He should certainly score goals. Even though he was starved of game time and didn't "fit their style" he was still Liverpool's 2nd top scorer last season (1 less than Firmino)
"Not particularly sweet or simple, you have £32m to spend on a striker with the whole of Europe to shop in, would your first stop be for a man who is behind a raw kid, a converted midfielder, a crock and as yet untested striker or would you look for someone who is a current starter and actually valued by his team?" Errerr....apparently your insight into Palace transfer policy was a little off. Seems they are actually willing to pay (eventually) 32M....go figure eh? And I could have sworn you believed us saying no to the original offer of 23M and impossible add ons was foolish and greedy? Let me know when you're going to sell your house or car...
League only. 4th position in all. It's nice that you try to keep up with all the minutiae of our club.
Nope, I actually said demanding yor money back was greedy (though I didn't use that word), it seem you boards stance of £32.5m not a penny less has now been refined to a more realistic figure The original add ons were far from impossible, granted the top 4 one was hard but far from impossible. What are the new add ons by the way, the "impossible" one's were posted virtually straight away.
Is it impossible for him to play in 70% of his new teams games? Is it impossible for him to score 20 goals in a season? Is it impossible for Palace to make top4 (remembering Leicester actually won the thing)? Add ons bother me in general though, what happens if a new manager comes in or the player doesn't settle (or fit their style) and the player gets sold, do the add ons still count if the player reaches his targets at another team?
There's a world of difference between something being technically possible and being at all likely. To be constrained to Palace making top 4 in order to get our money would be tantamount to writing it off.
You did use the word greedy...or greed..one of the two. I'm not going back to copy and paste again...let's just accept you know you did; we all know you did... Scrabbling Scrabbling...refined from 32.5 to 32...Hmmm. you've been proved soooo right lol knocking off that .5M is a serious climbdown by the club......our Board as in this Board or the LFC Board? People on here had various opinions of what we should accept. 30 was seen by most as acceptable.. Well...I didn't see the actual add ons of first offer, merely the reaction of various respected football journalists who all went "impossible" "no way LFC will accept" etc..and sure enough... Said same journalists today said the new add ons are much more realistic so I'll assume since they were correct the first time ..... And your main claim was that no one was going to meet our demands...they'd go elsewhere...they'd wait for the possibility of us breaking nearer deadline..etc...that we'd devalued the player by having him on the bench or not in squad at all... Suppose you were right....devalued by.....0.5 million....poor Tekkers ...bet the Palace signing photos will resemble WW2 POW photos after he rotted for so long...
Good money for Benteke, pretty much recouped it all in the Palace deal, but when you take our other business this window into account it's a great deal. We've broken even this window, give or take a few quids. I don't think Klopp will feel it burning a hole in the pocket Got no ill feeling towards the guy really, painfully obvious that it was a mismatch from the start and a decision made by a manager clutching at straws. He wasn't a good fit and was never good enough, but I don't think he committed the cardinal sin of not trying or disappearing. He seemed to want to make it work on the pitch but it just wasn't working, something we all saw coming. He'll do better at Palace, you can see how they'll set up to get the most out of his best qualities
Nice rant, I must point out though that at present he has been "devalued" by £7.5m. If he lives up to the new expectations (which seemingly haven't been leaked yet) then the devaluation will be £2.5m. Not a penny less than £32.5m remember
No rant...it was chortling.... Show me the quote saying not a penny less than original valuation? I know I didn't say it...how many did? None, 1..2...? No devaluation...he hasn't failed anything...and remember you were the one who claimed he would be ruined by sitting on his backside due to our greed...well he's not sitting...according to you the original add ons weren't impossible...if these are now seen by everyone who thought the originals were as more realistic then by your logic they'll be even more likely eh? And my maths might not be great but 27+5=32 doesn't it? 32.5-32= I've somehow lost your other 2 there....
