Liverpool Thread | 2025/26

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
TinFoilHat said:
Nah.

He'll be 'injured' but will be able to play for Engerland when Tommy Toucan wants him.

The **** wants to be at the next WC with his sponsorship deals.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't be anywhere near the England squad, and fuck only knows what Tuchel was thinking by introducing him again.

Not that I am interested in England, but going forward should be the way, not bringing back somebody who generally contributed very little previously.

Typical FA policy and only picked for the rag/dipper morons to watch and wet themselves over. And the fucker gets paid too !
 
Last edited:
city5189 said:
That's the one, sounded like someone shot his dog when city scored.
Click to expand...
Shocking! I've never really heard such a difference between two teams scoring at least two goals each. He sits in interviews saying that all fans accuse him of bias against their clubs but if he listened to that back, it'd be hard for him to explain. They hold up Liverpool 4 Newcastle 3 as the best match in Premier League but when we come from 2-0 down in a head to head title battle, it sounds like someone has farted on his Weetabix.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Hi Goochy City posted a profit of £73.8 million in their last accounts for season 23/24, Liverpool on the other hand posted a loss of £43.5 million for 23/24 which stands as a club record. As I’ve highlighted to you before they haven’t posted a profit since 2022.

City’s academy is much better than Liverpool’s and has turned over a billion in player sales since the new CFA was built in 2014. Consistently winning trophies like four league titles in a row and a treble (which Liverpool have never done either) consistently qualifying for the champions league which City hold the record for an English team for playing 14 consecutive seasons in the competition.

Add to that City have not used now deemed illegal interest free director loans which Liverpool have to the amount of £70 million. Three’s quite a few reasons why City can spend more than Liverpool and why there should be questions asked about Liverpool’s spending.

As it’s now been established Liverpool have unknowingly or knowingly enjoyed illegal owner investment to gain a sporting advantage. Should the Premier League now launch an investigation to forensically look back through Liverpool’s accounts to establish if they have escaped a sanction for financial fair play when really they should have had one? Please answer as the last time you talked about club finance on here you went hiding when the facts were highlighted.
Click to expand...
Nice one Emile.
 
Semper aggressus said:
It’s only overpaying if they turn out shit or disappointing though.

I’d say given their subsequent performances Arsenal didn’t overpay for Rice and Liverpool definitely didn’t overpay for van Dijk.

It’s impossible though to know how a player will perform at a new club, sometimes for the right level of player I wish we would take that risk more. I personally believe we could have won even more if we’d been willing to overpay in one or two instances.

All with hindsight of course. Unfortunately van Dijk didn’t end up like Mangala or Rice like Phillips.

I think City are wealthy enough to take more risks. I also think if other top clubs value someone at over £100m there’s actually less chance of him being shit, he’ll probably be a season-changer. To get ahead you have be a bit more ambitious in the transfer market. We seem to play it safe a little too much.
Click to expand...
Our record on the field over the last decade and a half - last year excepted, which was due to practically the entire squad being shattered both mentally and physically, in my opinion - says we don’t.

I was thinking specifically of Gvardiol, for whom we supposedly paid well under Leipzig's asking price, but we can add several others, like Maguire, Sanchez, Fred and Rice.
 
jrb said:
The Saudi owners and Newcastle are not selling him.

He is under contract,

Why would Newcastle sell their only real goal scorer and best player?

Newcastle need him for the CL, as well as another top 4 challenge.
Click to expand...

Hope you’re right mate
 
I hope Newcastle gets ekitike so liverpool has to overpay to get a new striker or stick to Nunez.
 
Funny scenario if Newcastle sell him for 120m there Saudi owners with there league next summer will give them the money back when one of the Saudi teams buy Salah for 100m!

Now this Saudi owned club Newcastle can’t be that dumb and sell him!?
 
www.bbc.co.uk

Alexander Isak: How can Liverpool afford Newcastle striker?

Liverpool have spent more than £170m on players this summer and are rumoured to be interested in Newcastle striker Alexander Isak.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

"Liverpool are a super smart football club," football finance expert Kieran Maguire told BBC Sport.
Click to expand...

"They're in an incredibly strong PSR position. Out of the traditional big six clubs
Click to expand...

"They've still got plenty of wiggle room with their transfer budget. Plus, a move for a striker is likely to be paid in instalments, meaning the cost can be spread over multiple seasons."
Click to expand...

Nauseating shit from the BBC.
 
How dare they not hand over their best players to the legacy clubs.


On a serious note, it must really rub Newcastle fans up the wrong way how a club that was one of the architects of the financial rules brought in, are now exploiting said rules to try get Isak. I know the traditional big clubs have a media foothold but it’s a sad state of affairs when no one is putting the argument forward as to why Newcastle should stand their ground on principle.

The whole thing is rather grim.
 
Can someone put me right here? I dont really understand PSR.

Isak cost Newcastle 60m on a 6 year deal - 10m per year when amortized.
3 years left on his contracy so he is worth 3x10m = 30m
If we give them 130m for him, thats 100m pure profit.
So they could buy 5 x 100m players (with the cost spread over 5 years)

In other words, if we buy Isak, NUFC can go out and immediately spend half a billion.

That cant be right, surely?
 
How good is this Ekitike? Never seen him play and seems to have had an underwhelming career other than his time at Frankfurt.
 
mexico1970 said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Alexander Isak: How can Liverpool afford Newcastle striker?

Liverpool have spent more than £170m on players this summer and are rumoured to be interested in Newcastle striker Alexander Isak.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk







Nauseating shit from the BBC.
Click to expand...
ah keiran maguire, the football finance rent a gob, it makes you wonder doesnt it why they always go to him for a quote, i cant imagine he is the only football finance expert but i bet you he is the only one willing to sell himself out for self promotion to anyone and everyone.
 
Goochy said:
Can someone put me right here? I dont really understand PSR.

Isak cost Newcastle 60m on a 6 year deal - 10m per year when amortized.
3 years left on his contracy so he is worth 3x10m = 30m
If we give them 130m for him, thats 100m pure profit.
So they could buy 5 x 100m players (with the cost spread over 5 years)

In other words, if we buy Isak, NUFC can go out and immediately spend half a billion.

That cant be right, surely?
Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons I hate ffp. Football fans end up talking like accountants.

And I don’t have a clue either
 
Goochy said:
Can someone put me right here? I dont really understand PSR.

Isak cost Newcastle 60m on a 6 year deal - 10m per year when amortized.
3 years left on his contracy so he is worth 3x10m = 30m
If we give them 130m for him, thats 100m pure profit.
So they could buy 5 x 100m players (with the cost spread over 5 years)

In other words, if we buy Isak, NUFC can go out and immediately spend half a billion.

That cant be right, surely?
Click to expand...
Yes it can be right, it’s not hard to work out.

You forget, (a Liverpool fan having a bad memory who’d of thought it…), that the 5 players combined will take 100m off the amount of money available for any future spending in each subsequent season.

United are suffering from this now , iirc approx £350m owed on transfers, they have hardly any pot to piss in, and end of next season it will get worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top