BBC - Liverpool make bid for Lallana - Part II

Adam is a valuable asset and I doubt we'd ever part with cheaply, but he has handled it all wrongly on top of that. Got a bit ahead of himself and presumed he could have what he wanted without argument. He's lucky Nicola isn't still here....can you imagine what he would have done!

 

Get 30million, shake the buyers by the hand,thank them very much and let Adam Lallana be a small fish with a very big attitude in a big pond.......oh and if he's as good as he thinks get 20% sell on

 

I don't understand how people can assume all this. He hasn't actually said or done anything wrong.

 

True. And I'm trying to keep an open mind but last week, saints released information to a friendly journalist about the Liverpool bid in response to what was perceived as information being passed to other friendly journalists selected by Liverpool and Lallana.

 

Keeping an open mind, but someone printed part of a story, in the Echo, from the days when we were in administration.
Mark Wotte refused a bid of £500k, for Lallana, from Wolves. Lallana's response was to refuse to play two pre season friendlies, if what he printed is true.
So, based on that, not quite the loyal lad some think.

 

After a couple of weeks of this I have calmed down and I hope we can keep him here whether he like it or not. However after 5 years+ of loyalty to the guy I won't be getting 20 on the back of my shirt next year and will either get 7 in memory of Rickie and MLT or I will just put my age on the back (I assume you can get numbers that high. lol)

 

So you'll not consider Zlatan's number 10 [or 18] when he turns up..?

 

definitely not. can't stand the bloke

I may get 40 on the back next season as it will be the big birthday year next year

 

Interesting that Liverpool put press speculation on their website (even with disclaimer) - Barnes wants them to get Adam - http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/media-watch/express-barnes-would-like-lallana?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

A comment from one of them on that article:

adie65
8th Jun 2014 11:14 "So the mighty Southampton FC want to hold, ransom and blackmail the best football club in the world LIVERPOOL FC. Well they should back down as I would offer 20 Sterling, cash not our player Raheem. On the business of the basis of take it or leave it. YNWA JFT96 "

How are we exactly blackmailing them? Holding to ransom yes but its not blackmail.


That said, hopefully the Liverpool board read these comments and take heed. The fans don't want to pay £30 mil so they should just move along.

 

In fairness, I don't think to another club he's worth £30m so yes, they should move on.

 

Yeah sure. They have been stung with paying top money for English players in the past who have failed to live with the price tag. Not saying Adam would do to but when Fabregas is going for something similar you can understand why they wouldn't want to pay our asking price.

He's a player with 4 years left on his contract and to us he is worth what we are asking. It is up to them to meet that valuation or move on.

 

OK, what about Bale when he ends a sentimental journey..?

 

Absolutely. He is worth £30m to us. If others don't agree then they shouldn't waste our time. If he stays though, we will probably have to up the terms of his existing contract to keep him happy (ish).

 

How are we holding them to ransom?

 

He wants to leave (apparently) so we are holding him against his will. Liverpool will have to pay us want we want for us to release him from his contract.

 

That's terrible...how can we be so cruel as to try and keep him to his contract. I bet we insist on paying him an extortionate wage as well. Is there no end to our infamy.

 

By that definition any (fee-based) transfer is a ransom.

 

Any situation in which case someone wants to buy something and the other party want to sell at a higher price, will often have the phrase "held to Ransom"/"holding me to ransom" attached to it. "I want to buy that house but the owners are holding me to ransom" for example.

Obviously we are not holding Liverpool to ransom by the dictionary definition of the word. However in the context of the original quote and my subsequent post, we could be described as holding them to ransom over the sale but not blackmailing them.

 

What are we, his jailer..? No, we just temporary own his football skills and if we wish to keep owning them we won't sell. As far as Saints are concerned it's actually a seller's market.

There's an interested part of me that hopes he puts in a transfer request, after the World Cup, because I'd like to see whether Saints will ignore it, as they have a perfect right to.