takanohana

f*ck me

Kuyt as a number 8 is just so right...why is that?

He is too. Think he was punditing on the England-Ukraine game the other day, and ref one of the Ukrainian players started with 'Obviously I don't know anything him about him but...' No, you're only being paid to be a pundit on the BBC Teddy, why would we expect you to know what you're talking about...?

Despite the absence of even a hint of it in the Transfer thread, I'm still hoping we sign an attacking player (anyone will do at this point...) to deal with the 'park the bus' issue this season. If we don't, and despite our performances last year, I'll be more pessimistic about our chance for the title than I have been for a while. Which probably means we'll win it...

Yay

If he is going, I'd rather he didn't just say so. Less likely to get top whack for him if he makes a public statement that he's looking to move.

£5m for Arbeloa...?? He's got to be worth more than that if he goes.

Think there's something in what he's saying. Not to the extent he makes out, and Rush coming back by no means a terrible transfer, but I remember at the time worrying if it would disturb the side trying to fit him in again. Can be argued it did and we'd have been better sticking with Aldo.

Warren Bradley taking advantage of the situation. From Guardian... Liverpool and Everton 'must' share new ground, council says Liverpool and Everton must share a new stadium if they are to thrive in future, the leader of Liverpool City Council has said. If they do not, the city will not be included within England's 2018 World Cup bid because "Anfield and Goodison Park do not fit Fifa's criteria". Warren Bradley, also head of the city's 2018 bid committee, has brought the groundshare debate to the fore again after Liverpool's accounts showed the club lost £42.6m last year. Bradley, who says he has "seen the books of both clubs", told The Observer: "We've got to do something if we are serious about being a bidding city for the World Cup. I don't want to see everything migrate down the M62 to Manchester where there are two fabulous stadiums," he said, refering to Old Trafford and ­Eastlands. "There is a need for a 60,000 fit-for-purpose, 21st-century stadium in ­Liverpool. It would cost around £300m. Sure, we still have the tribalistic ­supporters in the city who would say, 'I won't sit in it after a Liverpudlian or Evertonian has.' But that's not the argument, is it? I don't see any reason why it can't work – it does so across the southern hemisphere, and in Germany, Italy and America." The prospective stadium would be situated between the two clubs on Stanley Park, where Liverpool have said they would like to build their own new ground. Both clubs are dismissive of Bradley's claims, but Bradley is confident he has support across Liverpool. "What I've said is absolutely right and is now being amplified in the city in business, at the clubs privately, and with the supporters. When you speak privately to different people at the clubs – at director level – they tell you what they think, but will never publicly go on record. "There is a groundswell of support now that it is the only way forward for both football clubs." Bradley's views are backed by the Northwest Regional Development Agency, a major stakeholder in the city's bid, which said: "The Agency was supportive of the idea of a groundshare between Liverpool and Everton due to the economic sense this made. However, we accept that any decision has always been a matter for the two clubs." Bradley accepts that they must be on board, but believes that there is now no other choice. "We recognise the Fifa criteria that both clubs must have 40,000-plus seats available to the paying public that doesn't include VIPs. I don't believe either club is in a position to satisfy that criteria, so therefore something needs to be done quickly." Goodison Park is definitely too small, while Anfield's capacity of 45,000-plus may also fall short of requirements. The struggle of Liverpool owners Bill Hicks and George Gillet to refinance their £350m debt facility by the end of next month would seem to threaten the club's plans to build its own stadium on Stanley Park. Liverpool declined to comment, but it is understood they maintain it is business as usual. Everton, meanwhile, will find out by the autumn if their proposed ­controversial move outside the city to a new stadium at Kirkby – in partnership with Tesco – will be agreed by the government. Bradley is sceptical. "The longer it goes on the less likelihood it can be delivered financially by the club. I firmly believe Everton is taking the wrong step by moving out of the city," he said. "This is raw economics. I've had a season ticket at Everton for 30 years, so this is not about which way the wind is blowing. "I firmly believe the economic viability of both clubs, not only in the present climate, but, in the future, has got to be the ability to invest on the field, not in hard infrastructure. Having looked at the books of both clubs, at the moment about 70% of the bottom line goes to hard infrastructure. If they shared a stadium they could cut that down to about 30 to 35 per cent and the rest could go on footballers." While Liverpool would not comment on the record, Everton spokesman Ian Ross was explicit in voicing the club's anger at Bradley. "Yes, the Everton directors have one view and that view is that we should push ahead with the destination project. For Warren Bradley to suggest that the directors have one view and that is [to have] a shared stadium is the usual utter nonsense. "We have spent nearly three years working on destination Kirkby and are giving absolutely no consideration to any other scheme. Perhaps ­councillor Bradley should have fought somewhat harder to keep Everton inside the Liverpool city boundary if he is that intent on a joint stadium. "We would have welcomed more help from our city council – that never ­happened, which is why we pursued Kirkby. For councillor Bradley to now claim there is a weight of opinion to suggest we should now have a joint ­stadium would appear to be opportunism of the first order." Bradley said he will chair a meeting over the coming fortnight of the stakeholders involved in the city's bid to be part of England 2018. It will include the directors of Liverpool and Everton and the idea of a joint stadium is bound to be discussed ahead of the first visit to the city by the 2018 committee next month. By then Liverpool's financial situation may also be clearer. If RBS, one of the two main creditors, does not wish to refinance its part of the debt the bank could countenance actually running the club itself. As the credit crisis has made the government and taxpayer a sizeable owner of RBS this would be unprecedented in English football and would have major implications for the Premier League as a global brand. The Premier League was unavailable for comment. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/ju...n-stadium-share

I always think of Souness to Sampdoria for £650k as the worst deal we've ever done. A shockingkly low fee for the player he was at that time, couldn't understand it at the time, still can't now...

Losing Xabi doesn't bear thinking about now (not that it did before). Hope bridges have been burnt there...

Appears not. Anyone know if Rafa wanted him this summer, or were we beaten to the punch?

This content is not viewable to guests.

Don't be silly. There'll be nothing but speculation till page 1004 when it will be confirmed that Rafa has bought Montse a new watch.

another close season, another debate about what Bascombe knows or doesn't know. happy days

Hilarious. Heinz blatantly swung his arm back at Torres, 'accidental' reckons Beglin.

Kuyt isn't usually played up front and has scored when he has been. Not sure giving 'the impression' of going for a win is a good basis for picking a team. Reckon it might be better to actually go for the win by picking players in form

Good reasons for all of them being on the bench: Keane had a shocker last time out, Babel in v poor form and Torres feeling his way back after long absence,should be on soon...ah here we go

What ""call to arms"" was that?

I hope you (DH) are right but I don't think that football as it's going is just a contiuation of the haves and the have nots. In the 70s and 80s yes there were clubs with more money to splash around than others but it was nothing like the degree its reaching now. Middling clubs like Ipswich, Southampton and (dare I say) Everton in the mid 80s could, with a good manager and a team that didn't cost the earth, put together a challenge for the title. Watford and Wimbledon could come from nowhere to do the same or win the FA cup (when it was still taken seriously by the 'big' clubs). With the vast amount of money in the game now, and players willing to move from all corners of the world to where the lucre is, if you don't have a very rich owner you won't stand a chance. Doesn't matter how good your manager is or if you've accumulated a particularly talented group of players for relatively little money. Clough, Taylor, Kendall couldn't do now what they did then (and yes I know they weren't all exactly impoverished). At some point the amount of money that certain clubs have just puts them out of reach. The principle of rich, medium and poor clubs is the same, but the the gap is too big to bridge until your number comes up in the mercenary investor lottery.

Not about whining when someone else gets money, it's not good for the game whether its Man City or Liverpool being bankrolled to ridiculous levels (not that we currently are but if DIC come in who knows) What exactly does winning the league or anything mean if it becomes so determined by the whims of random rich people?

Biggest concern for me is what these billioniare take-overs are going to do to football. Thought so when it happened at Chelsea and Liverpool too. It becomes: which of 3 or 4 clubs are going to overspend their way to the title or the european cup this season? Aka, how to slowly suck all meaning out of the game. It's a bloody disgrace that there's a complete absence of leadership on this issue from the governing bodies, just periodic whinging from Platini et al.

Yep, sadly not sure if anything will be done about it though. Any sense of the good of the game has long since been buried by the cynicism of the Premier League and Scudamore who to coin an old cliche know the price of everything and the value of nothing. FA are hopeless. Some sort of co-ordinated European strategy for football that understands football is not just another business would be nice. Not holding my breath though...

Further evidence that football in England is going to hell. Doesn't matter if it's Man City, Liverpool or whoever, it's bad for the game to become this stratified and based on who's got the biggest billionaire owner.

We're not out...