Liverpool Rumours Member Posts

 

Use our rumours form to send us liverpool transfer rumours.


(single word yields best result)
 

Our weekly Correct Score Competition is now open for Week 2

ProfG's Profile

Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
Correct Score Competition:

Not entered
Correct Score Competition
Flat Out Racing:

Not played Flat Out Racing


No Profile Picture uploaded

Team:


Where from:


Favourite player:


Best team moment:


Interests:


Timezone:




ProfG's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To ProfG's Posts

 

 

To ProfG's last 5 rumours posts

 

To ProfG's last 5 banter posts

 

To ProfG's last 5 rumour replies

 

To ProfG's last 5 banter replies

 

ProfG's rumours posts with other poster's replies to ProfG's rumours posts

 

30 Dec 2014 20:14:47
Ed002
Over on the rumours page you hinted that Lavezzi is an option under discussion?

I know you hate to discuss players (but after last night everyone will see your predictions for Can and Lallana were spot on. Balotelli too!) so. I am wondering if you or Ed001 see Lavezzi bringing anything that we actually need?
I can't see how he would fit in a squad with Markovic - and Origi - to arrive. If we want a hard working forward then we have Borini for that roll too?

Happy New Year

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - I think you may well have misread what I said Prof.}


1.) 30 Dec 2014 21:20:46
That's a relief! Too much sherry and mince pies perhaps.

{Ed002's Note - The discussion today was between PSG and Inter Prof. It concluded that the transfer of Lavezzi could take place but first PSG need to talk with the player - who has returned to Uruguay without permission. Neither Napoli nor Valencia should be discounted from making a bid. Chelsea were offered Lavezzi in exchange for another player but declined.}


 

 

21 May 2013 08:41:33
Ed002

I know you aren't so keen to talk money these days, for obvious reasons, but could you possibly clarify (in light of today's rumours).

"Free" transfers are not remotely free are they? I thought that simply meant that the old club didn't receive a transfer free but instead a (potentially) similar sum of money was passed directly to the player, often spread through the length of their contract. I recall that Joe Cole's large salary was organized this way?

In simple terms "free" does not mean free?

ProfG.

p. s. Where are you Chris in Tamworth. away fishing?

{Ed002's Note - Right. Typically an out of contract player will be given a "signing on fee" to join. Many clubs look to spread this cost over the length of a contract. Taking as an example Player K signing a two year deal with a £4M "signing on" fee, he would likely be given something like £1M up front and then his salary would be supplented by £30k per week over two years. If the club wished to sell the player on or terminate his contrctt after a year, then whatever remains will be due to the player.}

ProfG

1.) Give a kid a chance instead of Toure!


 

 

 

ProfG's banter posts with other poster's replies to ProfG's banter posts

 

23 Jul 2016 19:27:50
Eds, could you give some insight into the workings of a club that can splash £27M on someone we didn't apparently track (and don't obviously need; but who may turn out well) but won't stump up a little extra for a left back at a fraction of the price?

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - Give me a break.}


1.) 23 Jul 2016 20:01:37
Who have we signed now? This has come totally out of the blue! Who is it who's is it? Come on the suspense is killing me.


2.) 23 Jul 2016 21:11:33
Our valuation of wijnaldum was acceptable to Newcastle so we payed it. Our valuation of Chilwell is less than Leicester want, so the club doesn't want to pay more than what they think he is worth.


3.) 24 Jul 2016 02:16:27
Klopp stated that he has had an eye on Wijnaldum since he was a youth player.


 

 

06 Jul 2016 18:06:40
Ed002. With players being discussed with values around £100M indeed more for your Messi, Ronaldo etc. do we ever get to a point where - under FFP - these players become "untransferable" as no club could offset the expenditure?

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - A very good question - but the summary answer is no, UEFA cannot restict trade.

A little history: In the past Messi has turned down a transfer to one side who had agreed to meet Barcelona's then €250M price tag, and Barcelona and a commercial partner resisted an approach by a commercial organisation on behalf of an English side with an offer to buy, or at least part fund, the purchase of the player. I am aware that in Spain there has been speculation about an offer being made during the summer 2014 transfer window, but it is "largely" incorrect. This all started in 2012 when in mid December Anzhi made an offer to Barcelona that matched the €250M euro release clause that existed in his contract, and put up what I am told was a "very" significant personal package. However, Messi was not interested in a move to Russia and Barcelona did not want to sell - so Messi, in early February 2013, extended his contract with Barcelona. In the early summer of 2013 efforts were being made by Adidas to broker a deal that would get Messi away from Nike and to one of their three high-profile clubs that they were invoved with at the time. Very quickly Real Madrid were ruled out and with Pep Guardiola moving to Bayern Munich that pretty much saw the end of any chance of a move there (given the strained relationship) at the time. This left Chelsea, and I can confirm that discussions were held about making a firm bid - at this point we are in late 2013 and early 2014 and Messi was in a verbal spat with Barcelona about getting a further extension - which the club were against. Ultimately, the player was (at least in his eyes) available during the Spring of 2014 and at that point Chelsea and Adidas made his management representatives and Barcelona aware of what they would be willing to do to make a transfer happen. Since then he has again extended his contract with Barcelona and Chelsea and Adidas have parted company. I understand that again they see three possible destinations for the player but I am not going to get involved in any further speculation at this time – but one of those destinations is the new money of Manchester City. If the right money were offered to the club, then Barcelona would be open to selling - and if the package were good enough, the player would consider any offers. The difficulties include his tax issues and the vast amounts of money involved. Manchester City have already started to try and negotiate - they may persist else switch to Suarez.

So: A number of questions were asked of representatives of UEFA in December 2014 regarding the transfer of the financially very high-end players and the impact on FFP. It is clear that exceptions would need to be put in place as the alternative could be lawsuits from players regarding restrictions on trade. As such, it would not be an FFP issue in any one year for a number of clubs but it would be an issue for any club looking to do any other business over forthcoming years.

And the amounts of money involved are well beyond significant.}


1.) 06 Jul 2016 21:18:08
Incredible knowledge.


2.) 06 Jul 2016 21:47:13
All I can say is thank you very much for this info Ed002. A very good read indeed. Is Messi aware of the interest from Man City and is he willing to move their despite his strained relationship with Pep?

Red Sandman.

{Ed002's Note - Yes he is aware.}


3.) 06 Jul 2016 22:00:08
It does make you wonder, what with all the poor and starving in the world, that paying that much for a footballer is vulgarity in the extreme.


4.) 06 Jul 2016 22:06:48
Wow, that's possibly my favourite answer ever on this site. Absolutely fascinating stuff. Nice one eds.


5.) 06 Jul 2016 22:16:50
I was only discussing with one of my mates in work, let's say you won a big jackpot on the euro millions, 80-90 million euro, it would change your life forever but you couldn't even afford one of the best footballers in the world.

{Ed002's Note - It depends what you want him to do for you.}


6.) 06 Jul 2016 22:30:27
Cheers ed2. Never cease to amaze with your knowledge. To the point I only ever believe what you and ed001 say.
I think I speak for a lot of us when I say this site is a massive part for all of us, and thank you for doing it for free.
And thanks to the OP! For asking a genuinely interesting question, and not when Pogba, Lacazette and Dahoud will join us for £500 million.

{Ed002's Note - Personally, I wouldn't believe anything Ed001 says.}


7.) 06 Jul 2016 22:53:36
very insightful, does make you think when other teams and fans moan about a £20 mill player, also its not just down to the transfer fee that we now have to look at.

{Ed002's Note - Fans moan.}


8.) 06 Jul 2016 23:37:51
That's an incredible answer to that post and just goes to show the knowledge you possess. It must piss you off when asked the same mundane questions about random players moving to us when you are capable of divulging information like this. Great site keep you the good work.


9.) 07 Jul 2016 08:21:44
Many thanks for the insight, and indeed for the time you and the other Eds dedicate daily for the users of this site.


 

 

12 May 2016 12:57:21
Ed002
Without making it Liverpool-centered (because of the response it would get), when you have a mo' could you explain to us what the formal limits of "tapping-up" are? I can see that a manager speaking to a player directly about a move is banned. (although I can't see why having an agent involved makes it any better), but I imagine that all players when they get together discuss whether they might move, ask questions like "if there were an offer would you be interested" - just in their general banter? is that also illegal? Also, why does this apply to contracts in football (? sport in general? ) but not other jobs in the world?

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - Clubs or representatives of clubs are not allowed to directly approach any player who is contracted to another football club. They can approach his club and ask for permission to speak to a player and typically that would be agreed on the basis of a commitment to pay a specific fees. Some clubs (typically in old Eastern bloc countries - Russia and Ukraine aside) will give permission based on interest rather than a commitment to buy - and that is because they rely heavily on income from transfers. An example here might be Marko Grujic who had spoken to a number of sides (e.g. Chelsea, Hamburg, Stuttgart, Udinese and Anderlech) with the permission of Red Star Belgrade before speaking with Liverpool. It is excepted that managers will call players they know but they are not allowed to discuss transfers - and everyone knows that. No doubt it happens a lot but the brighter managers or coaches should perhaps not do it with players who are keen to give interviews and discuss the matter (e.g. Zielinski and Goetze). The correct process to follow would be to typically discuss options with the agent of a player before approaching his club.}


1.) 12 May 2016 18:25:38
Thanks for your time (again) Ed002. (still find it a bit arcane though. why doesn't football behave like other professions where head hunting etc is the norm. is football so unstable that it needs these rules? ) .

{Ed002's Note - Sorry you don't understand. Footballers are contracted to clubs fopr fixed periods of time. Company employees are not.}


 

 

05 Oct 2015 21:24:48
Ed002

How will Wonder Dog Sparky take Brendan's departure ? Does he have a CA vs JK preference ? Will they move in ?

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - He prefers Carlo.}


1.) 05 Oct 2015 21:48:29
Smart doggie.


 

 

24 Sep 2015 17:29:49
At the risk of an RTFP response. could I clarify? Macca didn't mention Ancelloti by name did he ? Just someone who had previously managed a large Spanish club?

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - He is talking about Ancelotti.}


1.) 24 Sep 2015 19:33:16
Who else is on sabbatical and recently managed a big Spanish team?


2.) 24 Sep 2015 20:00:27
It is Ancelloti. it`s all over the media.


3.) 24 Sep 2015 18:18:21
Hi ED'S,just hope the owners have got the balls to interview both KLOPP and ANCELLOTTI and show some ambition both are ready and available and come as trophy winners,please no more bright young things. . also ED'S how confident are you that FSG will get this next appointment right because my patience with them is very low and I think the finger of suspicion will be pointed at them once RODGERS has gone,the structure they have in place is all wrong,they have been here since 2010 and we haven't moved any further,were still a yo-yo team.

{Ed002's Note - Liverpool has shown no interest in Klopp - move on.}


 

 

 

ProfG's rumour replies

 

Click To View This Thread

30 May 2016 12:24:49
No sign of the Babel-copter though? Disappointing. A ride round the country, continually spotted by readers, would convince him for sure.

ProfG

 

 

Click To View This Thread

08 Jun 2015 20:44:16
I think that if we had had Ings at the beginning of the season we may well have achieved top 4.

He is a far better fit to our "style" of play (although I have begun to doubt what that actually is. ) than any of the current (fit) strikers.

The issue for me are (1) the reduced opportunities for Sinclair and (2) what then is the role for Origi ? There are now three strikers behind Sturridge and that is without Lambert, Aspas, Borini and Balotelli. I can't see another being brought in.

ProfG

 

 

Click To View This Thread

30 Dec 2014 21:20:46
That's a relief! Too much sherry and mince pies perhaps.

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - The discussion today was between PSG and Inter Prof. It concluded that the transfer of Lavezzi could take place but first PSG need to talk with the player - who has returned to Uruguay without permission. Neither Napoli nor Valencia should be discounted from making a bid. Chelsea were offered Lavezzi in exchange for another player but declined.}


 

 

Click To View This Thread

I am sure Eds002 and 001 could add to this but perhaps you should consider this definition:

To Brendan (verb) - to leave a player in a position where they don’t know what their role or future is at the club by any number of means including, but not limited to:
a) neither selecting players, nor allowing them to leave
b) loaning, but not caring how players actually perform on loan or how to integrate them upon their return
c) not offering the majority of young players a route to develop

It may be brought about buy buying too many players for similar positions, but failing to operate a happy rotation policy.

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - You missed the kick in the balls.}


 

 

Click To View This Thread

26 Aug 2014 05:43:14
Without wishing to crawl too much.

I joked earlier in the summer when asking if Ed002 was available as an adviser to LFC. . But having read that response, and yesterdays comment on the lack of transfer / youth strategy, I cannot help thinking that Ed002 could help Brendan considerably?

ProfG

 

 

 

ProfG's banter replies

 

Click To View This Thread

05 Sep 2016 08:59:12
Yes, I agree that referees lying cannot be good for the game!

But it is a very artificial situation whereby you can't take action after a match if the referee had a view/ interpretation of it in a match (which turns out to be incorrect/ sub optimal)? Better to make the rule sensible, rather than asking referees to lie or allowing violent conduct to escape unpunished?

In the case in point, few would doubt Aguero had committed a punishable act? Better a rule that allows punishment irrespective of the referees view / non view / on the spot interpretation?

ProfG

 

 

Click To View This Thread

05 Sep 2016 07:28:14
I am confused. I had the impression he was suggesting they were asked to say they hadn't seen something in order for it to receive the CORRECT post-match punishment? It is the opposite of match fixing -it is correctly punishing violent conduct irrespective of what the on referee interpreted at the time? Albeit a mischievous solution to an artificial problem.

The best was to avoid that would simply be to remove the rule that if a referee sees something it cannot be retrospectively punished. Instead have the "citing committee" function more like rugby. If there is violence / serious cheating it should be dealt with, whatever the referees "on-the-spot" interpretation was?

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - The point is that the referees should be honest if they have seen something.}


 

 

Click To View This Thread

07 Jul 2016 08:21:44
Many thanks for the insight, and indeed for the time you and the other Eds dedicate daily for the users of this site.

ProfG

 

 

Click To View This Thread

12 May 2016 18:25:38
Thanks for your time (again) Ed002. (still find it a bit arcane though. why doesn't football behave like other professions where head hunting etc is the norm. is football so unstable that it needs these rules? ) .

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - Sorry you don't understand. Footballers are contracted to clubs fopr fixed periods of time. Company employees are not.}


 

 

Click To View This Thread

27 Apr 2016 16:28:23
The other reason they are banned is that they can potentially also be used as masking agents to make it harder to detect other abuses. If your pee is more dilute then the concentrations of banned substances would appear lower. Water loss is a crazy and dangerous way to lose "weight" as Ed002 says.
Not that I suggest that is the case here.

ProfG

{Ed002's Note - I suspect that if he had been juicing then the tests would be good enough to unmask it - certainly that is the claim from the folks who do the testing of the ball players in the US now.}