mooks

I'm not making these numbers up. These were the only numbers reported as far as I can tell. Whether they're accurate f*** knows and I find it hard to believe we would pay £5m for a loan fee but it's pretty clear that we did pay a loan fee and a substantial one at that. Liverpool guzump Arsenal for Nuri Sahin loan http://metro.co.uk/2012/08/24/liverpool-guzump-arsenal-for-nuri-sahin-loan-548860/ Liverpool are on the verge of signing Nuri Sahin on loan from Real Madrid after fending off interest from Arsenal. It is understood that the Gunners had agreed to hand over a £2 million loan fee, plus pay most of Sahin’s wages, only for Liverpool to trump that by promising a £5 million fee and to cover all salary and relocation costs. Liverpool have also promised Sahin regular playing time, and working under Jose Mourinho’s close friend Brendan Rodgers has been a pull, as the 23-year-old still harbours ambitions of making the Madrid first-team next season. The Reds are now expecting Sahin on Merseyside in the next 24 hours, with Rodgers confirming a deal is close following Liverpool’s 1-0 win over Hearts in the Europa League last night. ‘Hopefully in the next 24 hours we will get some confirmation on that. It’s quite far along,’ Rodgers told reporters. Liverpool are not expected to have an automatic option to buy Sahin next summer, but will get the first refusal if he is put up for sale. Arsenal meanwhile, will turn to other midfield options after refusing to match Liverpool’s bid, believing it not to be value for money. You're entirely missing the bigger picture. Skrtel's form dropped in the first half of last season but after the FA Cup exit Rodgers simply bombed him out. That alone ensured his transfer value would plummet. A responsible / knowledgeable manager would have continued to start Skrtel in 30-40% of games to protect his value and not let the whole world know that his manager doesn't think he should be near the starting line-up of a 7th place team. Particularly when we had almost nothing left to play for during this period. I do not think Rodgers would rather loan than sell. I just happen to think he's not very good at getting value for money for our players. I also don't think Rodgers understands the concept of rotation. He appears very dogmatic in his selections - starting Sterling every week for 3 months and then hardly involving him, for example. Then deciding Carragher should start every game ahead of Skrtel. A bit more finesse and guile is required of a Liverpool manager or, indeed, at any leading club.

We paid Madrid to bring Sahin on loan (reported £5 million). No-one has any problem with loaning out youngsters who need experience. Or senior players who are past their sell-by date even. But to loan out two players who were worth a conservative £30 million pounds 12 months ago is gross mismanagement and it's willful blindness to say otherwise.

Prescient? He only said that a day or two ago ,,,

Oh, the irony

Where did he say that?

I'm not seeing that at all

Okay, so Pepe's a liar now. Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth ...

His praise for the supporters and his teammates could hardly have been more fulsome

Huh?

Bland statements are known for stirring up support ...

Ah, the retort of the vanquished

Ask Stevie Gerrard

Oh, okay, so the issue is between Rodgers and FSG then ...

Has anyone considered that we may have a new manager next summer? And that Pepe may return as our first choice goalkeeper?

The Carroll thing burnt Rodgers? What do you mean?

Judging by that letter there was bad blood between Pepe and Brendan, or at least tensions beneath the surface. I do not doubt that that played a part in Brendan's decision.

How about having the balls to tell Pepe he's not wanted before trying to arrange loan deals for him?

In a nutshell

Neymar who?

It's his head on the block (our dreams as well ...)

You're spot on there. What happened next is that Reina's Barca move fell through and Rodgers lacked the flexibility to adapt his transfer strategy accordingly. Hence a goodly portion of our transfer budget going on a position that was low down on our list of priorities. Leaving aside the fact that we aren't even sure the position has been strengthened period.

First off, I'm defending Pepe from unwarranted allegations that he forced the club's hand and demanded a move. As for Rodgers, it's not just a question of getting the keeper he wants - it's also about ensuring we get value for the players who leave. For the old-timers let's go back in time to 1976. Kevin Keegan has said he is going to leave for a continental club at the end of the season. Bob Paisely has identified Kenny Dalglish as his replacement and believes Kenny is a superior player. Would it have made sense for Bob to sign Kenny in the summer of '76 and loan Keegan out for a year while planning to sell him in '77? Even if he thought Kenny was the better player?

There's no maybe to it - Rodgers has come out and said as much. As far as I can tell DH is the only one banging on about Reina demanding to leave, which is so patently untrue. Rodgers obviously believes he has landed a real coup by signing Mignolet and that loaning Pepe out and dramatically diminishing his transfer value is a price worth paying. Time will tell.

No, we're a legendary football club. However, we're not being run properly (although there are degrees of incompetence). The facts are that Pepe only asked to go to one club - Barca. When they no longer needed to replace Valdes there is no indication whatsoever that Pepe wanted to leave Liverpool. Indeed, the evidence is to the contrary - Rodgers himself said that it was his decision to force Reina out. When BR went ahead and bought Mignolet he told the world and Pepe himself that Mignolet was brought in as competition. So your first choice simply wasn't available - no-one needed to "force" Pepe to stay. It's just prattling to suggest otherwise. In an ideal world you balance the books. Assuming Pepe is at least as good a goalkeeper as Mignolet currently we have lost millions of pounds from our transfer budget for no reason when we could simply have replaced Pepe next year if required. And yes, I know how much United regretted "forcing" Ronaldo to stay. Or we regretted "forcing" Alonso to stay in 2008. etc., etc.

Who said that Barca have an agreement for Reina to wait a year? And who is this purported agreement with? Even if Barcelona and Liverpool had signed a contract for Reina to move there next year why would we loan him out rather than just keep him for another season? Did United loan Ronaldo out for his last season? Did we loan Keegan out? Etc., etc. By the way, Reina cannot demand a move to Barca or anywhere else. If Valdes did a u-turn again in August and we decided to let Reina go we could have brought in Mignolet then. THAT is how a proper football club is run.