Liverpool FC Forum

by **LFC2007** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 11:37 pm

It really boils down to; who has decided that the fee for Barry is too high?

The owners.

Why have they decided it's too high?

1) Because we don't have the money?; or
2) Because they don't value Barry at £18m?

If the fee quoted for Barry is too high, the fee paid for Keane must also have been 'too high'. Yet that deal was sanctioned.

Because of this - I don't think this is about the principle of paying 'over the odds', we simply don't have the money, and the owners aren't prepared to provide what they should be providing.

Given this, a budget should've been allocated and Rafa told to work within the confines of that budget. It shouldn't be; No initial budget - Rafa targets certain players, Rafa approaches Parry - who then informs the owners, they determine whether the price is acceptable, indirectly they determine whether we sign 'x' player or otherwise.

If it's the case that the full amount is available, and the owners are unwilling to sanction a deal because they don't rate him at £18m - we're in big trouble.

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:02 am

We will soon see if you are right. Rafa has said he needs a left winger/midfield player (if nothing else). If we don't get a player of reasonable quality (price wise)its not about re-sale values / value for money etc etc its that we havent got the money.

If we do still get a player and its not Barry, its Rafa's judgement that has been called into question, as the people in charge of our funds (Parry/Hicks/Gillett) obviously think Barry was a poor investment due to his age and the high price.

I still think we WILL buy someone, but someone younger with potential rather than 28 and at their peak.

Of course if we sell Alonso all bets are off

by **Dundalk** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:04 am

If it was the owners then I for one agree with them. 18 million IS to much for Barry although I think he is a good player I dont think he is worth that much and Villa are only trying to do what is best for the club - get as much as they can for the player but this time it is too much

by **Kharhaz** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:07 am

Good for the board I say, I also think its a ridiculous price. If he was along the same line as a Ronaldinho type player, the one who can change matches on there own then yes by all means, but Barry isnt. There are younger and better players than Barry available at a price in which villa are asking. Hopefully now this puts an end to it.

by **LFC2007** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:08 am

s@int wrote:If we do still get a player and its not Barry, its Rafa's judgement that has been called into question, as the people in charge of our funds (Parry/Hicks/Gillett) obviously think Barry was a poor investment due to his age and the high price.

Yes, if we end up spending £18m, then we'll know we're well and truly f*cked.

by **Scottbot** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:11 am

The whole thing has been a fu...c..king joke. As a club we look like fuc...k..ing idiots.

Only two people have been decisive in this whole thing and that's the two managers. Benitez has been clear that he wants the player and O'neil has been clear that he wants £18 mill for the player to leave. All this waiting game and brinkmanship and B.S that has gone with it has stunk the place up and made the club look like fools in my book. If it was about the price then it should have been a simple no thanks right from the start. End of.

Clearly there is a lot more to it than that and I get the impression the after-taste of this whole thing will roll on into the season.

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:17 am

Dundalk wrote:If it was the owners then I for one agree with them. 18 million IS to much for Barry although I think he is a good player I dont think he is worth that much and Villa are only trying to do what is best for the club - get as much as they can for the player but this time it is too much

Its a hard choice. Do you buy someone like Babel or Lucas who need a couple of years to settle, mature and reach their potential, or do you buy a player like Barry who is already at his peak and can make an immediate impact.

If your job's on the line, and the pressure to challenge NOW is increasing, I can understand him going for the ready made player.

Having said that, I still think we paid too much for Keane and we would have paid too much for Barry.

by **Scottbot** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:17 am

Dundalk wrote:If it was the owners then I for one agree with them. 18 million IS to much for Barry although I think he is a good player I dont think he is worth that much and Villa are only trying to do what is best for the club - get as much as they can for the player but this time it is too much

Problem is It doesn't look like it is as clear cut as that. Villa have been crystal clear on the price from the word go. surely if the answer from the owners was 'no' then this deal would have been dead and buried 6 weeks ago? I get the impression that they were ok with the price providing enough money was raised from transfers going the other way. But that hasn't happened and NOW they have baulked at the price.

I think we've got another H & G / Rafa row on our hands

by **puroresu** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:25 am

I think once keane signed the owners suddenly realised that to spend such another huge amount on barry without selling other players was not a good thing to do. I cant believe this whole saga has been going on since May. Personally I hope the deal is off as Barry at £18 mil is far to much.

by **LFC2007** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:29 am

Kharhaz wrote:Good for the board I say, I also think its a ridiculous price. If he was along the same line as a Ronaldinho type player, the one who can change matches on there own then yes by all means, but Barry isnt. There are younger and better players than Barry available at a price in which villa are asking. Hopefully now this puts an end to it.

On a point of principle here...

How can anyone accept that the owners should determine whether the valuation for Barry is acceptable or not?

Are they in a position, and do they have the expertise and knowledge to assess accurately how valuable a player Barry would be to the team? A key responsibility, that for decades in this country, has gone a massive way to defining management itself?

Even though thus far Hicks et al have demonstrated an alarming lack of understanding about the game, it's irrelevant here - should any owner(s) assume one of the key responsibilities of the manager?

My opinion is absolutely, categorically; NO.

The face-value impression gleaned from the statement is that they are assuming this role, though I suspect it's more likely that we just don't have the funds, as the signing of Keane demonstrated a capacity to pay over the odds - by common consensus.

How this has been communicated to Rafa is also another key point I think - if he perceives this as an undermining of his sovereignty as manager, at the very least he'll be mighty p!ssed off, but at worst - he may leave.

by **LFC2007** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:41 am

Bad Bob wrote:No, if these two are making football decisions we're well and truly fecked, despite how much some might wish to agree with their views on the Barry situation.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

You are correct and that is a FACT.

by **Kharhaz** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:02 am

LFC2007 wrote:
Kharhaz wrote:Good for the board I say, I also think its a ridiculous price. If he was along the same line as a Ronaldinho type player, the one who can change matches on there own then yes by all means, but Barry isnt. There are younger and better players than Barry available at a price in which villa are asking. Hopefully now this puts an end to it.

On a point of principle here...

How can anyone accept that the owners should determine whether the valuation for Barry is acceptable or not?

Are they in a position, and do they have the expertise and knowledge to assess accurately how valuable a player Barry would be to the team? A key responsibility, that for decades in this country, has gone a massive way to defining management itself?

Even though thus far Hicks et al have demonstrated an alarming lack of understanding about the game, it's irrelevent here - should any owner(s) assume one of the key responsibilities of the manager?

My opinion is absolutely, categorically; NO.

The face-value impression gleaned from the statement is that they are assuming this role, though I suspect it's more likely that we just don't have the funds, as the signing of Keane demonstrated a capacity to pay over the odds - by common consensus.

I believe they have picked up on how football or "soccer" works, and have a basic understanding of the premiership, I would imagine they have good advisors also to ensure they are not throwing there money away. Should the owners choose what is acceptable? yes, unless you want to end up the same way as Leeds Utd. The thing is with the valuation on Barry, many supporters can see that if we pay that amount we are being robbed. They are in a position to say no simply because they will be paying for it. The loans and whatever that have been taking out the board will be paying for them, one way or another. They have let rafa sign keane for an absurd amount, they would be mad to pay a similar fee for a player that wont make too much difference to the team. Yes he can play left midfield but you mention quality left midfielders and Barry is hardly, if ever, mentioned.

by **LFC2007** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:10 am

Kharhaz wrote:Should the owners choose what is acceptable? yes, unless you want to end up the same way as Leeds Utd.

Where the board were oh so prudent :laugh:

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:14 am

RAFA'S SILVA LINING

Yanks keep Benitez sweet with £18m bid

By CHRIS BASCOMBE

LIVERPOOL’S American owners will attempt to win back Rafa Benitez’s trust with an £18million bid for Valencia winger David Silva.

Kop boss Benitez is furious after the collapse of the Gareth Barry deal left him looking foolish.

Now owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett know they have to do something quickly to appease the Spaniard.

They blocked a move for Barry because they considered Aston Villa’s £18m valuation excessive.

They want to resurrect a bid for Silva, a hero of Spain’s Euro 2008 win and an Anfield target earlier this summer.

But Manchester United are ready to hijack the deal by making their own £20m bid and Arsenal are also interested.

And a move for Silva might not appease Benitez — who, amazingly, is backing a deal for a millionaire friend to pump upwards of £12m into Anfield.

An approach was made on behalf of Belfast millionaire and Liverpool season ticket holder John Miskelly several weeks ago, offering a massive interest-free loan for transfers.

This was instantly rejected by the Anfield board who, under strict banking conditions, cannot accept such offers.

Sadly for Benitez and his supporters within Anfield, the Barry decision was not about lack of funds. Hicks and Gillett decided it made no sense to sell Xabi Alonso and recruit Barry in a loss-making deal.

Last May, the Americans were convinced to bid for Barry when Benitez told them Alonso was in secret talks with Real Madrid and Barcelona.

He said Alonso could be sold for £25m and Barry bought for £15m, with the extra £10m earmarked for another player.

But Villa stood firm on £18m, and only one bid, of £16m from Juventus, was received for Alonso.
___

by **Kharhaz** » Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:15 am

LFC2007 wrote:
Kharhaz wrote:Should the owners choose what is acceptable? yes, unless you want to end up the same way as Leeds Utd.

Where the board were oh so prudent

Liverpool are still in the premiership, Leeds aint, Rafa has been able to spend, whatever anyone says, mascha, torres, babel, if hes capped this season I can understand why, we won sod all last season, if he has to raise funds then so be it. Id rather that than be a chelsea type run club where you can spend what you like and buy success rather than earn it.

Liverpool FC Forum

Gareth Barry TRANSFER is On * / Off * - *Delete where appropriate

Who is online