Denny Crane

Do you think you could take both J-V and Jairzinho, big call.

Careful TheFridge and BCM they will be calling you Code at this rate. They tend to do it when they have been found out talking poo. An example being Boss earlier, and his we could not get anyone better than Rodgers spiel.

Evidence of Rodgers not being able to balance Europe and the league see below. Souness back in 92-93 and for the 2nd time Rodgers, in both seasons we finished no higher than 6th, not a good omen. Only twice have Liverpool had fewer points at this stage of a Premier League season before (1992-93 and 2012-13)

Lot of assumptions there Boss. Maybe the reason Klopp talks about Arsenal is he keeps getting drawn in the same Champions League group, 3rd time now I think. You talk about the Liverpool job, like it has the kudos of managing Everton, you have well been well and truly Hodged. Who would not be tempted to try and win Liverpool first league title in a generation?. Like winning Real Madrid's number 10, a chance to go down in history. I struggle to believe we could not attract a much more proven manager than the one we have at the moment, should circumstances dictate. I respect you defending the manager, but not with this defence of we can't attract better, that is utter shite.

With transfer stuff it is always hard to pick what really goes on, so it is always open to interpretation. Like most fans, I am very cautious and cynical of American owners, but their overall spend and them backing managers on the face of it, seems very strong in their favour. There is something unexplainable going on but I am starting to think it has less to do with money. As for wages and what they pay, this all stems from their first window. But when you look back on it, can anyone really blame the club for bombing the pisshead Carroll and Stuart no heart Downing out the club. Can anyone really blame them, for not wanting to pay whatever wages and fee Fulham wanted for dempsey. Is the real reason Reina and Agger were booted out, not to do with wages but due to Rodgers not liking their views on defending and his relationship with the players. Let's be honest, they probably know more about defending than Rodgers has shown in his time here. If wages was such a big issue, why did Glen Johnson not get booted out?. Suarez earned 200k and Gerrard as the captain and longtime servant rightly gets rewarded. They are offering Sterling a good whack, that will make him pretty close to Luke shaw in being the highest paid teenager in world football. I am unsure what goes on with wages, but I do not think it is clear as some make out. If you add up the wages Balotelli and Lambert/Borini get or Allen and Lucas you could bid on most midfielders or strikers out there. Moaning about wages seems to be the new netspend. Maybe there is some validity in it, but it seems very dubious. As for age of players, maybe they told Rodgers he could have a certain amount of players over 24, he chose the Southampton lads. Bottom line is if we spent our money better I doubt people would be pontificating on what wages we pay. I also think Rodgers has very little pulling power to attract the top players outside of Britain.

A few in the know have suggested we offered more wages than Arsenal for Sanchez, same last summer with Costa. I certainly believe it with Arsenal, as Wenger is a tightarse who does not pay City or Chelsea wages. Maybe the players were happy playing for proven winners in Wenger and Simeone.

Floating voter but a man who will never vote BBB due to differing philosophies.

11.36 today to be precise.

Xabi is boss, good read that.

Needs a campaign name, how about in honour of it's founding father Boss. The Boss KRAP campaign, Keep Rodgers at Pool. Not forgetting, ART the splinter group, now rebranded as the Anti-Rodgers Taliban and the BBB, Bring Benitez Back.

The bad news is Parry has been appointed to be in charge of any potential sweeping review.

Tony Barrett Last updated at 11:19AM, November 21 2014 the game blog For more than twenty years, the scenario has been the same. As soon as Liverpool encounter problems, they look to the transfer market for a solution only to end up creating new ones. If the definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, an army of psychiatrists should head to Anfield in January for football’s bi-annual outbreak of lunacy. Having spent £120 million on players in the summer but turned the second best team in the country into the kind of uninspiring mid-table fodder that they were sweeping aside with contemptuous ease last season, Liverpool have conspired to put themselves in a position in which new signings are seen as the panacea to all their ills. Demands for further spending are inevitable given what is at stake but they also fly in the face of prevailing logic. The last thing Liverpool should do in six weeks time is get involved in the January sales. At some point, someone at the club has to call a halt to one of the most ill-advised sprees since pools winner Viv Nicholson famously vowed to “Spend, spend, spend” and order an audit of all of the signings that Liverpool have made since Brendan Rodgers. The review should begin with an appraisal of every recruit and their impact on the team but it should not stop there. Before Liverpool shell out another penny, their entire transfer strategy and its implementation by committee needs to be assessed because the risks of allowing the current situation are far too great. The best that can be said of the nine signings that Liverpool made last summer is that it is still to early to judge them,, even if the early signs are not positive. Equally, it is damning that only Alberto Moreno could be regarded as a qualified success. The argument that the others will improve in time is all well and good but Liverpool cannot claim that they were not expecting an encouraging impact from at least some of them. Nor can they hide behind transition given that other clubs, Southampton being the most obvious example, are flourishing despite profound change. By common consensus, out of the 23 signings that Liverpool have made over the last two and a half years, only two – Daniel Sturridge and Philippe Coutinho – have been a resounding success. Given Sturridge is now a long- term absentee as a result of the injuries that have blighted him throughout his career and Coutinho is, like most at Liverpool, becoming an increasingly fitful and less effective presence without Luis Suárez, even their success stories are not without drawbacks. It is an appalling record. Clearly, something is not working. Depending on personal choice, responsibility for Liverpool’s failings in the transfer market lies at the feet of either Rodgers, the club’s scouts or the committee. But if there are any fingers to be pointed, they should first be aimed in the direction of the club’s owners, Fenway Sports Group (FSG) who not only determined Liverpool’s transfer strategy, they also put in place the young, up-and-coming manager, committee and scouting system that they wanted. If FSG are given credit for signing the cheques, as they should be, then they should also be questioned if the structure they implemented fails to provide value for money. The complex, almost clandestine, nature of how Liverpool go about their transfer business makes it almost impossible to assign each signing to either the manager or the committee, even if the setup that isn’t as great a departure from the traditional model as some would have us believe. The reality is that, as Rodgers himself freely admits, with the possible exception of Oussama Assiadi, not a single player has been signed against his wishes. He might have had to have his arm twisted on a few, Sturridge, Mario Balotelli and Mamadou Sakho being the most obvious examples, but, one way or another, they have all arrived with his blessing. Many questions remain unanswered . What exactly does Rodgers have the final say on? How much choice does Liverpool’s strict wages policy afford him and his scouting team who are competing for talent with some of the highest payers in world football? If, as Rodgers has claimed, the “calculated gamble” on Balotelli was forced by a lack of options, what does that say about Liverpool’s strategy? Why, when Suárez signed a contract that guaranteed his departure if a club met his release clause, did their list of attacking options have a Plan A in Alexis Sanchez with the only Plan B being Loïc Remy, a player with historic and well documented medical issues, and little else? You could go on and on. All of these issues would not be such a mounting concern if so many of the first-choice signings that Liverpool have made have not been so counterintuitive. After Rodgers said whereas other teams play with ten men and a goalkeeper his philosophy was “to play with eleven,” Liverpool went and signed Simon Mignolet who has shown no signs of being a sweeper keeper since his arrival. After he said last summer that he “would rather have one or two world class players than seven or eight who might not be able to help us,” Liverpool did the opposite. After paying £17 million for Sakho – described by Ian Ayre at the time as a “marquee signing” – Liverpool spent £20 million on another left sided centre back, Dejan Lovren, just 12 months later. Neither the departure of Suárez nor longstanding concerns about Sturridge’s durability prompted moves for players of their ilk, instead two of the most mobile forwards around have been replaced by two of the most immobile with Balotelli and Rickie Lambert being asked to fill a considerable void. None of this adds up. In the fullness of time, we might come back to look at Liverpool’s current transfer strategy as an object lesson in proving people wrong, as a case study in spotting, nurturing and fulfilling talent for the long term betterment of a team which critics had claimed was destined to fail. Alternatively, the status quo could continue and the failings which by now appear all too obvious will continue to undermine their chances of success. While the latter remains a genuine concern, Liverpool should examine what is going wrong and endeavour to put it right before even considering throwing good money after bad. the game blog http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/the-game/article4274285.ece?shareToken=b5ed10b6ebae1ca9fc9f5bb4cc38a1ad

No doubt Whelan is a Thatcher loving, minute silencing, wanting cunt. But does anyone not feel a bit uneasy, watching a 77 year old man being pointed at, going aha he is not with the times. Well he is half dead and not with it at the best of times. Not sure what people expected to come out of his mouth.

The lads don't seem to impressed with the clips of Leon Osman.

Indeed, anyone going to the Xfactor should be burned, or at least slightly charred. I bet he has erm an eclectic record collection. Maybe a bit of, Wham, Mick Hucknall and a bit of Ricky Martin. Rodgers is defo a livin la vida loco sort of man.

Relax, Rodgers seems calm, he was enjoying the Xfactor yesterday. Probably looking for a striker there I guess. Keith J ‏@KJ_77 Brendan Rodgers sat at Xfactor - really nice guy even if he is Liverpool manager lol - check my tie lol Enfield, London

It's been knocking around for a while what Brazil said to be fair, he's a close friend of Rodgers also, they like a bit of champagne and gash...

Sounds like Rodgers told him to man up Rodgers has not been able to select Sturridge - who has also had a calf injury in between his thigh issues - since August 31 and Brazil, on his daily breakfast show on TalkSPORT, hinted that the Liverpool manager is becoming irritated by being without his first-choice striker. In conversation with co-host Mike Parry, Brazil said: 'I have heard that the staff, I won't say who but, are getting just a little bit fed up of what is going on there with Sturridge.' Parry replied: 'Erm, the staff, Al? You are going to have to tell us a little bit more about that. That's just a taster.' Brazil, who is friends with Rodgers, then said: 'Well, let's put it this way. I think Brendan is very, very upset… I mean, what is going on here? Why is he (Sturridge) always injured?' Sportsmail have approached Liverpool for comment. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2840757/Brendan-Rodgers-losing-patience-Daniel-Sturridge-striker-prepares-spell-says-Alan-Brazil.html#ixzz3JWMn3xNC Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Or maybe it should read cheeky shitbird instead.

The owls revenge, cheeky cunt. Hodgson on Sturridge's latest injury setback: "It's really bad news. The only positive with that is we don't play again until March." #LFC

If you look close at the pic of Johnson, little Joe Allen tries to get in the pic.

Sad but true.

He made Gerrards best 11 he has played with.

On closer examination of Conte's description of the injury, it sounds like he was giving us a hint a few days back. Acting like a big cock, maybe. Conte said of Balotelli's injury: This is not a muscle strain but an inflammation of the pubic area