Suarez: Sell or Keep?

[Section_31]

Wilshire, Walcott, £50 million and some Skittles.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

Wilshire, Walcott, £50 million and some Skittles.

 

Crazy Sours though, otherwise they can fuck off.

[Guest San Don]

If arsenal take a beating Wednesday their fans will be in total meltdown,then rodgers and the club should act smart and call arsenals and suarezs bluff.

 

Make it public that wenger can have suarez for 70mil plus a pound, take it or leave it and sit back and watch the media frenzy.Suarez wouldnt fancy going because of not being guaranteed champs league, and wenger would shit himself under the pressure of spending so much money. Put em both in their place.

 

Will make us look classless and for what, a bit of bravado?

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

If arsenal take a beating Wednesday their fans will be in total meltdown,then rodgers and the club should act smart and call arsenals and suarezs bluff.

 

Make it public that wenger can have suarez for 70mil plus a pound, take it or leave it and sit back and watch the media frenzy.Suarez wouldnt fancy going because of not being guaranteed champs league, and wenger would shit himself under the pressure of spending so much money. Put em both in their place.

The defeat to Villa has certainly put pressure onto not only Wenger but the board as well. Wenger dosent like spending big on players and he wears that point like a badge of honour. It is also why the board love him so much , because he hardly spends and makes them great money , and gets into the champions league every year.

I think they have to act quick and pay over the odds to get a top class player in. If they lose on Wednesday and then the return leg it will be hard for the board to fight off the crowds call for Wengers head.

[Paco]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/aug/23/brendan-rodgers-liverpool-philippe-coutinho[/url]

 

Where is suarez playing if coutinho is 10?

[BCM]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/aug/23/brendan-rodgers-liverpool-philippe-coutinho[/url]

 

Where is suarez playing if coutinho is 10?

 

Suarez will be off before sept 2nd

[johnsmith79lfc]

Sell absolutely sell.

 

He needs to be gone solely for the way he has acted and disrecpected the club, fans, shirt and everything our club stands for.

We need the money and if it was spent wisely we could have £80-90m (including current funds) to spend on players.

Yes we've had issues attracting players to our club but perhaps we'll continue our great run of January window extravaganzas.

 

I would happily take a player plus cash swap from RM too but needs to be very soon, not last day...and also who in their team would come, that's the other issue.

 

Yes Suarez is an incredible player but he went too far this summer and he will probably do more crazy shit and get another ban, we need to sell at anywhere around £60m and let him be someone else's problem.

[Megadrive Man]

Rodgers keeps going on about this number ten role, yet ideally we play with three midfielders, a striker and two wide forwards.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Sell absolutely sell.

 

He needs to be gone solely for the way he has acted and disrecpected the club, fans, shirt and everything our club stands for.

We need the money and if it was spent wisely we could have £80-90m (including current funds) to spend on players.

Yes we've had issues attracting players to our club but perhaps we'll continue our great run of January window extravaganzas.

 

I would happily take a player plus cash swap from RM too but needs to be very soon, not last day...and also who in their team would come, that's the other issue.

 

Yes Suarez is an incredible player but he went too far this summer and he will probably do more crazy shit and get another ban, we need to sell at anywhere around £60m and let him be someone else's problem.

You're saying that we need to sell, we need to get a good price and we need to reinvest wisely.

 

Only the first of those three is possible before 2nd September - so it would be (as the man said) "ludicrous" to sell him.

 

True, he has acted like a cunt this summer, but I don't hold his bans against him. The Ivanovic bite was worthy of 3 or 4 games, maximum. It was stupid and pointless, but not serious. The Evra bullshit was worthy on zero games, because the one thing Suarez actually said was (in the opinion of the FA's language experts) not insulting or offensive. The one-game ban for flipping the bird at the Fulham fans never would have happened if the FA and the media hadn't branded him racist in the first place.

 

I still believe he could be a tremendous player for us again this season.

[moof]

Rodgers keeps going on about this number ten role' date=' yet ideally we play with three midfielders, a striker and two wide forwards.[/quote']

 

No, I think IDEALLY he wants to sign another class forward so he can play Coutinho at 10. He preferred 4-2-3-1 at Swansea and I think that's what he's trying to do here.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

There's not really much difference between 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1. I prefer the latter because I feel having two DM - one destroyer, one playmaker - offers better balance. It does require mobility from the destroyer, though.

[waddy78]

Alan Hansen has just said on match of the day, he's of the understanding that Suarez is about to sign a new contract at Liverpool in the coming few days ? Anyone else seen or herd anything about this ?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Alan Hansen has just said on match of the day, he's of the understanding that Suarez is about to sign a new contract at Liverpool in the coming few days ? Anyone else seen or herd anything about this ?

I've heard rumours from the usual rumour mills. If the club rewards his cuntishness (as the Mancs did with Rooney last time he chucked his toys) I'd be really disappointed.

[Saintslfc13]

Alan Hansen has just said on match of the day, he's of the understanding that Suarez is about to sign a new contract at Liverpool in the coming few days ? Anyone else seen or herd anything about this ?

 

Was rumoured a few weeks ago by that Uruguayan journo wasn't it?

 

Haven't seen anything since other than what you've just said.

[Anubis]

Rumoured to be a new contract that rewards a top four finish and has a proper buy out clause for foreign teams.

[Barney_Rubble]

Rumoured to be a new contract that rewards a top four finish and has a proper buy out clause for foreign teams.

If true, I hope someone tells Ayre to make this buy out clause dependent on Suarez not biting opponents, not opening his gob or otherwise shitting on us as a club from a great height as was the case up until now.

 

The little rat tasted Serbian meat in the hope that we'll do Ajax and cave in, so I expect our MD to be smart enough and wise enough to prevent a repeat, otherwise I am certain that come April-May next year (or even this coming January, if desperate enough) Suarez will either start sulking or do something stupid and get himself banned again, then brief some no-mark journo in Uruguay how the press here are hounding him.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Barney_Rubble
stupid predictive text

[xerxes]

Alan Hansen has just said on match of the day, he's of the understanding that Suarez is about to sign a new contract at Liverpool in the coming few days ? Anyone else seen or heard anything about this ?

 

If true it would be disgraceful.

 

We are already paying him for the period of a ban which was self-inflicted.

[Heinze]

Settle.

 

It's probably just a contract that includes a proper buyout clause.

 

What would be the minimum consdering what Bale went for?

[xerxes]

Settle.

 

It's probably just a contract that includes a proper buyout clause.

 

What would be the minimum consdering what Bale went for?

 

His existing contract already has one.

 

What would be the point in making it easier for him to leave?

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

It doesn't have a 'proper' buyout clause. If we get him to sign a new contract, with a non-CL clause of, say, 55m, that'll be better for us.

[Sangria]

It doesn't have a 'proper' buyout clause. If we get him to sign a new contract, with a non-CL clause of, say, 55m, that'll be better for us.

 

Correct.

[xerxes]

It doesn't have a 'proper' buyout clause. If we get him to sign a new contract, with a non-CL clause of, say, 55m, that'll be better for us.

 

But not for him, why sign?

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

 

But not for him' date=' why sign?[/quote']

 

Assuring he can leave for a set price should we miss out, plus a pay rise.

[Major Tom]

But not for him, why sign?

 

Because, theoretically, we could keep him for 3 more years.

[Moo]

I think xerxes is trying to imply his current contract has a lower buyout clause than if he signed a new one, i.e .the not better "for him, why sign?" comment.

I'm not sure why he's implying this, if indeed he is, with all that's transpired recently.