suarez cant be creator provider and scorer all in one... at best, at least at this club, he is the provider. we need the finisher

---

Added on September 3, 2012, 9:34 ami wouldnt mind having the drog in red. used to be my most hated player but oh well...

This post has been edited by Petre: Sep 3 2012, 09:34 AM

at least Carragher will be relieved he is playing for us n not against us

Dont be too happy yet. Drog is getting $200k per week. I'm not sure he will settle for $50k per week in Liverpool.
It will be weird to see him in Red though.

If we cannot afford Dempsey we cannot afford Drog's wages. Period.

We can afford Dempsey. It's not about the $1million extra we have to pay. It's about refusing to pay.
The club felt that we were bullied in this situation, hence refuse to pay.

We can also afford Drog's wages after releasing 9 players and recruiting only 3. The question is, will we do it? I doubt the present management will be so generous.

Enough with Dempsey and Drogba lah. It's sound like lusting best friend wife. Haha...
Get a grip man, losing second time doesn't mean the end of the Liverpool journey. Have faith on them.

Drogba/Owen/Dempsey?? o dear

the man behind the failure to sign dempsey had been demoted am i not right? so drogba, cant rule out yet... who else we can sign? ussain bolt? lol

drogba just moved to china....u think he want to move back to uk? money is good there

Hopefully Shenhua will loan Drog to us
I am quietly confident Suarez and Drog can work well together.

As for the traitor (Owen), he can rot on the bench.

I think the hierarchy was a little emo when refusing to pay that extra mil for Dempsey. on the other hand, i felt we are suffering for the the previous regime aborted plan. We were chasing Adam for 2 window and now he is gone. Out record signing Carroll loaned out. The case of Carroll going on loan is more like we refuse to bulge yet we want to reduce wage. It's all about the money now. We threw away a truck load of cash recently, now we are faced with the consequences.

Its a harsh reality but this is a good example of the club is a business first and a football club next.

I don't like the idea of saving a mil and loan Carroll out when we only hv 1 experience striker who is not exactly scoring and 2 young striker. I don't fancy Carroll but we have him and yet loan him when we are thin.

Its gonna be a long and testing season this one. the good thing i see is apart from our opening match, we didnt play bad against City and Arsenal. We were unlucky against City not to win. Against Arsenal we sorely miss a lethal striker.

against 2 of the big 4, at home, we got 1 point, and against one of thse 'small' teams, we lost...

it doesnt look good to me

This post has been edited by Petre: Sep 3 2012, 10:13 AM

Very good point. I was gutted as well. When Caroll was gone, I thought Demps gonna finally arrive. Poor decision. It was always about the money for the Yankees from the start. As I always said, they are not here to throw their money like oil rich Arabs.

There is good and bad in the way they do business. In a positive note, Liverpool will always be financially stable but on a negative side, we will need to take a lot of gambles. I'm not pleased with the Yanks but I am not blaming them either. We dont want to end up like Leeds, victim of their own greed for success.

haih...carrol had his touch on all 3 west ham goals before he got injured yet our so called manager thinks he doesnt fit into his tika taka kiki lala kit kat football "philosophy"...and now we only have suarez who cant finish a simple goals and can only score wonder goals...we're in big trouble

ok...time to use...our antidote

"If you cant support us when we are losing, Dont support us when we are winning"

Hm.. then we switch Suarez to central midfield, move Shelvey to attack. Suarez can then score all the wondergoals from far. HEHE.
Now's that "Koko Krunch" philosophy.

Let's not digress from the core of the issue. The point of discussion here is, are both terms mean the same thing? And by having 2-different terms here, would the game be played in similar fashion? If the answer is yes, we're simply debating over a non-existent issue here, more of pride than anything. If the answer is a big NO, then we do really have to have a serious discussion over it. Lol.

Irrespective of what the English believes in or their preference of the term football over soccer as what you've suggested so, I have nothing except respect for what the English .... oops maybe I should say the British believes in, they have their good reasons to be so, moreso they have been passionately attached to the game for more than a century and it would be suicide to now ask them to call it soccer.

But the same that cannot be said that others must follow suite and use the term football, if they choose or prefer the word soccer over football. Not sure on your opinion of being disrespectful by using the term football. I do join some other football forums out of leisure, I believe they're mainly UK based forums and i chose to use both words at random and I don't get any reaction at all from the forummers, looks like we're more British than the British here.

Just the other day not too long ago, this ang-moh fren said to me ... "hey, i'll be late for the event i'll need to take the 2-boys to school for a soccer match" and i jokingly I asked .... "Football is it?," reply I got was ..... "pal you sounds more English than me, ho ho ho". Lol.

Nevertheless, you may wanna google espn.soccer.com and espn.football.com and sees what comes out of it.

Cheers and have a nice day.

This post has been edited by redkop63: Sep 3 2012, 10:44 AM

Actually I agree with some of the reasons brought up by the owners as well. We shouldn't be paying for stopgap solutions like Dempsey/Drog/Owen. These guys have at the most 2-3 years left in them, compared to the rest of the team. We have so much cover for both Carra and Gerrard because they're on their last legs. Similarly, we don't want an aging strike force, whether or not they are good. The philosophy Fenway has been showing is a good one, build from the ground up with young talent, and as much as it pains me that we're screwed atm, it's something worth looking at if you ask me.


We didn't buy carroll for 35M for him to have his touch in all our goals. We bought him to score them.

Best team?

Play 3, score 0 from open play.

Already posted before, no prize or point for possession, goal does.

How to challenge the top 4 when the team struggling for goal?
And somemore leaking goal easily.

If cannot win next PL match against Sunderland, and ManU, talk of relegation battle may emerge again...

bottom line is, you cannot succeed without spending. like it or not, thatst he truth. we can talk all day about buying youth and potential. without success, there will be no money. its a chained reaction. clubs been doing it for many years. take westham for example. many good players come from there. but what are they today? still midtable team...

success has to come fast, and especially with today's market where the billionaires can spend so easily, its a fact and you cannot deny it. we can develope all we can, but once the wealthy decides to spend, all our effort will gone to nothing.

i advocated instant success 2 seasons ago, and i still selling it now. unfortunately, we dont have the wallet. number 19 wont come anytime soon fellas. and i dont think FSG are the right people, they will never get us there.

in any business, you need to be ruthless. that was what SAF did. now mancity are doing it. SAF showed intent by buying RVP. who cares if he still have 2-3 seasons? if he can bring success, more success will come... that is what separetes us from them - we got small mentality

and the way i see it, there is now the BIG3, the NEXT2, and ... the rest... at best, we are now only top10

This post has been edited by Petre: Sep 3 2012, 10:47 AM