Kopfaithful

they also had a very difficult line to tread with regard all that type of thing - trying to keep us "old school" if you like, whilst trying to make the most of our name. although we could perhaps have been marketed more and to greater effect, it doesn't mean it would have been better.

not that i can see. i can only imagine how gutted david moores must be .... although i guess 80-odd mil softens the blow!

nice one connie. although you probably don't remember, i met you a couple of years back when we toured the US and canada pre-season. was on your bus up to the celtic game and met you in toronto too. good to hear you're still loving it.

you're right. i'm gonna be gutted to sell up though :-(

aren't they only offering to keep the ticket rights to those who aren't forced to sell - so for those who agree 1st time?

it was english heritage i think, not the council.

my mate who's a west ham fan reckons west ham are up in front of the FA tomorrow to explain the ownership of both machereno and tevez. so i guess we may find out tomorrow or friday.

as i'm sure has been said about 20 times on this thread, it's 3 clubs from july 1st. larrson has not played for 3 clubs since then.

and all 3 of those teams are probably the least aggressive defensive sides in the country and less likely to hit him with a tackle from behind. as i said earlier i'm happy he's gone. without doubt kuyt is an improvement for our team and comparing morientes in terms of work rate with kuyt is plain unfair and the lad probably even out works ian rush's contribution at his working best! we'll have to agree to disagree about him!

and i'm pleased we got rid of him too - it didn't work out with him. it doesn't mean he didn't try to make it work. i think the lad himself was gutted it didn't work.

You defo watched a different player to me. Me and my mates often agreed if Morientes had managed the goal return that Cisse had, he'd still be with the club, because his attitude was spot on (in fact last seasons cup semi v chelsea summed up the difference between the two of them in terms of attitude). He was certainly short of confidence and imo, he didn't like getting hoofed from behind and getting nothing for it. in many a game I'd watch his head go down after the 3rd or 4th time he'd get taken out and get nothing. Some players are just not cut out to play in certain leagues - his domestic form lowered his confidence so he even struggled in european games in the end. But I have no doubt effort was not one of the reasons he failed. and as for your kuyt comaprision - i'd sooner have kuyt too. he's clearly more effective in our league than morientes and he's younger too. however, it doesn't mean i'm not happy it's working out for morientes. in fact it's best of both worlds imo - we have a player who's doing the business for us and an ex-player has been able to go and find himself a decent side and get back to his true level in an environment that suits his style more.

nothing quiet about it imo. he's brought in aurelio and Insua in the last 2 windows. If aurelio could stay fit, I would suspect we'd have seen a lot less of Riise this season. I reckon rafa will spend the rest of this season assessing if he thinks Insua can make an impact next season and if not we'll go out and buy a left back. i've no doubt about that at all. Personally, I think he'd be a massive success and well loved at a club like Villa or Spurs. His limitations with us are expose as we spend so much time in possession pushing forward at home, that we need someone who can use the ball well and be offensively effective, as well as doing a job as left back. As others have pointed out on this thread, his hoofs and random smash it shots, do nothing but relieve the pressure on the defending team. For teams that have less possession, I think he would be a very effective player.

I'm almost certain Dubai does not allow Jews into the country.

how many has morientes got now? i'm made up for him. he worked his nuts off when he was with us, it just didn't work out for him.

I would imagine confidentiality agreements prevent the club from saying very much at all. We'll hear nothing until G&H put in an official bid and the board will need to make the case for the takeover to the shareholders. At that point we still may not find out the details of the DIC deal and the difference between the the 2 bids.

yeah i think that is the number of issued shares. but i also think that perhaps our statement last week refered to that, but i don't understand all this enough.

is that rule 2.10 not just in relation to the statement made by the club last week?

does that mean he's bought anything or just planning to make an offer?

Yes if I thought it wasn't in the best interests I wouldn't agree to sell - but I imagine whatever Moores and Parry want approving will have a pretty good case and currently my gut reaction is to trust them. The problem is I am just 2 shares ... there's 17,000+ shares that are not in control of David Moores, so my vote means very little. The real significant ones are Granada (9.9%), Morgan (5%) and the two city institutions (with 3% each). It's these people the board really have to convince, as I would imagine the likes of myself would have almost have to trust what the board recommend through lack of understanding of the offer, as I'd imagine it'll be in business speak not plain english! Also once they get 90% I have not choice I understand - i have to sell.

I don't believe their statement said that, it just said they intended to break off negotiations. I am a shareholder - but if a condition of the offer was that it needed to make the 90% mark otherwise they'd buy none of them (I don't know if they can make such an offer?) and I felt whoever it was making the offer was good for the future of LFC, then I would feel compelled to sell.

as soon as they make an offer for moores shares, they are obliged to make an offer for the entire stock of the company at the same price per share as moores was prepared to accept.

I think the problem a lot of people have is it's being percieved by some that the only thing that chaged is the extra 500 quid per share. LFC will need ot make the case at some point that it's not been about that. Until that point, I think some people will be uneasy. Personally I'm happy to wait till they make their case - but it seems some prefer to have a lynch mob before knowing the facts. you had been making sense on this thread up until that point. now you come out with this crazy talk!! :-)

either way, the PL supposedly looked at this in September and didn't have an issue then. I don't see how they can change their position now.

and by the sounds of things we'd agreed with DIC on MOnday and even gone as far as preparing a joint statement. it's not done till it's done.

And I thought this had all been investigated at the time. The players are owned by WHU, but they pay a 90% sell on if they choose to sell and have to sell if a certain fee comes in. So technically they are WHU's players. I don't see why the PL would suddenly be bothered about this now. It seems a bit late to me.