cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 12,851
I wanted a summer holiday so ruled out City, Chelsea, Bayern & Madrid….
Liverpool Thread | 2024/25
- Status
I wanted a summer holiday so ruled out City, Chelsea, Bayern & Madrid….
Tracking back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 2,364
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Ha! Yes. But this is different.
Liverpool are a very wholesome family oriented club with impeccable morals.
This isn't vulgarity or vanity it's about bringing prosperity to the region and contributing to the British economy.
A selfless act to bring joy to many.
........ or they were left holding their cocks after we pulled out and they had to save face by going through with the deal.
Let's face it, this is very much out of character for LFC to break the British transfer record.
Either way, they can never (with a straight face) mention ours or anybody elses spending in the premier league.
That train has left the station.
jimharri
Moderator
You can't beat Aigburth on a warm July evening.
TinFoilHat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jan 2023
- Messages
- 38,136
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Canny them scousers.
Unless the majority add on payments are for the Caraboa cup they won't pay out.
Unless the majority add on payments are for the Caraboa cup they won't pay out.
it would seem from some of the dipper comments on the net that money is not now ruining football like it was a couple of years ago?
Who would have guessed that, now they have won their first title without a asterisk for 35 years and their owners have found the cheque book again :-)
Who would have guessed that, now they have won their first title without a asterisk for 35 years and their owners have found the cheque book again :-)
To be fair, if Liverpools 2020 title has an asterix. Then City's 2021 title definitely has one.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,437
BBC proclaiming £100m on Facebook.
TinFoilHat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jan 2023
- Messages
- 38,136
- Team supported
- Manchester City
They only include add-ons if they sign for City
I'm With Stupid
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 May 2013
- Messages
- 23,116
Alisson (£67m)
Frimpong (£30m)------Konate (£36m)------VVD (£75m)------Kerkez (£45m)
Szobozlai (£60m)------MacAllister (£55m)
Salah (£43m)------Wirtz (£116m)------Diaz (£50m)
Nunez (£85m)
Not a pot to piss in. You've got to feel sorry for them having to operate on this sort of strict budget.Frimpong (£30m)------Konate (£36m)------VVD (£75m)------Kerkez (£45m)
Szobozlai (£60m)------MacAllister (£55m)
Salah (£43m)------Wirtz (£116m)------Diaz (£50m)
Nunez (£85m)
One thing we know the media wont do is oublish his wages, add them up for his contract and add to the fee and Headlune, Liverpool spend 180 million on Wirz on a 5 year deal.
Probably the most expensive starting 11 in the PL next season, added to buy lots of 30 to 40 million squad players ie Jota, Gakpo.
As Jack was “100 million Jack” in every commentary for his first 18 months, I guarantee it wont be 100 million Wirtz, the same as its never mentioned for Rice
Lovebitesandeveryfing
Well-Known Member
The truth is that since the sixties and seventies, the big clubs have big budgets.
That is just the way of the world. It would be great if a club could win cups and titles on a small budget — the romantic in us always likes that (although I didn't like it four weeks ago!) . But it simply is not the case.
You can think of a few exceptions. Ipswich managed to do well on a relatively small budget. They won the league right at the beginning of the sixties and were, let us say, challenging until the end of the seventies/beginning of the eighties. Then there's the case of Derby in the seventies — now that really was miraculous. Clough did very well with Forest, but it was definitely on a handsome budget. Significantly bigger than anything he had to work with at Derby. Then there's Leicester, more recently.
But honestly, looking at it since I've been following football — over a fifty-five year period, that is — it's the two Manchester clubs, the two Liverpool clubs, and then Arsenal and more recently Chelsea. With the occasional look-in from midland clubs like Villa or Forest as challengers. And, less convincingly, but occasionally, Tottenham. That's it. That really is it.
It's the narrative that's irritating, and simply ignorant — that is, that City have unlimited funds, can spend those funds as they like, and everybody else is “doing it the right way”. It is just fucking nonsense.
its simple
It's a defence mechanism used by Liverpool and United to point the finger at Manchester City's so-called oil money spending when their own club is in a mess and debt
Why the media never go and do their homework, Manchester City have always been a big spending club and have had record-breaking signings from right back into the 50s/60s/70s/80s/90s, Yes, City had a bad period without a pot to piss in but NEVER a little club and small fan base
It's never £100 million with add-ons. Why would he sign for Liverpool if City was quoted £150million plus add-ons
Unfortunately just had a conversation with a Liverpool fan. I agreed with him that Wirtz was a very good player and all was good. I then said what fantastic business City did getting three brilliant players for £106M thinking he would certainly agree.
I must have definitely touched a nerve with him as he said nothing about our deals but just blurted out that we spent a hundred million on Grealish haha!!. I was a bit gobsmacked and realised that he was clearly not overjoyed at the great transfers we had made. So I just finished the discussion by saying that Grealish was a very good footballer and what idiots would pay £85M for a total donkey called Nunez.
End of conversation.
I must have definitely touched a nerve with him as he said nothing about our deals but just blurted out that we spent a hundred million on Grealish haha!!. I was a bit gobsmacked and realised that he was clearly not overjoyed at the great transfers we had made. So I just finished the discussion by saying that Grealish was a very good footballer and what idiots would pay £85M for a total donkey called Nunez.
End of conversation.
citizen_maine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 May 2011
- Messages
- 17,954
Because Wirtz will have chosen the club that will pay him most.
Tracking back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 2,364
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Sky have it at £116.2M
BBC have it at £100M
It looks like the dippers are still bidding with themselves for him.
Seriously though, this is why the British media don't do themselves any favors. Just report what the whole package including add ons and wages is costing Liverpool FC. My guess is that it's somewhere around £180M.
They do it when MCFC sign a player. So by reporting reduced figures when Liverpool sign a player Just looks bad.
They (media) either look like a bunch of amateurs who get their sources off football forums or they come across as insecure children in the playground trying to convince everyone that their dad can fight your dad.
True, and it's why the official figures being put out are lower than what Liverpool are paying, It happened with Spurs and the Kane deal, we had our price and value and did not buckle. Clubs know they can add a City tax to the transfers because in early days we would have paid crazy prices, but now City walk away and find somebody else.
Wirtz is a great player, but the people around him are touting him around, it makes a move to a club just for the money and could be for all the wrong reasons, Players are greedy, but some are very clever and go for a project and buy into the ideas and end up with medals and money
citizen_maine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 May 2011
- Messages
- 17,954
He's likely to get medals and money. He's not joining the rags
- Status