Liverpool FC Forum

[jimmy brighton]

DANIEL STURRIDGE
Chelsea are likely to rebuff all approaches for Sturridge, for whom they have high hopes, but Bolton Wanderers remain eager to take the striker back on loan after an impressive six-month spell at the Reebok Stadium from January onwards. Sturridge, who joined Chelsea from Manchester City in July 2009 after he failed to agree a new contract with the Manchester club, scored eight goals in 12 appearances for Bolton. Chelsea are likely to wait until a new manager is in place before a decision is made on Sturridge, but he could be given the chance to compete for a starting position depending on who comes and goes.

I wasn't keen at the time but you have to ask did we drop the ball when we said no to Sturridge coming across as £5 million makeweight in the Torres deal?

I got the impression we gave them a 'no' so you are right, that could have been one big -up. Having said that, I trust Kenny and co to get the right players and hope we buy a great striker, and I don't mean as back-up. We need to get another class striker, with his own individual talents to bring to the side, so we can seriously mix it up. There will come a point when teams learn how to mark Carroll and Suarez. You have to remember that. That's why its important we mix it up.

[PabloMedina28]

I would prefer a british player to a foreign player if they were of the same ability for the obviuos reasons (none of them right wing, i havent joined ur gang so dont get to excited gents, you know who you are)

But if its Downing instead of Mata because hes british then forget it. Stating the obvious, i believe we need a good blend of youth and experience, british steel with foreign flair.

[killerp]

Lots of good constructive responses, keep it up while we wait for the next signing in great anticipation!

[metalhead]

* Young English players are exceptionally expensive, high wage demands, resigning fees etc...
* For the money you must pay there is no guarantee they will be successful
* National duty will cause lots of problems with injuries & player fatigue, especially after the media is finished assaulting you after the last performance.
* Takes time to develop young players & we have been waiting for almost an eternity to win the league!

Good post,

Just have a couple of comments to discuss, I guess the Cons work for both Foreign and British. However, foreign players playing for the first time in the league are riskier than home grown talent because foreign ones need more time to adjust than British.

I think for any fee you pay there is a risk for the signing not to be successful, even if you buy a player for 1m you can still make a loss if he turns out to be rubbish and then release him on a free or sell him at a loss. That said it is different than buying a player for 20m then turns out to be a flop, but it is still the same idea of risk.

The National duty is also the same for foreign ones, especially the ones from overseas (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, etc...) who gets affected the most because they usually play their qualifiers in South America and that has its repercussions (Jet lag, missing 1 day of training, fatigue, etc...) I guess its easier for British players to adapt to this situation because half of the England qualifiers are played in England.

Last statement is true, 19, 20 year old players are players for the future and we might wait for 2 or 3 years until they mature and become better players, however, I would like to recite a quote said on here ''if your good enough your old enough'', which pretty sums it up for me.

[SouthCoastShankly]

* Young English players are exceptionally expensive, high wage demands, resigning fees etc...
* For the money you must pay there is no guarantee they will be successful
* National duty will cause lots of problems with injuries & player fatigue, especially after the media is finished assaulting you after the last performance.
* Takes time to develop young players & we have been waiting for almost an eternity to win the league!

Good post,

Just have a couple of comments to discuss, I guess the Cons work for both Foreign and British. However, foreign players playing for the first time in the league are riskier than home grown talent because foreign ones need more time to adjust than British.

I think for any fee you pay there is a risk for the signing not to be successful, even if you buy a player for 1m you can still make a loss if he turns out to be rubbish and then release him on a free or sell him at a loss. That said it is different than buying a player for 20m then turns out to be a flop, but it is still the same idea of risk.

The National duty is also the same for foreign ones, especially the ones from overseas (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, etc...) who gets affected the most because they usually play their qualifiers in South America and that has its repercussions (Jet lag, missing 1 day of training, fatigue, etc...) I guess its easier for British players to adapt to this situation because half of the England qualifiers are played in England.

Last statement is true, 19, 20 year old players are players for the future and we might wait for 2 or 3 years until they mature and become better players, however, I would like to recite a quote said on here ''if your good enough your old enough'', which pretty sums it up for me.

Did you subconsciously read my post above?

[stmichael]

First of all this is an excellent thread and there are a lot of really good responses. It's an exciting time and you have to admire us looking to buy the best of British whilst also looking at young talent from abroad. You still need your fair share of foreign flair. Just buying British will get you nowhere and you'll turn into Aston Villa. You only have to look at the current England national team to see that flaw. 

On the other side if you go too far the other way like Arsenal have that'll most probably fail aswell. For all their fantastic football what have they actually achieved or won in the last 5-6 years? Their team of 98 was the perfect blend for me with the likes of Dixon, Adams, Winterburn etc combined with the foreign talents of Bergkamp, Overmars, Petit and Vieira.

These players have to be the right players though regardless of where they are from. It doesn't matter where they are from if they haven't got the ability and possibly even more importantly, the mentality to play for this great club. It's ok saying all the right things to the fans, but at the end of the day it's up to the players to go out on the pitch and prove they've got what it takes. In many respects they can use some of the current players we have as an example. Lucas is the prime example. I don't think I've ever seen such a mentally strong kid considering some of the garbage he had to endure off some "fans" in his early Liverpool career.

[metalhead]

* Young English players are exceptionally expensive, high wage demands, resigning fees etc...
* For the money you must pay there is no guarantee they will be successful
* National duty will cause lots of problems with injuries & player fatigue, especially after the media is finished assaulting you after the last performance.
* Takes time to develop young players & we have been waiting for almost an eternity to win the league!

Good post,

Just have a couple of comments to discuss, I guess the Cons work for both Foreign and British. However, foreign players playing for the first time in the league are riskier than home grown talent because foreign ones need more time to adjust than British.

I think for any fee you pay there is a risk for the signing not to be successful, even if you buy a player for 1m you can still make a loss if he turns out to be rubbish and then release him on a free or sell him at a loss. That said it is different than buying a player for 20m then turns out to be a flop, but it is still the same idea of risk.

The National duty is also the same for foreign ones, especially the ones from overseas (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, etc...) who gets affected the most because they usually play their qualifiers in South America and that has its repercussions (Jet lag, missing 1 day of training, fatigue, etc...) I guess its easier for British players to adapt to this situation because half of the England qualifiers are played in England.

Last statement is true, 19, 20 year old players are players for the future and we might wait for 2 or 3 years until they mature and become better players, however, I would like to recite a quote said on here ''if your good enough your old enough'', which pretty sums it up for me.

Did you subconsciously read my post above?

I do apologize SCS.. I just read the initial post and didn't bother reading the replies!


Now after reading your post I feel like a right tIt

again I'm sorry for missing your post  

[SouthCoastShankly]

* Young English players are exceptionally expensive, high wage demands, resigning fees etc...
* For the money you must pay there is no guarantee they will be successful
* National duty will cause lots of problems with injuries & player fatigue, especially after the media is finished assaulting you after the last performance.
* Takes time to develop young players & we have been waiting for almost an eternity to win the league!

Good post,

Just have a couple of comments to discuss, I guess the Cons work for both Foreign and British. However, foreign players playing for the first time in the league are riskier than home grown talent because foreign ones need more time to adjust than British.

I think for any fee you pay there is a risk for the signing not to be successful, even if you buy a player for 1m you can still make a loss if he turns out to be rubbish and then release him on a free or sell him at a loss. That said it is different than buying a player for 20m then turns out to be a flop, but it is still the same idea of risk.

The National duty is also the same for foreign ones, especially the ones from overseas (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, etc...) who gets affected the most because they usually play their qualifiers in South America and that has its repercussions (Jet lag, missing 1 day of training, fatigue, etc...) I guess its easier for British players to adapt to this situation because half of the England qualifiers are played in England.

Last statement is true, 19, 20 year old players are players for the future and we might wait for 2 or 3 years until they mature and become better players, however, I would like to recite a quote said on here ''if your good enough your old enough'', which pretty sums it up for me.

Did you subconsciously read my post above?

I do apologize SCS.. I just read the initial post and didn't bother reading the replies!


Now after reading your post I feel like a right tIt

again I'm sorry for missing your post  

Don't apologise. Great minds think alike.

This has to be the most agreeable thread in newkit history!

[SouthCoastShankly]

LAUREN DALGLISH, we were once famously informed, had more sense at the age of six weeks than the manager of Manchester United. Little Lauren is now a grown up 23, but she’d still struggle to tell us why Alex Ferguson has just shelled out £16m on a young centre-back with 35 Premier League appearances to his name.

Because the United manager himself might struggle to explain why.

No matter what potential Phil Jones possesses – and he’s already been compared to a young John Terry – he’s joined a club which already has a world class central defensive partnership in Rio Ferdinand and Nemanja Vidic, a club with accomplished back up in Chris Smalling, a club with another international class defender in Jonny Evans. And if that’s not enough, the small matter of Wes Brown and John O’Shea – with almost 700 first-team appearances between them.

Oh, and Ferguson still has designs on another up and coming young centre-back,18-year-old Raphael Varane from Lens.

Where does Phil Jones fit into all that?

Or could it be, just possibly, that Fergie got wind of Kenny Dalglish’s interest in the young defender and jumped first?

Kenny’s interest in the young Englishman wasn’t just paper talk. And it doesn’t end there.

Fergie 2 Kop 0, trumpeted the back page of one national newspaper this week, as they speculated that Ferguson also intended to ambush Liverpool’s interest in Ashley Young.

That’s another head scratcher.

Young is undeniably a fine player.

But he plays in the same position as Nani - more Premier League assists than any other player last season, the highly regarded Antonio Valencia, the vastly under-rated Ji Sung Park and the legendary Ryan Giggs.

So why would Ferguson be interested?

If you think the United boss wouldn’t be so petty as to snap up players simply because his Scottish rival wanted them, then you won’t remember his discomfiture at Liverpool signing Glenn Hysen back in 1989.

A classy, ball-playing Swedish centre-half, Hysen had toured Old Trafford, enjoyed a buffet lunch, shaken hands on a deal with chairman Martin Edwards then flown back to Italy.

Negotiations mysteriously stalled, and when Ferguson and Edwards flew out to Florence to investigate why, Hysen’s agent told them that his client had already signed for Liverpool.

Ferguson’s fury multiplied when the Swede was named Man of the Match on his debut at Wembley in the FA Charity Shield and became the defensive lynchpin of Liverpool’s last title winning team.

Kenny couldn’t resist having a little nibble in his 1996 autobiography.

“Journalists made a fuss about me nipping in for Glenn Hysen when Fergie was about to sign him. That doesn’t create rancour; that’s business,” he wrote.

“We are both going for the best players. Sometimes managers of PLC clubs like Manchester United cannot spend money quickly.

“They have to get permission from the PLC board. If United’s wheels move slowly, that’s no concern of mine.”

Ferguson will have committed those words to heart. And he was desperate to ensure that the wheels moved quicker this summer.

That Hysen anecdote came in an entire chapter devoted to Dalglish’s relationship with Ferguson.

In it the Liverpool boss stressed over and over that there is no feud, no animosity, no simmering resentment.

I believe him.

But of course there’s a keen rivalry.

How could there not fail to be between two Glaswegians managing Liverpool and Manchester United?

Kenny Dalglish has always got under Alex Ferguson’s skin – and it promises to make for great viewing next season.

Ferguson thinks he’s finally knocked Liverpool off their perch.

But there’s a manager back in town who’s already got him rattled. This week’s transfer business underlines it.

(LINK)

[Octsky]

DANIEL STURRIDGE
Chelsea are likely to rebuff all approaches for Sturridge, for whom they have high hopes, but Bolton Wanderers remain eager to take the striker back on loan after an impressive six-month spell at the Reebok Stadium from January onwards. Sturridge, who joined Chelsea from Manchester City in July 2009 after he failed to agree a new contract with the Manchester club, scored eight goals in 12 appearances for Bolton. Chelsea are likely to wait until a new manager is in place before a decision is made on Sturridge, but he could be given the chance to compete for a starting position depending on who comes and goes.

I wasn't keen at the time but you have to ask did we drop the ball when we said no to Sturridge coming across as £5 million makeweight in the Torres deal?

well, nobody expects Sturridge to score so many if not
chelskit wont offer him to us right ?

at that point of time, it is better to take straight cash.