Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014/15

T-K-O

Gbear wrote: »

I hate his stupid runs, I hate the way he stupidly dithers around the edge of the box. I hate how poor he is in front of goal for a forward. I hate the oblivious look he has on his face after someone ****s him out of it for being in the wrong place.

But Sterling and Coutinho are as dangerous in front of goal as a pair of toasted cheese sandwiches.

Lallana is the first port of call but he's been in and out with injuries.

Unless something utterly wild happens I want Balotelli ****ed out of the club the day the transfer window opens in the summer and replaced with someone who actually fits the team.

But in the mean time we may as well be getting our bloody money's worth and I think we could do with a bit less reverence for the pretty failure of our current crop of attackers. Yes they're working hard, yes they're playing some nice football and in the right system they could be lethal.

But not this system. So we need to try something a little bit different. Not massively. Just a little. Our current form has been built on defence. I don't think Balotelli would cause our game to implode. Especially not when players like Gerrard and Markovic have hardly been indispensable.

Despite all that, you still believe he is the most dangerous. I disagree.

Dirty Steve

Balotelli is sh¡t, Borini and Lambert aren't much better; Sturridge (these days) is a sick note.
We're never going to beat anyone if we can't put the ball in the net. Buy a feckin striker (and do whatever with the rest, sell, loan - minus Studge of course).

Strongbow10

Dirty Steve wrote: »

Balotelli is sh¡t, Borini and Lambert aren't much better; Sturridge (these days) is a sick note.
We're never going to beat anyone if we can't put the ball in the net. Buy a feckin striker (and do whatever with the rest, sell, loan - minus Studge of course).

A trully big side would have a target in mind, even someone they plan on moving for in the summer. In these circumstances, a big club would prioritise and move for that target NOW, even if it meant paying over the odds.

The club want success but without doing everything necessary.

I think Sterling is a cracking player, still raw when it comes to certain aspects of his game though. The plaudits being lavished on him by BR and the media is over the top, the lad has not been impressive as a striker its as simple as that. His finishing is terrible, it was also pointed out in an article this week in one of the papers someone made comment about his poor technique when shooting. His strike of a ball is absolutely woeful.

Good strikers win titles for average teams. Pinning the hopes on Sturridge is a risky move, but seemingly a risk FSG are delighted to take if it means they don't have to spend any money.

If Berahino moves to Liverpool in the summer we might as well pack it in with this transfer committee. Shameful stuff if he is the best option they can come up with for the fee involved.

rob316

Sell Balotelli, Lambert and Borini and buy 1 striker out of that, because none of them are good enough for Liverpool in any capacity. Realistically you would be looking at the bones of £20m which is a good chunk of change to go towards a top striker.

daithijjj

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

How are we lucky to have Sturridge Daithii?

Because we were flirting too long over getting him in. In my opinion you either want a player or you dont. The question is why we were messing about over sums of money that equated to less than what Lambert cost for such an important signing, which strikers are.

Where would we be today if Sturridge had gone to Spurs for example that summer and didnt wait another window for us to come in with pay cut offers?. While we are disputing sums of money that equate to finishing 6th or 8th in the league for 1 season only. And also getting the player to take a pay cut to join!. How many players are going to do that for us and actually be worth the wait?

That's what i meant by we are lucky to have him. Obviously hindsight is king but look at us now for the alternative, bargain bin 'talent' for cover imho. And with that, we now have to put Sterling where he is not a natural player and also find someone to fill the slot he left.

Strongbow10

daithijjj wrote: »

Because we were flirting too long over getting him in. In my opinion you either want a player or you dont. The question is why we were messing about over sums of money that equated to less than what Lambert cost for such an important signing, which strikers are.

Where would we be today if Sturridge had gone to Spurs for example that summer and didnt wait another window for us to come in with pay cut offers?. While we are disputing sums of money that equate to finishing 6th or 8th in the league for 1 season only. And also getting the player to take a pay cut to join!. How many players are going to do that for us and actually be worth the wait?

That's what i meant by we are lucky to have him. Obviously hindsight is king but look at us now for the alternative, bargain bin 'talent' for cover imho. And with that, we now have to put Sterling where he is not a natural player and also find someone to fill the slot he left.

Wasn't it even rumoured that Rodgers wasn't interested in Sturridge and rather he was a committee signing? There was talk he didn't want him at all the previous summer only for the committee to put it on the table again the following January.

Not seen this story verified though

rob316

daithijjj wrote: »

Because we were flirting too long over getting him in. In my opinion you either want a player or you dont. The question is why we were messing about over sums of money that equated to less than what Lambert cost for such an important signing, which strikers are.

Where would we be today if Sturridge had gone to Spurs for example that summer and didnt wait another window for us to come in with pay cut offers?. While we are disputing sums of money that equate to finishing 6th or 8th in the league for 1 season only. And also getting the player to take a pay cut to join!. How many players are going to do that for us and actually be worth the wait?

That's what i meant by we are lucky to have him. Obviously hindsight is king but look at us now for the alternative, bargain bin 'talent' for cover imho. And with that, we now have to put Sterling where he is not a natural player and also find someone to fill the slot he left.

Don't know about that we paid £12m for him. Dumped by Chelsea, dumped by Man City. Hardly a queue of clubs lining up for him I'd have thought with his questionable "attitude".
I always liked him and was glad of the signing but the fee and signing raised a lot of eyebrows and he was considered a risk.

Don't think we are lucky to have got him it was just very good business. In the future we may be lucky to hang onto him though.

daithijjj

Strongbow10 wrote: »

Wasn't it even rumoured that Rodgers wasn't interested in Sturridge and rather he was a committee signing? There was talk he didn't want him at all the previous summer only for the committee to put it on the table again the following January.

Not seen this story verified though

We signed him on the 2nd of January because we realised we left ourselves very short and made a mistake the previous summer would be more accurate imo. Problem is i dont think we have learned from it. Signing what we signed was numbers rather than any quality and also just gambling.

K-9

Strongbow10 wrote: »

Wasn't it even rumoured that Rodgers wasn't interested in Sturridge and rather he was a committee signing? There was talk he didn't want him at all the previous summer only for the committee to put it on the table again the following January.

Not seen this story verified though

I think there was press reports that we wanted Sturridge on loan the previous Summer.

daithijjj

rob316 wrote: »

Don't know about that we paid £12m for him. Dumped by Chelsea, dumped by Man City. Hardly a queue of clubs lining up for him I'd have thought with his questionable "attitude".
I always liked him and was glad of the signing but the fee and signing raised a lot of eyebrows and he was considered a risk.

Don't think we are lucky to have got him it was just very good business. In the future we may be lucky to hang onto him though.

He was hardly dumped, his contract expired and Hughes spent 18m on Roque Santa Cruz iirc. He was their young player of the year and they just let him go because they had so much money for instant gratification signings. Didnt Mancini say he would never have let him go if he was in charge at the time?

As for Chelsea, many of their good young players never get a sniff in the first team. Was it 32 players on loan last year?. Didnt Sturridge play over 40 games for them the season before we got him?

Was it good or was it lucky in the end?

Harry Palmr

Free Hangball Doughboy!

Nerdlingr

Costa charged. Nice.

5starpool

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Free Hangball Doughboy!

Again?

It gets to the point with some trapped people where they should stop needing to be freed rather than anything.

Saying that I have no idea what the cause was this time. I'd guess it's Chelsea related though?

Iused2likebusts

costa charged by the FA for the stamp on can. Should get a 3 game ban.

Harry Palmr

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Costa charged. Nice.

Frothy coffee is all he is.

5starpool

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Costa charged. Nice.

Makes no odds to us really. It won't benefit us in any way, although it might make a few heads explode in conspiracy rage I guess.

Nerdlingr

5starpool wrote: »

Makes no odds to us really. It won't benefit us in any way, although it might make a few heads explode in conspiracy rage I guess.

Yeah makes no odds but its nice to see an ankle breaker get punished either way.

Couldn't care less if Costa gets any ban tbh.


They missed it last night so it makes no difference now

mosstin

5starpool wrote: »

Makes no odds to us really. It won't benefit us in any way, although it might make a few heads explode in conspiracy rage I guess.

It'll give Mourinho palpitations and I'm all for that.

brevity

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Free Hangball Doughboy!

Beasty wrote: »

I've had a word with the mod. We agree that although you used an abusive term to describe the player you were actually paying him a backhanded compliment. You were certainly not attempting to troll the fans of the club in question. In the circumstances he has agreed to overturn the card and resultant ban.

"Some birds are not meant to be caged, that's all. Their feathers are too bright, their songs too sweet and wild."

Turtyturd

When will he be charged for the stamp on Skrtel.

tok9

rarnes1 wrote: »

Couldn't care less if Costa gets any ban tbh.


They missed it last night so it makes no difference now

I disagree.

While it makes no major difference to Liverpool, it's extremely important for football as it's about time there was some consistency.

I'm not happy because I'm bitter, I'm glad because it's the right decision.

tok9

tok9 wrote: »

I disagree.

While it makes no major difference to Liverpool, it's extremely important for football as it's about time there was some consistency.

I'm not happy because I'm bitter, I'm glad because it's the right decision.

Meh, if it doesn't help us I couldn't care less.

monkey9

Christ, according to some Chelsea fans on that match thread, we were played off the park in the most one sided semi final ever were all we tried to do was kick them into submission.

monkey9

monkey9 wrote: »

Christ, according to some Chelsea fans on that match thread, we were played off the park in the most one sided semi final ever were all we tried to do was kick them into submission.

Hey, think of it as a filtering session. Match threads can be bonkers. Don't take them serious and they are a different ball game

8-10

Turtyturd wrote: »

When will he be charged for the stamp on Skrtel.

He's not, they said that

Turtyturd

8-10 wrote: »

He's not, they said that

The assault Gerrard?

smileyj1987

rarnes1 wrote: »

Couldn't care less if Costa gets any ban tbh.


They missed it last night so it makes no difference now

I do want him banned at the end of the day that stamp could have injured can and put him out of action for a few weeks !! That's not right so he should be punished and fully deserved if he is.

Hangballlouie

Howya lads.

Dirty Steve

I am quite enjoying the halo Chelsea supporters have given Costa regarding the stamps last night. Two accidental stamps in the same match; how oblivious can you be..

LuckyLloyd

Costa is a warrior. He plays the game like it should be played imo.

rob316

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Costa is a warrior. He plays the game like it should be played imo.

Stamping on people is how the game should be played?

whatawaster

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Costa is a warrior. He plays the game like it should be played imo.

He is filthy

LuckyLloyd

rob316 wrote: »

Stamping on people is how the game should be played?

Pushing every edge; being physically tough and competitive; mentally owning your opponents; and having the quality to put them to the sword - yes, that's how the game should be played

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Pushing every edge; being physically tough and competitive; mentally owning your opponents; and having the quality to put them to the sword - yes, that's how the game should be played

I notice you didn't say "violently stamping on other players" or is that covered by one of the above sentiments?

ush

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Pushing every edge; being physically tough and competitive; mentally owning your opponents; and having the quality to put them to the sword - yes, that's how the game should be played

Stamping is not how the game should be played. If all players did that the game would be over as a spectacle.

Dirty Steve

I'd have no problem in him playing for us, but I certainly wouldn't gloss over those two stamps like they have. And Suarez just fell on Ivanovic's arm..

rob316

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Pushing every edge; being physically tough and competitive; mentally owning your opponents; and having the quality to put them to the sword - yes, that's how the game should be played

I agree with all that and Suarez had all those qualities which I loved , it doesn't mean though that I condoned him biting players.

You condone actually stamping on your opponent?

Hangballlouie

It's hypocritical of Liverpool fans to have a go at Costa and the way he plays, yet the majority defended Luis and his behaviour. Does he deserve a ban? Yes. Of course he does. But it is what managers/fans/clubs must put up with as he adds so much to a team when on the pitch. Players of that ilk will miss 6-7 games a season with bans but if you try to take that snideyness from their game, they lose a lot of what makes them the player they are.

I almost got a 3 month ban because of how I worded it last night, but I'd absolutely love Costa at our club.

Charlie19

I thought he was getting charged, SSN now saying he wont be facing any punishment.

All good strikers have that little edge but Costa goes too far, two stamps in the one match is just thuggish.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Hangball Doughboy wrote: »

It's hypocritical of Liverpool fans to have a go at Costa and the way he plays, yet the majority defended Luis and his behaviour. Does he deserve a ban? Yes. Of course he does. But it is what managers/fans/clubs must put up with as he adds so much to a team when on the pitch. Players of that ilk will miss 6-7 games a season with bans but if you try to take that snideyness from their game, they lose a lot of what makes them the player they are.

I almost got a 3 month ban because of how I worded it last night, but I'd absolutely love Costa at our club.

Never defended him. We know Suarez is rough, and a bit dirty, we know he's going to do things and get banned and he's going to deserve to get banned.

I just want consistancy. If Suarez does it? Gets a ban - everyone calls for a life sentence!

Someone else does it? Nothing, maybe a yellow card - everyone says 'meh - it's a contact sport'.

Gbear

How bloody hard can it be to spot open and shut offences like the 2 last night, Suarez' stamp on Mirallas, Aguero jumping down Luiz' arse and a litany of others.

If the ref doesn't see it, just get one to bloody look at it afterwards and go from there.

Are they just too ****ing lazy? Surely they earn enough to actually do their ****ing jobs?

Every time there's a blatant example of violent conduct like this it seems like a roll of the dice.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Gbear wrote: »

How bloody hard can it be to spot open and shut offences like the 2 last night, Suarez' stamp on Mirallas, Aguero jumping down Luiz' arse and a litany of others.

If the ref doesn't see it, just get one to bloody look at it afterwards and go from there.

Are they just too ****ing lazy? Surely they earn enough to actually do their ****ing jobs?

Every time there's a blatant example of violent conduct like this it seems like a roll of the dice.

Delibearelty stamping on an opponent? One or two game ban. Regardless of that the referee does.

Do it a second time within 6 months? 5 games.

If players know that even if they get away with it on the pitch, they'll be missing the next few games, you'll see it dropped.

not yet

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Pushing every edge; being physically tough and competitive; mentally owning your opponents; and having the quality to put them to the sword - yes, that's how the game should be played

Yeah..if it's MMA.

Turtyturd

I take it Markovic got away with the clothesline?

Pyjamarama

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Pushing every edge; being physically tough and competitive; mentally owning your opponents; and having the quality to put them to the sword - yes, that's how the game should be played

This post is just more proof that you still think this is the 1980's... football is about playing football. Not stamping on people. Messi doesn't need to stamp on people is he playing it wrong?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Hangball Doughboy wrote: »

It's hypocritical of Liverpool fans to have a go at Costa and the way he plays, yet the majority defended Luis and his behaviour.

I'll want proof of that. Got what he dereved for the biting.

I'd like him at our club too, but I'd still have no problem with him being banned if he did that in a Livwrpool shirt.

LuckyLloyd

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Pushing every edge; being physically tough and competitive; mentally owning your opponents; and having the quality to put them to the sword - yes, that's how the game should be played

I'd love if we had him.

rob316

Its cowardly stamping on someone on the ground.
Aggression is fine been a thug isn't.

17 league goals in 19 games powering his club to the title.

Wouldn't bother me if he did the odd horrible act.