These things as you know though TB don't often get done overnight. Even if we received a bid of £50 mill you can't just organise a replacement like that unless we ourselves go and pay way over the odds. Even if we'd been quoted x amount for a player last week we all know that would rise considerably if other clubs knew we had £50 mill plus for Suarez. That would more than likely lead to prolonged bidding/negotiation processes etc etc. At the end of the day we were (rightly) mocked for panic buying Mandy so you can't expect/hope that we'll make the same mistake again then criticise us for saying we won't make that mistake again. I admired Moyes when he took a stand against Lescott, I admired Mancini for standing up to Tevez and whether you hate LFC or not I think fans across the world should be happy with us not letting a player dictate his own terms a year after signing a big fat new contract. The simple lesson is if you know you don't want to be at a club don't be so bloody quick to sign a new long term contract...and don't sully your reputation by going round biting fellow players.
He's definitely taking a calculated gamble mate, he's seemingly banking on the fact that the player will simply 'fold his hand' & knuckle down. There's nothing in Suarez career history to suggest that he's going to do that though I'm afraid. Uruguay would pick Suarez next summer, even if he'd not kicked a ball for 6 months, he's their star man. There'd also still be plenty of takers for the fella in the club market, irrespective of how he performs this season. The risk for LFC is that he doesn't deliver, you don't achieve your goals as a result & his value plummets from what it is today (as he'll have only have 2 years left next summer) Henry says that from a football perspective he can't let him go, but only time will tell whether that's an inspired decision or an absolute howler.
Nope. Even if somehow his value plummets, in the long term it is still a good investment in advertising that the club will not be dicked about by low and late bids.
So did I mate, but it was a battle we were never going to win. If you remember he picked him for the season opener & we got gubbed 1-6 at home by Arsenal, in one of the most abject performances I've ever had the misfortune to witness. He got rid the following week...... We know how this pans out, City dug their heels in with Tevez but only because the cash made no difference to them & he then ****ed off to Argentina for 6 months, so they were without him anyway. Modric I suppose could be held as the exception, but Spurs took £10m less the following summer, so was it the right call? Not sure myself like. I get what you mean about the previous **** up with Carrol, sure they're bound to be wary, but I'm not sure that the 'time' excuse is reason enough to make this stance.
So setting fire to say £15m would be good BUSINESS, as it showed you had a big pair of bollocks? Stay away from the private sector & stick to test tubes mate, would be my advice.
You know very well that, even if LFC did lose £15M (and that's not the figure that they would lose!) BUT they had created a more favourable management culture within the club and had set culture for future transfers then it would be considered as money well spent. Astro may have his head in his test tubes but you are being a limited bean counter.
The £15m figure was arbitrary, it was the principle that losing £m's in exchange for sending a 'message' to the market, is utter drivel, as individual transactions stand on their own. You're now compounding that drivel, with talk of cultural change regarding transfer dealings? haha, that's meaningless bollocks Dave. What I said was fact. The success of this decision (assuming it's as solid as it sounds), will be judged on how the player performs this season & thus how that impacts on your team goals i.e. a CL place, combined with (assuming he still wants to go next window or in the summer) how much you end getting for him. Trying to make out that any financial loss could be perceived as 'money well spent' merely off the back of some intangible 'message' is pony of the highest order.
So it will only be successful if Suarez knuckles down? Surely selling him to Arsenal and losing 4th due to that would be deemed a failure. If we keep him, we aren't strengthening Arsenal's squad and improving our chances at getting 4th, even if Suarez doesn't play.
That's why the advertising industry collapsed in 1976... oh wait, no it didn't instead it's grown to about £500billion. Anyway, this Suarez "individual transaction" replaces the Carroll one in terms of how the club behaves regarding big players.
Who mentioned Arsenal? He said he's going NOWHERE. In any case of course it depends on how the player reacts, if you get nowhere near 4th with him & get £m's less for him next summer, where's the benefit?
I love the stance the club has taken but would have been happier if he left the European teams bit out and sold the ****er to a team abroad. Surely we have targets that could come in and replace him? Anyway regardless it's a good stance from the owner and the message from Rodgers was also brilliant, lets hope Suarez knuckles down and plays well, I can't see him doing anything other than this though. Would he really sulk so much that he ends up playing in the reserves?
The benefit is we won't be rushed into another deal with very few options as the window closes. Would we rather sell him to a rival for £40m this window or ship him overseas in the future for £35m? One of these options weakens us and strengthens a competitor, the other weakens us (or not, if he doesn't perform).
I know this is going back to a discussion that we were having before last season kicked-off but I really believe this Suarez problem was exacerbated by LFC's corporate structure. We have had statement by Ian Ayre and Brendan Rodgers. These have been mostly ignored. It is not until John Henry makes an appearance and calmly states what is and is not going to happen that the club are seen to be back in control of the situation. Rodgers and Ayre are very good operational managers but there are times (and this has certainly been one of them) when firm and clear executive management is required. Currently Tom Werner is Chairman of LFC. However, he is not based in Liverpool or even in the UK. Add to that his persona appears to be fairly soft. John Henry has the appearance and background of a true executive (sophisticated with a hard edge underneath). However Henry's interests are mostly in the US. Now I don't expect Henry to move lock stock and barrel to Liverpool and take over the reigns from Werner but I do think that it is time for him to seek a full time Chairman for LFC.
I have no idea what the **** you are on about there, or what possible relevance that random comment has - care to elaborate? The current stance over Suarez doesn't 'replace' anything, it's merely a stand you're taking in light of a particular set of circumstances. The idea that you would always react in the same manner is nonsense, as with as little as one change in the criteria you'd probably react differently. e.g. If Suarez had reacted in exactly the same manner & Madrid put £50m on the table last week, do you think that Henry would have made the same speech? Would he **** as like.........
Unless it works Tobes. It may limit who comes to us but those who do know the score. Up to other teams if they want to follow suit: nows the chance. Of course Chelsea & City will make some clubs fear doing that as they don't have to follow budget rules but lets face it that type of player isn't coming to us anyway and I don't know whether I want them to. If enough financially constrained clubs follow suit then the top 10 clubs in Europe will either have very crowded squads of mercenary egos or players will change their behaviour. Personally I don't think enough clubs will follow suit. Time will tell either way.
Why would we get less for him? I really don't see him sulking and risking not playing any footy. If he does then **** it, as a fan I try to avoid the financial crap I don't care too much what he's worth and would rather play him in the reserves for 3 years and let him go on a free other than sell him to Arsenal.
"the principle that losing £m's in exchange for sending a 'message' to the market, is utter drivel" ^ that's called advertising Of course it depends on the details. If Madrid offered £50m last week 1. it would have been a lot closer to the club's valuation 2. it would not have strengthened a competitor 3. it would have been earlier giving more time for replacements These are all the points Henry was making, so of course if you say "yeah well Henry would have agreed to a deal if a club offered him everything he wanted" isn't a counterpoint, it is a total win for LFC
You might be right there, but I think Henry is a bit knee jerk, his "what are they smoking" tweet wasn't what I'd expect (nor want) from my Chairman tbh. He's now seemingly made a definitive statement here, in such a fluid market - as the transfer market is - he might kick himself for being quite so definitive, before the end of the month should an opportunity for resolution (both in & out) present itself. Both incidents show that he's a money man, rather than a considered CEO imo.
And here is what was playing as JH made his announcement. [video=youtube;wt3cYpFLJiM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt3cYpFLJiM[/video]
