Liverpool cannot be held to Ramsom. Want to buy reasonably and pay reasonable price.Charlie Adam or Stewart Dowring the price has to be reasonable-John W Henry. Source:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...held-ransom-Stewart-Downing-Charlie-Adam.html
Carroll?? Didn't you offer 30m and then Newcastle held out for 35m? If that's not being held to ransom **** knows what is. Someone said it before, but by paying 16-19m for Jordan Henderson so early in the market you've set a marker by which selling clubs are pricing their players. It's all well and good having a strategy of not over paying for your targets, a target being someone who you've identified as being a benefit to your team, but to then potentially lose your target over 2-3m, your then looking at 2nd choice targets. The 2nd choice targets club are also now aware of how much your willing to spend on filling that position, which doesn't help the negotiation process.
There is a stark difference between having 2 months left in the transfer window to haveing 2 hours left
I dont think we are being held to ransom when blackpool are only asking for an additional £1mil for a player who has proven in the premier league, has a cracking left foot and has great accuracy from deadball situations (corners & free kicks). With regards to stewart downing, we have not had a naturally left footed winger for a long long time, id go as far to say the last few we had was patrik berger and steve mcmannaman. With someone like downing on the wing staying wide and sticking to the touch line and charlie adam spraying the ball to feet....the future looks bright.
...and how many times does it need to be said that we valued Carroll at 15mill less than Torres. If we bought him for 20mill, Torres would have gone for 35mill. So no. We weren't held to ransom. We got what we wanted and it was CHELSEA who were ****ed over with a ludicrous 50million bid.
Of course. But now clubs know they can hold out for more when dealing with Liverpool. With City throwing money about, seemingly collecting players, surely you'd be better nailing down your 1st choice targets with an extra 2-3m, rather than lose them and have to go to plan B, which is increasingly foreign players with no Premier league experience. While the premier league experience argument should be looked at on a case by case basis, with each player judged on their own merit, would you not rather pay that bit extra knowing the player won't need to adjust to, not only the team system/dynamic, but also the physicality and pace of the league.
Exactly, nail down the players you want in the positions you need. Play hardball over the squad players that will give you depth. Liverpool have been screaming out for proper wingers for years, and with Carroll up front, you need them to get the best out of him.
I agree totally with your point, if the additional is only £1mil or £2mil additional then I would pay this and a prime example is charlie adam. Who has the experience, is british and also would be a great addition for the team. I dont think we should try to even compete with City because as you did say they are just throwing money at players price and wages to stop other teams from getting hold of them. As the club has stated we need to be getting players who want to play for the club which proven over the years in Kuyt, Reina and also Suarez! Charlie adam has already handed in a transfer request and stated that we are the club he wants to join which also states that we can still compete with the top 4/5 without European football
You've contradicted yourself. First you say Liverpool are being held to ransom because of previous dealings then you say we should be the extra few million pound difference to get the players we want.
Seriously ?!?!? If you had got Carroll for 20 million do you think you would have turned around to Chelsea and said we only want 35 million as we think the difference is £15 million ? The fact is you were held to ransom over the Carroll deal and you were pushing the transfer through close to the deadline. I don't see where the problem is admitting to that ? Once you get that close to the deadline there is less time for bargaining so you had to pay of the top for Carroll if you wanted to buy him, ie being held to ransom by Newcastle.
No, JJ is right. The deal was made to Chelsea that we want Carroll + 15m, so they agreed that thinking Carroll wouldn't go for more than £20m and Chelsea would have snatched Torres for £35m. It just so happened that Newcastle were stubborn and held out for £35m which we accepted straight away, as it wasn't coming out of our pocket.
We paid over the odds for Carroll..but it was lastminute.com..Newcastle knew how much Torres had gone for..so £35 million it was..good business? Time will tell. The bottom line is transfer fees for British players are ridiculious. Carroll, Henderson,Wickham,Jones and more are vastly over priced..Not because there world class, but because there English.
We we're overpriced for Andy Carroll and I agree with your points but I will also state that during that time we we're still competing in the Europa League. We had bought Luis Suarez but he was cup tied and relatively new to the premier league and the club. Our only striker at that time was Kuyt and N'gog who couldn't form a partnership. We needed a centre forward who could play in the premier league, europa league, who is young and can take the club forward and in the January transfer window Andy Carroll fitted the bill. I hope this isn't a dig at us as we could open a can of worms of paying over the odds for players at united?
How it is a dig ? It simply pointing out that you paid over the top for Carroll as it was last minute. However some fans seem happy to point at Chelsea saying how you have had their pants down whilst refusing to acknowledge that you paid over the odds for Carroll. As a previous poster stated time will tell but I think Torres will come back strong this season as he had a good break and I personally think he is quality. Also ZL, if you had got Carroll for 20 million you would still have sold Torres for 50 million imo.
Our owner has said as much. It is rather you who seems to struggle to grasp the concept than us in admitting to it. Torres had been injury plagued and out of form for a while. He also handed in a transfer request. £35million is a very fair valuation. We said to Chelsea we want whatever Carroll costs us and £15million and the combination of the January transfer window, the deadline, and Chelsea's willingness to pay anything drove the prices up. Our money bought us an extremely unique forward, someone who has their best years ahead of them, and a player that we would no doubt have a great deal of competition for if we were trying to sign him now. Fabregas and Aguero are a couple of players who will leave for below the £40mil mark this summer. Do you think we would have gotten more than that for Torres even providing his form for us was somewhat better than his form for Chelsea in the second half of the season? I bet Andy Carroll would still have been over £20million though. Most people are forgetting that the Premier League recently secured a new TV deal so every club has more money. Add to that a general trend of increasing revenue and inflation and you have prices that were always going to go up. Then factor in teams like Man City and Chelsea who have been pushing the market for years, and you are going to have higher prices. The whole issue of being English has warped everything. Yes our national team hasn't done great, but we still have plenty of class players in the squad. Being English doesn't necessarily mean you are worse than your foreign counterparts, especially at club level. We are putting our money behind securing the nucleus of the England team of the next decade. Players that grow up together, play for club and country together, and have the same culture and character. It's part of the reason Barca are so strong, and it's clearly part of the plans of the people in charge of our club.
If we didn't have that much money to spend do you really think that we'd have paid £16m for Jordan Henderson? Seriously!! I know your a manc so it's in your blood to be biased but can you honestly believe that we'd blow our wad on an unproven right wingers come central midfieler when we have obvious areas which need working on
What the club says in public and what it says in negotiations behind closed doors are not necessarily the same thing. By stating publicly that we won't be held to ransom we send a warning to sellng clubs not to try it on. I'm sure that in private, if they really want a player, they won't balk at stumping up the extra to get him.
Well if the owners said it then it must be true. The point I am making is that if you think you were not held to ranson over the Carroll deal you are wrong for reasons previously stated. I find it funny how some Liverpool fans, may not you I don't know, always refer to the Carroll deal in a net spend sort of way, ie Carroll + 15 million for Torres then laugh at United when we talk net debt or net transfer spends. The flitting between their opinion and principles to support whatever point they are arguing is funny ( again I don't know if you do it or not ). Also the transfers you pointed out don't involve selling from English club to English Club which as we know puts the price up. As stated I think you would have asked for, and received, 50 million from Chelsea regardless of the Carroll fee.
Your basing your argument on your own opinion of Torres and Carroll,As in Torres will come good again after his rest and Carroll is'nt worth £35m. Do you have a fortune tellers booth on Blackpool's golden mile?,you dont know how either will fare in the coming season and beyond. Torres wanted out and Carroll wanted in,Chelsea paid for both of those events end of.
