Mohamed Salah

[Reckoner]

So do we love him to bits or despise him? I can’t keep up.

[VladimirIlyich]

6 hours ago, JohnnyH said:

I too am furious with Salah for this possible transfer we’ve all just made up in our heads. 

You think he's signing a contract?

[JohnnyH]

1 minute ago, VladimirIlyich said:

You think he's signing a contract?

I’ve no idea. Probably not. And I’m ok with that. He’s been superb for us, if he wants to go then fine. But I’m certainly not going to start getting pissed off with him because a few people on the internet have decided he might sign for Man City. 

[VladimirIlyich]

1 minute ago, JohnnyH said:

I’ve no idea. Probably not. And I’m ok with that. He’s been superb for us, if he wants to go then fine. But I’m certainly not going to start getting pissed off with him because a few people on the internet have decided he might sign for Man City. 

Me neither. I thought you were convinced he was signing a contract soon. Just another top footballer getting as much as they can,financially, from the sport nowadays. It seems strange the way FSG seem happy to let valuable footballers contracts run out without cashing in on them though. That is part of their business model I am unable to understand.

[Barrington Womble]

7 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Me neither. I thought you were convinced he was signing a contract soon. Just another top footballer getting as much as they can,financially, from the sport nowadays. It seems strange the way FSG seem happy to let valuable footballers contracts run out without cashing in on them though. That is part of their business model I am unable to understand.

We've not let too many valuable ones go for nothing. There was Can and Gini - I think others were pretty valueless. Both Gini and can would have maybe been worth what, 20m at the time on an open market? You've then got the cost of replacing them, plus any agent fees to facilitate both moves 2 years ahead of when you need. Then the added risk of the change. And of course if you did that all the time, you would have greater turnover of players across the squad and if you renewed above your desired wages, you'd have wages going up across the squad more quickly. I would think Salah is the first one where it's hard to see how the numbers add up to let him go for free as he's so valuable. And I'd argue we probably expected him to agitate for a move to Spain before now and sold him.... Although of course @m0e will tell me I'm wrong! 

 

I think to work it through properly you'd need to sit down and really work on the numbers and I have to say, I can't be fucked with that. We need a numbers man. Where's @woolster when you need him?

[Bjornebye]

32 minutes ago, Reckoner said:

So do we love him to bits or despise him? I can’t keep up.

We love the judas prick 

[Fugitive]

My take on it is that if Salah stays, I will love him.

 

If he leaves on a free next year, I will still love him.

 

Him and Mane have given me my best memories as a red and both of them will be legends forever. 

[VladimirIlyich]

47 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

We've not let too many valuable ones go for nothing. There was Can and Gini - I think others were pretty valueless. Both Gini and can would have maybe been worth what, 20m at the time on an open market? You've then got the cost of replacing them, plus any agent fees to facilitate both moves 2 years ahead of when you need. Then the added risk of the change. And of course if you did that all the time, you would have greater turnover of players across the squad and if you renewed above your desired wages, you'd have wages going up across the squad more quickly. I would think Salah is the first one where it's hard to see how the numbers add up to let him go for free as he's so valuable. And I'd argue we probably expected him to agitate for a move to Spain before now and sold him.... Although of course @m0e will tell me I'm wrong! 

 

I think to work it through properly you'd need to sit down and really work on the numbers and I have to say, I can't be fucked with that. We need a numbers man. Where's @woolster when you need him?

20 million each is a fair whack. Klopp would probably not even replace them and they'd have added 20 million to the coffers at different stages. Salah would be a whole new level if they allowed it to happen though.

[Barrington Womble]

2 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

20 million each is a fair whack. Klopp would probably not even replace them and they'd have added 20 million to the coffers at different stages. Salah would be a whole new level if they allowed it to happen though.

We did replace Can, but I would guess klopp was still figuring him out when it was 2 years to go. Gini was a weird one, but clearly we weren't going to pay him the psg money. And perhaps he knew that payday was coming 2 years out and just sat tight. We can't force players to move. And I would argue we are still trying to replace Gini - at least in terms of a consistent performer who's always available. We don't have 1 midfielder like that. 

[JohnnyH]

13 hours ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Me neither. I thought you were convinced he was signing a contract soon. Just another top footballer getting as much as they can,financially, from the sport nowadays. It seems strange the way FSG seem happy to let valuable footballers contracts run out without cashing in on them though. That is part of their business model I am unable to understand.

He's certainly looking at players at his level and lesser players getting paid £400-£500k a week and questioning why he isn't getting that.  And I think that's a perfectly fair question for him to ask.  He sees our billionaire owners and thinks they can afford to pay what he wants.  So his people will push and push for as much as possible.  And if he doesn't get what he wants or a compromise he's happy with, then he gets to agree contracts as a free agent and will get even more money, and his choice of clubs, in 6 months time.

 

I've said before that if you're a top player and are not playing for the club you supported as a kid, then you should move around.  I think Mane is 100% right to move on to Bayern and win some stuff there.  I think Haalands contract policy of having a fee he can leave for after 2 years is desigfned to do exactly that and will see him line out for Barca or Real within in the next 4 years.

 

Salah on a free will have Madrid, Barca, Bayern, and Juve, to name a few, willing to offer him a €50m signing on fee and €400k a week because they can as he's a free agent.  That's not money grabbing,  That's moving to top teams in top leagues and winning top trophies. The money is a bonus.  Even going to City would still mean he is challenging for, and no doubt winning, top trophies (as much as it would piss me off).  PSG would be the only one where I'd look and question his motives as solely financial, and I don't think he'd go there anyway, unless his form fell off a cliff and they were the only ones offering.

 

Anyway, I don't think he's definitely gone.  I think the Diaz and Nunez signings make it more likely he'll sign if they click.

 

Liverpool is now a final destination for footballs seeking to challenge for the top trophies, as opposed to a stepping stone.  But so are Real Madrid, and Bayern, and possibly Juve and Barca soon.  We have to switch off our Liverpool bias and accept that.

[Carra_is_legend]

Its just not possible to switch off Liverpool bias and accept him going to City (if he does). Some fans might accept it sooner than others but majority will dislike it. That is how it is and Salah will know that too so the choice is his.

[VladimirIlyich]

30 minutes ago, JohnnyH said:

He's certainly looking at players at his level and lesser players getting paid £400-£500k a week and questioning why he isn't getting that.  And I think that's a perfectly fair question for him to ask.  He sees our billionaire owners and thinks they can afford to pay what he wants.  So his people will push and push for as much as possible.  And if he doesn't get what he wants or a compromise he's happy with, then he gets to agree contracts as a free agent and will get even more money, and his choice of clubs, in 6 months time.

 

I've said before that if you're a top player and are not playing for the club you supported as a kid, then you should move around.  I think Mane is 100% right to move on to Bayern and win some stuff there.  I think Haalands contract policy of having a fee he can leave for after 2 years is desigfned to do exactly that and will see him line out for Barca or Real within in the next 4 years.

 

Salah on a free will have Madrid, Barca, Bayern, and Juve, to name a few, willing to offer him a €50m signing on fee and €400k a week because they can as he's a free agent.  That's not money grabbing,  That's moving to top teams in top leagues and winning top trophies. The money is a bonus.  Even going to City would still mean he is challenging for, and no doubt winning, top trophies (as much as it would piss me off).  PSG would be the only one where I'd look and question his motives as solely financial, and I don't think he'd go there anyway, unless his form fell off a cliff and they were the only ones offering.

 

Anyway, I don't think he's definitely gone.  I think the Diaz and Nunez signings make it more likely he'll sign if they click.

 

Liverpool is now a final destination for footballs seeking to challenge for the top trophies, as opposed to a stepping stone.  But so are Real Madrid, and Bayern, and possibly Juve and Barca soon.  We have to switch off our Liverpool bias and accept that.

Surely a footballer knows that billionaire owners don't generally use their own money to become and stay billionaires,or their advisors at least? (Sportswashing clubs aside.)

[VladimirIlyich]

2 minutes ago, Carra_is_legend said:

Its just not possible to switch off Liverpool bias and accept him going to City (if he does). Some fans might accept it sooner than others but majority will dislike it. That is how it is and Salah will know that too so the choice is his.

I'd certainly have no problem if it was the City of 15-20 years ago!

[TD_LFC]

Would City sign him, I could see Newcastle going for him as they'd have had three or four windows building a good foundation and looking to add a bit of prestige to it, can't see City though.

[Total Longo]

1 minute ago, TD_LFC said:

Would City sign him?

They are a club that can risk near enough any transfer without it biting them, so, yes. Given they were after Messi last year, i think Salah wouldn't be beyond the realms of impossibility.

[TD_LFC]

1 minute ago, Total Longo said:

They are a club that can risk near enough any transfer without it biting them, so, yes. Given they were after Messi last year, i think Salah wouldn't be beyond the realms of impossibility.

With all due respect to Salah, he's not Messi or Ronaldo.

 

 

 

[Total Longo]

2 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

With all due respect to Salah, he's not Messi or Ronaldo.

 

 

 

That was kind of the point i was trying to make...

[VladimirIlyich]

1 minute ago, TD_LFC said:

With all due respect to Salah, he's not Messi or Ronaldo.

 

 

 

I'd disagree. Probably not in football ability but off the pitch marketability and sponsorship he is in their league.

[Captain Turdseye]

14 hours ago, JohnnyH said:

I’ve no idea. Probably not. And I’m ok with that. He’s been superb for us, if he wants to go then fine. But I’m certainly not going to start getting pissed off with him because a few people on the internet have decided he might sign for Man City. 

Playing devil’s advocate here, but it was Salah and his people who put it out there that he’d be happy to sign for another English club. 

[Butch]

I'd have rather seen mo go than Sadio. Mo's form since returning from afcon hasn't been good at all and I think it's cheeky asking for double his wages. There is no way Sadio should have been on half of what mo has been getting. While He's workmate is unquestionabe the end product is mostly disappointing now 

Every team knows how to nullify Mo's threat to good effect by having two players on him and another waiting behind them then the keeper,it doesn't work any more. 

[VladimirIlyich]

What I would say about Klopp's previous brilliance at Dortmund was that I believe the Lewandowski transfer ultimately killed their ability to compete with Bayern to win the league. I'd like Salah's departure not to be that English equivalent.

[Barrington Womble]

44 minutes ago, Carra_is_legend said:

Its just not possible to switch off Liverpool bias and accept him going to City (if he does). Some fans might accept it sooner than others but majority will dislike it. That is how it is and Salah will know that too so the choice is his.

We should never turn off our emotions in football, it's part of what keeps us coming back. If I try to think of anyone I like outside of Liverpool there are very few and that is because of that bias. But I think in this age you have to attach your emotions to the club and not the players. Do I want to see Salah playing at city? No of course not, but I have to accept if we are a club that won't pay the top wages, we're always going to lose our best players and the reality is there's 4 clubs in this country with greater spending power than our own. So if a player is driven exclusively by money and not so much the challenge of playing somewhere new, this is going to happen. I just think it gives me someone to shake off their game by giving them a bad time when we play city, like we have with sterling for years. 

[Megadrive Man]

1 hour ago, TD_LFC said:

Would City sign him, I could see Newcastle going for him as they'd have had three or four windows building a good foundation and looking to add a bit of prestige to it, can't see City though.

It would be a major coup for them to sign the top goal scorer of their nearest title rivals, so of course they would sign him on a free transfer. It's a no lose situation for them!

 

From Salah's point of view, as it stands Guardiola is going to leave next summer, so it might not be the best time to move to City. 

[JohnnyH]

1 hour ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Playing devil’s advocate here, but it was Salah and his people who put it out there that he’d be happy to sign for another English club. 

Yep, it was probably with his blessing that this was leaked.  But that's more than likely just the usual negotiation tactics. Or it may be true, but in his own mind he won't go to a rival.  Who knows.   It certainly doesn't mean he's signing for City, which was the point of my original post about people getting hot and bothered about a move created in this thread.

 

1 hour ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Surely a footballer knows that billionaire owners don't generally use their own money to become and stay billionaires,or their advisors at least? (Sportswashing clubs aside.)

Yes, it was just a general add on to the point that he sees players at his level and not as good as him getting paid much more than him and he wants to be paid the same.

[Supremolad]

1 hour ago, Butch said:

I'd have rather seen mo go than Sadio. Mo's form since returning from afcon hasn't been good at all and I think it's cheeky asking for double his wages. There is no way Sadio should have been on half of what mo has been getting. While He's workmate is unquestionabe the end product is mostly disappointing now 

Every team knows how to nullify Mo's threat to good effect by having two players on him and another waiting behind them then the keeper,it doesn't work any more. 

Wow, interesting. Every team knows they essentially need to put 3 players on Salah with a keeper behind?  Seems it has only taken them 5 years to work out a way to nullify him and he still ended the season as golden boot winner and multiple player of the year awards. That's some top notch nullifying.

 

And regarding his form after the AFCON, seems the logical reason is he lost a bit of physical and mental sharpness after playing 120 mins SIX times in a space of a few weeks with a couple intense penalty shootouts to boot. But hey, why go for logical reason when other avenues are available? All fine by me.