Enough and that Football Without Fans is Nothing.

Hidalgo

NukaCola wrote: »

We gots to play them all anyways.....it should be a bit different than last time anyway being honest. It was a tough start with a new manager, the team has had a year now so with the new "philosophy".....what i'm basically saying is a bad start will all be on BR shoulders this time.....

The manager has had a year to settle in so that's not an excuse this season.
One thing that would favour a 'nice' start is the amount of potentially new players.
Possibly a new keeper, one CB, one AM, one RWF. A lot of new faces and they'll have to settle in quickly.

The positive being that a lot of the business looks like its being done early, that at least gives new faces plenty of pre-season rather than arriving the week the league kicks off.

Guy:Incognito

YouTookMyName wrote: »

The new TV deal will subside any lost ticket revenue.

Everyone else has increased tv money too though.

Similar lines to the arguement that that club is making great strides by finishing with 6 or 7 points more than a previous season, its fup all use if the clubs above are improving by 10.

EDIT. Too slow off the mark :-)

dfx-

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Really confusing message.

I think it's a very clear message. If you put up with not affording going to the match, the child will do the same when they grow up, they won't go to the game either..

Pedalstool

dfx- wrote: »

I think it's a very clear message. If you put up with not affording going to the match, the child will do the same when they grow up, they won't go to the game either..

Ah when you put it like that.

Knex*

dfx- wrote: »

I think it's a very clear message. If you put up with not affording going to the match, the child will do the same when they grow up, they won't go to the game either..

It really isn't a clear message, hence the confusion on here when it was first put up.

If it was very clear, there'd have been no confusion.

Personally, I thought it looked like a campaign against bringing kids to pubs for matches.

I thought it was a clear message tbh.

Rekop dog

Futile protest is futile.

Mr Alan

rarnes1 wrote: »

I thought it was a clear message tbh.

So did I. As usual those who are trying to contribute something positive scorned & criticised by those doing **** all.

Knex*

Mr Alan wrote: »

So did I. As usual those who are trying to contribute something positive scorned & criticised by those doing **** all.

You really do reach for the hyperbole bull**** a lot don't you.

jcsoulinger

Mkhitaryan v Eriksen which is considered the better buy?, I have to say I would rather have the Dane he seems more like the finished article where as Mk still looks a little rough around the edges.

Paully D

Kirby wrote: »

If Carroll turns that down, he is a moron. He isn't going to be a starter and on 100k a week at any other club. It's a perfect fit for him. What is there to even think about? Even if Newcastle did come in for him, they aren't going to pay him that wage and he would have competition upfront. Is he mad?!?

West Ham paying £100,000 a week for anyone, especially Andy Carroll, is pure and utter madness. They're going to have a hard time getting in other players for a reasonable wage now if that is true. Potential targets will take one look at what he's getting and be saying ''I'm twice the player, there's no way I'm taking half the wage''.

klose

jcsoulinger wrote: »

Mkhitaryan v Eriksen which is considered the better buy?, I have to say I would rather have the Dane he seems more like the finished article where as Mk still looks a little rough around the edges.

Ive never seen mick play bar a 6 minute montage of armenias game v denmark and he was pretty boss in it, then again denmark got whooped 4-0. I assume hes the dogs bollocks considering we are paying a reported 20 mill.

But hey, hes not british

amiable

Leiva wrote: »

AnfieldMole wants to see you over on Twitter. wants to interview you for Fans Corner.

I have no time for pimps

messinkiapina

jcsoulinger wrote: »

Mkhitaryan v Eriksen which is considered the better buy?, I have to say I would rather have the Dane he seems more like the finished article where as Mk still looks a little rough around the edges.

Never seen Mk play but I'm a bit disappointed that we seem to have gone cold on Eriksen since he is seemingly available for less money and judging by his interviews, would like to play for Liverpool.

messinkiapina

I suppose the daily Suarez interview/whinge is imminent since Uruguay are playing tonight.

daithijjj

Paully D wrote: »

West Ham paying £100,000 a week for anyone, especially Andy Carroll, is pure and utter madness. They're going to have a hard time getting in other players for a reasonable wage now if that is true. Potential targets will take one look at what he's getting and be saying ''I'm twice the player, there's no way I'm taking half the wage''.

Its not madness imo. West Ham paid the odd player 70k p/w in the Championship, the strategy got them back up. I despise Allardyce but the man is a pretty competent manager. Bringing in Carroll had a big impact on West Ham's season, it basically gave them an edge that saw them never in danger of the drop, is that worth a pay rise of 1m p/a?, absolutely imo. I think people need to look at bigger pictures. They are gonna give him a payrise of 20%, not unreasonable for moving to London imo. Carroll himself would probably take a pay cut to move back to Newcastle, they dont want him now it seems so from my point of view i would do the exact same as Carroll. Cant criticise people for doing what most, if not all players, would do.

And all the while, nobody knows if any of the wage talk is true. Folk getting their knickers knotted talking about the player dragging his feet etc, some folk need to 'calm down dear', everyone is on feckin holiday, the deal will get done.

Vicxas

messinkiapina wrote: »

I suppose the daily Suarez interview/whinge is imminent since Uruguay are playing tonight.

More than likely, sigh.

Hidalgo

daithijjj wrote: »

Its not madness imo. West Ham paid the odd player 70k p/w in the Championship, the strategy got them back up. I despise Allardyce but the man is a pretty competent manager. Bringing in Carroll had a big impact on West Ham's season, it basically gave them an edge that saw them never in danger of the drop, is that worth a pay rise of 1m p/a?, absolutely imo. I think people need to look at bigger pictures. They are gonna give him a payrise of 20%, not unreasonable for moving to London imo. Carroll himself would probably take a pay cut to move back to Newcastle, they dont want him now it seems so from my point of view i would do the exact same as Carroll. Cant criticise people for doing what most, if not all players, would do.

And all the while, nobody knows if any of the wage talk is true. Folk getting their knickers knotted talking about the player dragging his feet etc, some folk need to 'calm down dear', everyone is on feckin holiday, the deal will get done.

Yup,
while he's worth nowhere near £100,000 a week, if his contribution is enough to keep West Ham safely in the pl, then its money well spent.
Carroll along with Ambosini I'm guessing would be on serious wages.

LiamoSail

Mr Alan wrote: »

So did I. As usual those who are trying to contribute something positive scorned & criticised by those doing **** all.

Brendan Rodgers says hi

cunnifferous

daithijjj wrote: »

Its not madness imo. West Ham paid the odd player 70k p/w in the Championship, the strategy got them back up. I despise Allardyce but the man is a pretty competent manager. Bringing in Carroll had a big impact on West Ham's season, it basically gave them an edge that saw them never in danger of the drop, is that worth a pay rise of 1m p/a?, absolutely imo. I think people need to look at bigger pictures. They are gonna give him a payrise of 20%, not unreasonable for moving to London imo. Carroll himself would probably take a pay cut to move back to Newcastle, they dont want him now it seems so from my point of view i would do the exact same as Carroll. Cant criticise people for doing what most, if not all players, would do.

And all the while, nobody knows if any of the wage talk is true. Folk getting their knickers knotted talking about the player dragging his feet etc, some folk need to 'calm down dear', everyone is on feckin holiday, the deal will get done.

I think that's a bit of a stretch tbh. 7 goals and 23 apps in hardly a big impact and certainly not enough to warrant significant pay rise on already inflated wages.

Raif Severance

LiamoSail wrote: »

Brendan Rodgers says hi

mormank

Knex. wrote: »

It really isn't a clear message, hence the confusion on here when it was first put up.

If it was very clear, there'd have been no confusion.

Personally, I thought it looked like a campaign against bringing kids to pubs for matches.

That's exactly what I thought it was when I first looked at it. Couldn't figure out why people were protesting watching games in pubs tbh.

rarnes1 wrote: »

I thought it was a clear message tbh.

It may be clear to people that know the protests are happening or avid football fans but I can guarantee you the average punter looking at that wouldn't have a clue what it's really about.

NukaCola

If Andy was 5'10 he'd be on the dole in Newcastle.....

mormank

Mr Alan wrote: »

So did I. As usual those who are trying to contribute something positive scorned & criticised by those doing **** all.

Never heard of constructive critisism then no? Again, just because you know what it means doesn't make it clear. Greek people can understand greek written on a page but that doesn't mean it is clear to me.

daithijjj

cunnifferous wrote: »

I think that's a bit of a stretch tbh. 7 goals and 23 apps in hardly a big impact and certainly not enough to warrant significant pay rise on already inflated wages.

There's more to the game than just the goals for West Ham, he has been good for them in causing general mayhem against opposition centre backs and people like Nolan feeding off that. He has also been great for them when defending corners for example. There's a reason they were chanting "sign him up" at the end of the season.

Funky G

Jaysus nearly 10,000 posts

in before the lock

smileyj1987

Funky G wrote: »

Jaysus nearly 10,000 posts

in before the lock

Lock it now , Lock it now !!!

gafferino

If only this one could end with a tyra banks gif again.....

The Rooster

dfx- wrote: »

I think it's a very clear message. If you put up with not affording going to the match, the child will do the same when they grow up, they won't go to the game either..

Yeah, and look at all the empty seats at all the games of the big clubs who charge the big prices

What the feck has the pub got to do with anything?
Pub owners would be delighted to be regarded as a cheap alternative!!

jenno86

gafferino wrote: »

If only this one could end with a tyra banks gif again.....

I think "those" gif have been banned

klose

Mignolet to be done by the end of the week apparently

jenno86

It's an honour.

Leiva

10001 !
<

---

Literally