Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Go fuck yourselves FSG


Neil G
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, stringvest said:

Jurgen can do what he wants - he's not going to starve if he objected so strongly to the way that the club is operating that he felt he had to leave.  

I just think that to look at this in simplistic terms is, well, simplistic.  The club finances involve rather more than buying and selling players.  Unless you're privy to the books, you're either speculating or you're taking the Ladybird approach to finances.  I certainly don't have any knowledge of the finances of the club, so while I'd love us to be spending on strengthening from a position of strength, Jurgen may understand why that may on balance not be desirable or even possible.

No he doesn't do what he wants he is an employee. His bosses are in the States.

 

We have a massive fanbase and global reach, we've earned more money than ever the last few years and we have consistently been in the CL for the last few years. We should be able to spend 30-50 fucking million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Just to be clear, are you suggesting the owners have syphoned money out of Liverpool so the red socks can pay this £140m and that Jurgen is complicit in deceiving the fans?

 

 

As I've just said, they probably rotate between the two. maybe next summer liverpool get some spending money and the Sox don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

Why do you always ignore the big sales we made? Is it because it doesn't fit your narrative? Whether they wanted to leave or not they were sold. Henry is on record for saying VVD and Alisson would not have been bought but for Coutinho leaving. 

 

You bang on about high fees, well it goes both ways because they bought suarez for 22 million and sold him for 80. They bought Coutinho for 8 million and sold him for 147!

 

Stop defending a bunch of US businessmen.

FSG refused Torres transfer until he publically made clear he no longer wanted to play for the club by handing in a transfer request. How's that my 'narrative'? It is established fact.

 

Even dalglish accepted he didnt want to play for him. Can you eluccidate if you had a player who'd made their stance clear, you'd keep them and not sell unlike just about every other manager's stance?

 

Same with coutinho but at least he had the good grace to at least keep playing on the pitch while maintaining he wanted to leave. Where's the 'narrative' to support your assertion these players were sold purely to finance other purchases? If the money was used for better players, why are you against the sales when it clearly has improved the team?

 

You mention both Suarez (yet another player who no longer wanted to play for the club) and Countinho's purchase and sale fees. Are you pissed off that the club made big profits on both and bought numerous players with the proceeds? Would you have preferred we sold them for the same fee we paid for them?

 

Why, exactly, should I stop 'defending' a bunch of US businessmen? I'll continue to comment on mistakes and poor decisions the owners make relative to the on and off field performance of the club. Selling players who want to leave isnt erroneous. I'' withold my backing of them them when they make the club uncompetitive with indiscriminate sales, sacking the manager and backroom staff to save money etc not because they've made the club self sufficient, well organise and run.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

Who knows? We are not privy to the details. What they probably do is rotate between the needs f the two teams. They recently signed a few players on whopping contracts.

And the audited club accounts? Is Swiss Rambler in on the conspiracy as well?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dockers_strike said:

FSG refused Torres transfer until he publically made clear he no longer wanted to play for the club by handing in a transfer request. How's that my 'narrative'? It is established fact.

 

Even dalglish accepted he didnt want to play for him. Can you eluccidate if you had a player who'd made their stance clear, you'd keep them and not sell unlike just about every other manager's stance?

 

Same with coutinho but at least he had the good grace to at least keep playing on the pitch while maintaining he wanted to leave. Where's the 'narrative' to support your assertion these players were sold purely to finance other purchases? If the money was used for better players, why are you against the sales when it clearly has improved the team?

 

You mention both Suarez (yet another player who no longer wanted to play for the club) and Countinho's purchase and sale fees. Are you pissed off that the club made big profits on both and bought numerous players with the proceeds? Would you have preferred we sold them for the same fee we paid for them?

 

Why, exactly, should I stop 'defending' a bunch of US businessmen? I'll continue to comment on mistakes and poor decisions the owners make relative to the on and off field performance of the club. Selling players who want to leave isnt erroneous. I'' withold my backing of them them when they make the club uncompetitive with indiscriminate sales, sacking the manager and backroom staff to save money etc not because they've made the club self sufficient, well organise and run.

It doesn't bloody matter!!!!!

 

They funded sales. We would not have signed Suarez and Carroll without selling Torres first. We would not have squandered the Saurez cash had we not sold him. Same with Coutinho. I don't give two fucks if they wanted to leave or not thats not the issue. You are absolving them of responsibility because players wanted out.

 

Ask yourself would we have bought had those players remained? Probably not, although with the FSG model they would probably be looking to get shut in the 29-30 range anyway.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the hyperbole comes out when people so much as question FSG's ambition.

"FSG Out brigade", "suggestion of syphoning money from the club" when these things are barely uttered on TLW.  What gives? 

Do we have defenders of all things USA on here who can't stand any criticism? Or just hysterical fannies?  Or people who can't differentiate TLW from the Twitter mob?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Moo said:

I see the hyperbole comes out when people so much as question FSG's ambition.

"FSG Out brigade", "suggestion of syphoning money from the club" when these things are barely uttered on TLW.  What gives? 

Do we have defenders of all things USA on here who can't stand any criticism? Or just hysterical fannies?  Or people who can't differentiate TLW from the Twitter mob?

 

Come on. How come you dont and never make that very same connection when a poster has said the owners have spent 140m on the red socks in a post he's claiming the club do not have money to spend because we havent sold anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

FFS are you deliberately being a nob? No one is suggesting they are leeching the cash (apart from twitter nobheads) what we are asking is why we are skint.

We arent 'skint' as you put it. But clearly if you think it is ok to continue spend hundreds of millions of pounds when the club has had severly restricted income since the last home game with a crowd and, still no sign when fans will be allowed in stadiums, knock yourself out.

 

It's called budgeting. Why are virtually all clubs doing the same thing? Oh, except city of course, who've announced via their media hacks they are looking to spend 150m they found down the back of the sofa. In fact, seeing as they got off with the charge, they dont even have to pretend where the 150m is coming from any more. Nobs? Sheeesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Correction.

 

We signed Suarez with the aim of playing him alongside Torres.

 

Carroll was a panic buy because Moody Chops fucked off.

I don't think we could afford Suarez at the time which is why it took so long to get the deal over the line, it wasn't until Torres was definitely leaving that we stumped up the cash.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

Even some italian teams have more money than us. They normally can't afford squat and just loan everyone.

Oh FFS, give yer head a wobble. At one time or another during their time as manager here, Shankly was told the club didnt have the spare money and he had to sell to buy and keep the club mainly out of debt, Bob was told the same, so was Kenny and so was Souness. Ive no doubt the same was said to Houllier, Benitez and even Jurgen etc. Not all the time, but some times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

We arent 'skint' as you put it. But clearly if you think it is ok to continue spend hundreds of millions of pounds when the club has had severly restricted income since the last home game with a crowd and, still no sign when fans will be allowed in stadiums, knock yourself out.

 

It's called budgeting. Why are virtually all clubs doing the same thing? Oh, except city of course, who've announced via their media hacks they are looking to spend 150m they found down the back of the sofa. In fact, seeing as they got off with the charge, they dont even have to pretend where the 150m is coming from any more. Nobs? Sheeesh.

We will see. Cant imagine no teams will buy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Oh FFS, give yer head a wobble. At one time or another during their time as manager here, Shankly was told the club didnt have the spare money and he had to sell to buy and keep the club mainly out of debt, Bob was told the same, so was Kenny and so was Souness. Ive no doubt the same was said to Houllier, Benitez and even Jurgen etc. Not all the time, but some times.

Oh really? I seem to remember us purchasing year on year even when we were consistently brilliant. Keeping the team on its toes and that was when you only had one sub!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

Oh really? I seem to remember us purchasing year on year even when we were consistently brilliant. Keeping the team on its toes and that was when you only had one sub!

Yes, really. Did I say the club never spent on players? I said at times during those manager's spell we didnt go overly into debt to buy. In other words, the club kept to a budget. Kenny wanted to buy Gascoigne for just over £3m before he went to Spurs. But he was told by John Smith \ Peter Robinson the club had no money to pay the fee and didnt intend going in the red with the bank to sign him.

 

We actually sold Rush to Juve and bought Barnes, Aldo and Beardsley Oh, who were the owners then, I dont think it was FSG? Why hadnt we bought them before Rush was sold, we all knew he was leaving upto 12 months before he went?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Yes, really. Did I say the club never spent on players? I said at times during those manager's spell we didnt go overly into debt to buy. In other words, the club kept to a budget. Kenny wanted to buy Gascoigne for just over £3m before he went to Spurs. But he was told by John Smith \ Peter Robinson the club had no money to pay the fee and didnt intend going in the red with the bank to sign him.

 

We actually sold Rush to Juve and bought Barnes, Aldo and Beardsley Oh, who were the owners then, I dont think it was FSG? Why hadnt we bought them before Rush was sold, we all knew he was leaving upto 12 months before he went?

We bought Aldridge mate first whilst Rushy was here. We already had Walsh and Kenny up top who was at the end of his career. We then went out and bought another three attacking players on top. we didn't have to do that but we did to keep things fresh and competitive. We already had Molby, Whelan and McMahon for centre mid and went out and bought Spackman. And this was the days of one sub. The squad was regularly kept topped up we didn't sell first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, SlugTrail said:

I don't think we could afford Suarez at the time which is why it took so long to get the deal over the line, it wasn't until Torres was definitely leaving that we stumped up the cash.

We always took forever to wrap up deals thanks to the guys handling negotiations at that time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

Come on. How come you dont and never make that very same connection when a poster has said the owners have spent 140m on the red socks in a post he's claiming the club do not have money to spend because we havent sold anyone?

And the FSG Out Brigade? 

It's the language and exaggeration to any, valid, questioning of FSG's ambition.

Why shouldn't they be questioned?  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...