Suarez at £75million is a snip compared to Fabio Borini to Sunderland for £14million

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...rez-looks-snip-75million-inflated-market.html

''Suarez at £75million is a snip compared to Fabio Borini to Sunderland for £14million''

Just goes to show how the myopic writers in the South East know about football. Borini scored 10 priceless goals for Sunderland last season and helped to keep us in the Premiership and also got us to a cup final. Suarez on the other hand was scoring goals in a better team but is 4 years older and is a grade 'a' liability. I can't see that Suarez will make more of a difference to Barcelona next season then Borini at Sunderland.

 

The daily fail strikes again - they hate us anyway.

So Suarez scores 4 times the amount of goals for Liverpool but misses 5 games of the season due to his need to bite players!
Had he NOT been banned for those games, chances are Liverpool would've won the league.
Ergo - Suarez actually (arguably I know) COST Liverpool the title - and that makes him worth 5 times what Borini is - who was instrumental in us staying in the premier league?

as always to the daily mail

 

Suarez is costing Barcelona about 1 million per goal last season then Borini would cost Sunderland. That's not even adding to that his ban for the next four months.

 

It's a bit of an odd comparison for them to draw, I don't see the point in this at all really.

If I was head of the daily mail and I read this crap I'd be thinking I was being taken for a ride with my money, this plonker would be sacked straight away.

 

It must be so easy being a football reporter...

lets make up some headlines...

''Sunderland make wasted bid for Alonso even though Ross Wallace is available on a free.''

''Sunderland Fans want Marco Gabbiadini instead of Borini''

''Mannone stepping down as Sunderland first choice keeper as supporters dig up Fatty Foulkes body''

 

I have to say this is the most pointless comparison I've ever come across.

 

Just seems like they will look for any angle possible to have a dig at us..

 

Is it specifically you lot mate? I don't read the mail, or any paper in fact, but especially not the mail... Or is it just poor sports journalism in general?

 

They come up with some ****e

but they have targeted us a few times with utter dross

 

I'm not sure they've ever printed anything aside from that mate, the thing is they take themselves seriously. Go on the daily star website and it's all just blatant lies, but atleast they kind of admit they're just a bunch of idiots making up lies, nothing serious about it. Not that I'm an avid reader of the star, I just check for boobs!

 

I wouldn't believe anything that originates from The Fail in regards to Sunderland. They've not got one right ever. Seriously. It's like they guess every time and guess wrong.

 

My mother buys it, she just sits there flicking the pages with her glasses on, "Tut, tut, tut, bloody hell, that's awful, tut, lottery numbers, tut, s**t", same crap every day, never anything in it that she likes, I have no idea why she buys it. Fruitloop.

 

I get all my current affairs on-line. Used to buy the 'I' paper as it's quirky, they really search out strange but interesting stories, but even they're available online, plus I don't have to pay for the information.

 

I love the times but can't get it here and won't pay for it online.

 

Always a good read but I find broad sheets too challenging, the size that is, I've destroyed the paper by the time I've read it. Too big.

 

The Times is normal size these days marra...If I do buy a newspaper, which is very rare these days, it is always either The Times or The Independent.

 

Buy The Times?

The only time you uneducated folk get newspapers, they're from the fish shop.

 

Hoy...Watch it you...

At least Sunderland fans can tell the times...

 

Using newspaper in fish shops is illegal now. I read it in The Times

 

Alright, clever ****e.