Liverpool Rumours Archive June 08 2017

 

Use our rumours form to send us liverpool transfer rumours.

08 Jun 2017 14:04:25
Afternoon Eds. will our upcoming transfer ban prevent Solanke deal happening as well, or is that done.

Believable2 Unbelievable7

{Ed002's Note - No, the ban relates to academy players.}

08 Jun 2017 20:05:36
I think he means the ban he thinks we'll get over the whole VVD debacle.

Agree3 Disagree6

{Ed002's Note - I am not aware of any such ban.}

08 Jun 2017 21:13:47
Yeah it was the youth ban, just wondered if it's in effect or due to start on X date, so wondered if it has any impact on Solanke. But, now I'm interested in the reply From Lfc hopeful2. If we are banned by some authority due to VVD, could that stop Solanke?

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed002's Note - The academy ban is in place and has no impact on Solanke. If there was a ban that took immediate effect then it would also not impact an agreement that has already been reached - but Solanke cannot go ahead without an agreement on the fee to be paid to Chelsea.}

08 Jun 2017 23:18:42
THanks ed. so this is expected to go to tribunal for fee.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed002's Note - As far as I know yes. Liverpool could always mafe an offer to Chelsea to avoid it.}

09 Jun 2017 00:57:21
Of course we could Ed but that would be the easy thing to do, will probably turn out like the ings situation and end up paying more than we should 😂.

Agree3 Disagree0

09 Jun 2017 03:13:54
Liverpool will only offer at max 1 million the way we are going🙄.

Agree1 Disagree0

09 Jun 2017 09:32:31
Ed002, do you know what sort of figure Chelsea are actually asking for compensation for Solanke? (I know we don't talk money, but I am curious about the sums being asked? ) .

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed002's Note - Chelsea are not asking for a specific amount but it will be higher than they would have got if he had moved abroad.}

08 Jun 2017 17:52:51
Hi Eds, Is it true that Tottenham have declared an interest in Sakho?

Believable5 Unbelievable8

{Ed001's Note - not that I know of.}

08 Jun 2017 21:27:28
Thanks Ed001.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - welcome.}

09 Jun 2017 02:10:43
Can I ask where you think he'll end up? I know it'sthe kind of speculation you hate but it's just nice to have an educated opinion.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it would be more of a guess, despite his form last season there was very little interest, due to the asking price and his wage demands. There is always the possibility of a newly-rich club like AC Milan looking to him. His injury makes it more likely he will not leave this summer to be honest.}

08 Jun 2017 17:57:06
Macca gelson martins?

Believable2 Unbelievable10

08 Jun 2017 18:09:38
Roma apparently want £35m for Salah. Gelson isn't worth what Sporting want for him (£40m+? ) .

Agree4 Disagree2

09 Jun 2017 00:17:42
Why can't we just pay up for Salah? Klopp clearly thinks highly of him, he would add pace and unpredictability to our attack and knows where the back of the net is. If Roma want more cash up front, then give it to them. We have embarrassed ourselves enough the last few days and the last thing we need is clubs refusing to do business with us in the future.
Can't the club just put other positions like RB and CM on hold for now to get the deals we are currently stuck in over the line? If Klopp is desperate for VVD, Salah and Mendy, just pay up and review matters later in January if more depth is needed.

Agree1 Disagree0

09 Jun 2017 09:35:37
There are so many stories flying around its hard to separate fact from BS. Apparently Roma want £35 and of that £25m up front, we have apparently offered £28m and £17m up front, textbook lowballing from us. Which given that they are the selling club then fair enough. I think we were hoping that the player would engineer a move. Which is blindingly stupid and pretty shoddy on our part.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 17:30:55
VVD news -

LFC met with Saints and Premier League today Saints accepted LFC apology nothing further will go on reported on SSN.

I still feel there may be a chance this deal goes through when all parties meet shake hands LFC apologise properly and perhaps things can move forward. I wouldn't write it off.

Hoping Salah deal is not over.

Is anyone close to going out the door at all Eds?

Cheers.

Believable8 Unbelievable3

{Ed001's Note - only Markovic on a perm right now, well other than Lucas who is taking a holiday to consider his options.}

08 Jun 2017 17:50:10
Cheers Ed1.

Agree2 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - welcome.}

08 Jun 2017 18:04:55
Finally something good happened.

Agree0 Disagree2

08 Jun 2017 18:17:02
I think a perm would suit Markovic with those long flowing locks Ed001.

Agree13 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - agreed.}

08 Jun 2017 23:06:15
Be like Kevin Keegan back in a red shirt, could tackle midfield with Pat Sharp from the fun house spilt up front with the pony tail that is Voronin.

Agree1 Disagree0

09 Jun 2017 13:52:00
Who has Markovic signed for?

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 15:29:12
Hi ed

Echo reporting liverpool have bid 43million for Real Madrid player Asensio. You got any info on that Please really appreciate your thoughts

Thanks.

Believable4 Unbelievable4

{Ed001's Note - I very much doubt that would do any more than give Real Madrid a good chuckle at that small a bid.}

08 Jun 2017 15:57:04
Thanks ed

How much is he worth

And if your a betting man what % do you think of working with Southampton on getting vvd.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - I have no idea how much he is worth, but Madrid are not looking to sell him.

I am not a betting man mate.}

08 Jun 2017 16:32:46
I thought this happened weeks ago.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 16:32:52
I'd be surprised if we even offered that much. A mars bar and a pack of crisps would be more our style. Maybe a can of lilt as a performance based add-on.

Agree14 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 16:56:47
A fun sized mars bar Jurgen.

Agree2 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 17:24:59
That can't be true, we haven't tapped him up yet.

Agree6 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 17:31:55
Looks like a good player im sure he is a born and bred madrista can't see he leaving ZZ seems to like him.

Agree2 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - Zidane rates him very highly.}

08 Jun 2017 18:40:45
He is a very good player and I suspect Real will want to keep him as a squad player for the time being. No chance of us going for him IMO.

Agree1 Disagree0

09 Jun 2017 04:36:21
Asensio has said he wants to stay at Madrid and earn more minutes next season. Sounds like the player backs himself to succeed - and in that situation, Madrid is a much bigger club to play at vs Liverpool. Don't really see this move materializing.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 15:22:45
Ed do you have any transfer update on our other targets? Luan? Mendy? Robertson? Kieta? Peirera?

Believable2 Unbelievable0

{Ed001's Note - Ghoulam?}

08 Jun 2017 15:36:05
Who are we targeting this summer, realistically?

Keep seeing James Rodriguez but surely that is just nonsense?

Agree1 Disagree2

08 Jun 2017 15:46:11
smeagol?

Agree14 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 15:53:25
Thank you ed.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - welcome.}

08 Jun 2017 18:03:08
Oh dear god! But if we sign Ghoulam then surely we'll be relegated in January 2018! :o.

Agree0 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 18:03:34
wait, i meant 2019!

Agree0 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 14:48:36
Hi Ed's any update as to how VVD has reacted to everything? Does he still want the Liverpool move?

Thanks.

Believable5 Unbelievable0

{Ed001's Note - I don't know, but I don't see how anything would have changed for him.}

08 Jun 2017 14:58:06
Thanks for the quick reply. We should do the right thing and stump up the cash if we can to ease relations with Southampton and VVD and limit the damage to our reputation.

Agree6 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 15:01:32
He seems a level-headed guy. I doubt he'll really give two hoots.

Agree5 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 15:02:29
Just curious. I'm an American, as my name clearly shows. I understand the tactical/ technical side of the game (am a U-18 coach) yet the business side can often elude me. How much of this debacle is down to the tabloid culture in England? I see fans groaning about how embarrassing this is, but a lot of it seems to stem from the fact the the tabloids in the U. K. are so quick to post transfer rumors.

Agree2 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it is nothing to do with that, all about us getting caught out.}

08 Jun 2017 15:39:31
Bummer. wishful thinking. Thanks for the response.

Agree1 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 16:54:26
I still think it will happen. Vvd I mean. Early days yet. We want him more than we ever wanted dempsey.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 17:47:28
Hi Yankee. It's very un-British. It's embarassing and goes against any sense of fair play. That said we British have been betraying people for centuries all around the globe (Perfidious Albion etc. )
It's doubly embarassing to be caught and triply embarassing to be so stupid after previous incidents.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 14:29:13
Afternoon all, Eds I'm hearing from a few people Jose fonte is being considered? Please tell me this isn't true.

Believable0 Unbelievable8

{Ed001's Note - are you sure?}

08 Jun 2017 14:35:27
I'm sure that's what I've heard from a few people but I'm asking because I'm not sure if it's valid or not.

Agree1 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - not heard a thing on that sorry.}

08 Jun 2017 14:41:52
Ok thanks anyway Ed.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 14:43:11
Thats not funny.

Agree3 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 14:46:00
Much better option than Klaven.

Agree3 Disagree2

08 Jun 2017 14:53:48
Would take him as a replacement for Klavan, but not as first choice.

Agree0 Disagree3

08 Jun 2017 14:56:28
Has a great relationship with lovren.

Wouldnt be a bad idea. Proven leader. Can carry the likes of clyne and lovren

Him and matip wouldn't be to bad. And his signing would see us well through thr season, and we can revist vvd next year?

Agree0 Disagree5

08 Jun 2017 15:10:11
Right! Let's throw our transfer and team development policy out the window and go out and get a 33 year-old at the end of his career because we screwed it up with VVD and any other random name is good enough.

Agree4 Disagree1

09 Jun 2017 13:58:32
Sorry kloppcat but it wasn't a joke or ment to be funny, I simply asked a question on something I've heard, after all this is a rumours site and not a transfer FACTs site, as I've said to the Eds I hope the few people who told me are wrong.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 12:51:31
HI Eds

Read a few rumours that Peter Moore is speaking to the premier league and also meeting Southampton's people in person at some point today to smooth things over and see about the possibility of resurrecting the deal, any ideas if there is any truth in this?
From what I've read from interviews with Moore he said he was taking a back seat from transfers, so I bet he's wondered what he's got himself into if he's got to go Southampton an clear this mess up, that's presumably if he wasn't involved.

Believable4 Unbelievable0

{Ed001's Note - I believe the rumours are true, that all 3 parties will be involved in clear the air talks.}

08 Jun 2017 13:25:25
You couldn't write this stuff! It's like a soap opera. Hope it's true and we can get the deal done but Im not holding my breath.

Agree11 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 13:43:55
Probably the most exciting transfer window I have ever experienced.

Agree11 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 13:36:55
Would you think the deal can still be done eds.

Agree5 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - can definitely, will is a different matter though.}

08 Jun 2017 13:41:24
Ed1 - is this with a possible view to making a deal happen?

Agree4 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - firstly it is with a view to ensuring we don't get a transfer ban.}

08 Jun 2017 13:55:35
I don't want excitement. I'd like competency and reasonable behaviour. Where's Peter Robinson when you need him?

Agree4 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 13:56:06
And it hasn't even opened A2 😂
It's going to be a long summer!

Agree5 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 13:53:46
And it's not even open yet 😂😂.

Agree5 Disagree0

{Ed025's Note - that doesn,t matter to liverpool..they just charge in like a burglar jcw.. :)

08 Jun 2017 13:49:08
Eds do you think the deal can be struck? Seems very odd all this, although i can't really see vvd staying after this fiasco.

Agree2 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - that is the point, VVD wants to move, so it can be struck. I just have my fears about the costs involved.}

08 Jun 2017 14:02:30
Haha ed025! It's like black Friday and we've gone in swinging!

Agree6 Disagree0

{Ed025's Note - your right there robbie.. :)

08 Jun 2017 14:00:33
eds do you see city or Chelsea going back in for him or are they a no go now for vvd.

Agree1 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - I do not expect either of those clubs to return for him now.}

08 Jun 2017 14:09:19
Why don't we just leave it and spend 60m elsewhere instead of on a CB than had half a decent season and has been injured since December?

Agree4 Disagree2

08 Jun 2017 14:12:08
Good point, 50m is overpaying as it is. Especially since he is coming back from injury. More than than that seems like insanity.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 14:18:25
Oh boy. if we do get a deal done for VVD I wouldn't be surprised if the cost is close to twice our current transfer fee record (£35m) to smooth things up. could be a crazy fee for a CB! Just go and buy Soton club already!

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 14:19:26
ed that does not leave Southampton with many options. So do you think they would be happy to start negotiations with us now. After making a point that the so called big teams can't just do what they like, And still getting paid over the odds for VVD so a win win for Southampton.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - I think it comes down to how much we are willing to pay really.}

08 Jun 2017 14:21:26
One reason not to "just leave it" is that, if Chelsea or City don't come in for him, we have left the player high and dry, after he allegedly committed to come to us.

That's a good policy if you want to ensure that fewer players, agents, and clubs will want to deal with you in the future. Kind of like selling a lemon to a car buyer and expecting repeat business.

Given the amount of money we have wasted in recent years, paying a little more to sort out this mess and repair some of the damage to our reputation may be a good idea.

Agree11 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 14:50:27
Agree - horrible mess but cleanest thing we can do now is settle on VVD (assuming Soton wants rid) and Salah and move on. We don't need anything else apart from a LB, and so if we pay a bit more for VVD then so be it as we deserve a bit of a slap given the idiotic mistake of not clearing discussions with Soton first.

We can also even spend a bit less on a FB if we have to (Sessegnon as understudy to Milner if we can get him) and keep our noses clean for the rest of the window. we don't need anything else urgently for next season IMO.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 15:07:27
When the bad news came out ref our apology and pulling out of the deal, i did post that this transfer was not over yet, I get info from a taxi driver, he says that we are still in for VVD, also Salah, we will know more after the weekend .

Agree0 Disagree1

{Ed025's Note - oh a taxi driver...that explains everything mate.. :)

08 Jun 2017 15:56:59
Ed01 do you think it would make more financial sense and for tge good of the club to say to Southampton. look we are at fault it will be investigated and dealt with it will not happen again. The player wants a move what cost are you looking at. They say x amount and we as a club say here you go. Our apologies and let's sort a friendly with you getting the proceeds and all parties can move on.

This way we get a player and learn a lesson and aviod a ban with Southampton getting a good financial gain in the process and moving towards building bridges and some form of relationship with them again.

Thanks in advance

Jon.

Agree2 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - that would depend on how much Southampton asked for! If they turned round and said £100m then it would make no sense at all. However that does seem the most sensible way to fix this.}

08 Jun 2017 16:29:34
We should not just walk away! That would just prove we really don't care and would mean we've thrown our apology out of the window. We've broken the rules, got caught. At this point the cost is really irrelevant, we should just pay up, it's the only way Southampton and Virgil are happy, that's the important point, yes we would really really be over paying but that's our fault and nobody else. Showing we can do things right is more important.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 17:06:02
I agree with most replies to this, I think we desperately need to build bridges with Southampton and try to rebuild our reputation. I don't know what the fee is but as long as it's under £60million I'd just get it done, maybe throw in Joe Gomez on loan for the season with us paying all his wages etc in as a gesture, that would actually work out well for us if he got game time as he'd progress well down there. Point being we need to put it right.

Agree3 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 17:34:22
I agree on that ED01 thinking more if we could say let's give you 50 million and let's be done with the matter but it obviously isn't that straight forward

Cheers for your input ed01.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - welcome mate.}

08 Jun 2017 17:45:34
Since we are in the business of eating humble pie at the moment, is it not worth driving down to Fulham with some chocolates and a bunch of flowers to try and smooth over any bad blood and get a deal going for Sessegnon?

Agree4 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 12:38:20
Southampton will accept Liverpool's official apology and then begin fresh negotiations which will see Van Dijk become a Liverpool player.

Southampton do not want to keep a player who desires to be elsewhere and miss out on the opportunity of record transfer fee.

Salah update:

Roma want an upfront payment of £25m with the rest in installments. Liverpool willing to pay £17M upfront.

Believable9 Unbelievable3

08 Jun 2017 13:16:55
That's almost how we dealt with Salah before he went to Chelsea and we got turned away! If we can't afford the player, look at ones we can!

Agree4 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 13:13:26
I'll only believe it if (a) I see him leaning or (b) Any combination of Ed001/ 002/ 025 say that it is nailed on.

Agree6 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 14:07:40
Omg, when we sell players we sell them like donuts. When we buy players, we bargain like my grandma in a flea market.

Agree3 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 15:16:25
SFC accepted the apology. nice.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 17:51:39
Kwkhong. is your grandma available to join the lfc negotiating team?

Agree0 Disagree0

09 Jun 2017 13:52:10
Although this is a rumours site Big D, and i disagree with people chucking crap when anyone shares anything.

You did say (i think) a few days ago that Salah fee was agreed and transfer would be over the line. That doesn't seem like it is, or ever was the case given that they are looking into our dealings with the player.

What makes you believe this is concrete? if we are yet to see us re-enter talks with Van Dijk how can it be known that it will 'see Van Dijk become a Liverpool player'. surely logic dictates that its way too early days to pipe up with that?

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 12:27:31
Apparently interest is cooling on de Vrij!

Believable5 Unbelievable1

08 Jun 2017 13:28:44
Bach to Virgil Car Lesbian.

Agree4 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 13:46:29
Is it any worse than when Real Madrid or Barcelona want a player.
They let it be known that they are interested in a player to unsettle things and always get their target?

Agree0 Disagree1

{Ed025's Note - yes actually verdo..

08 Jun 2017 14:05:12
There's nothing wrong with saying you're interested in a player (despite it being a little underhand if you are doing it to unsettle the player) .

It's when you go and talk to the player regularly about signing without agreeing with his club.

I wish everyone would stop trying to justify this as "oh but everyone else does it too" SO?

We acted little total *swear word* just suck it up.

Agree2 Disagree1

09 Jun 2017 00:54:21
Madrid and Barcelona rely much less on tapping up I reckon, they know their pull power is already enough to sway people.

Agree0 Disagree1

09 Jun 2017 08:45:11
they get Neymar to get in coutinhos ear instead.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed002's Note - Which would be tapping up if the club requested the player to do it.}

08 Jun 2017 12:10:21
first time poster, a friend of mine whos dad is close to the club has told me VVD will hand in a transfer request to push through the transfer. He also said he has already been house hunting near Liverpool. just passing on cheers.

Believable12 Unbelievable4

08 Jun 2017 12:20:57
Yeah its not happening guys.

Agree5 Disagree6

08 Jun 2017 12:24:18
Smart move . Puel to be sacked also?

Agree3 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 12:33:32
not cousin but works :)

Agree2 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 13:06:44
don't know ill ask him now mate.

Agree1 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 13:08:21
lads if anybody knows of anyone selling their house let us know. try and get this pushed through quicker.

Agree4 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 13:26:47
Yep that's it, as he was seen at Liverpool airport on his iPad looking st rightmove.

Agree5 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 13:39:09
Dsey125 😂😂😂😂.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 11:05:02
One of the football headlines today: 'Man City sign keeper for £35 million' and Sky are saying that LFC have bid for the Dutch defender De Vrij but the bid is well below the player's valuation (again) . Compare the two approaches.

Believable7 Unbelievable11

08 Jun 2017 11:31:10
How can you compare them? Did City over-pay or did they haggle hard to get him for 35m? Are his wages extortionate or not? What does this in any way have to do with us and De Vrij?

Agree11 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 11:59:27
I think he mean how frustrating it is to see City, Arsenal and soon United just wraping up their deals early, while we just keep on digging ourself deeper and deeper into the dirt.

Agree5 Disagree4

08 Jun 2017 12:40:22
Isn't De Vrij in the final year of his contract?

Agree1 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 13:39:47
I'm sure he's got 5yrs left.

Agree0 Disagree3

08 Jun 2017 15:14:53
Reusch, your thinking of VVD De Vrij is on his last year, and will go for maybe 20 or 25 mill, but VVD is the better player, and will be a better fit for us .

Agree0 Disagree0

09 Jun 2017 13:51:48
You shouldn't compare the approaches per se, look deeper at the background. How come City has all the revenue? Is it fair then? Just support the team, many were baffled by 25m splashed for Wijnaldum and 30m for Manè. City bought Mangala and Stones, compare me this.

Agree0 Disagree0

09 Jun 2017 14:15:13
Ah sorry 👍.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 11:03:51
I'm hearing the new board were more involved with this fiasco than klopp himself.

Believable5 Unbelievable2

08 Jun 2017 11:27:29
Just to make it clear, do you mean Edwards and Moore? If so, how is that?

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 11:28:39
Klopp has been texting him too.

Agree1 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 12:05:47
snapchating too.

Agree6 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 12:08:11
Klopp has stated before he doesn't get involved in transfer negotiation he presumably thought permission had been granted to talk to the player well i hope he did. getting permission was down to edwards.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 13:58:17
Facebooked snapchat and a group chat with salah.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 15:59:59
Evittslfc heard the same mate . Werner.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 08:26:11
Morning Ed's, just a quick question. Have we actually managed to mess Salah around again aswell or are we still trying to get that deal done? Is it a case of Roma seeing if they also have a complaint with us before they are willing to negotiate further? Hence us exploring other options.

Believable1 Unbelievable1

{Ed001's Note - Roma are investigating our conduct, so things are a bit up in the air until that is completed. No idea how long that will take. For all I know they could have finished already. It will only be when further action of some kind happens. Either a resumption of talks, us being warned off or a complaint to UEFA.}

08 Jun 2017 08:42:41
Personally I think it's dead in the water. Again, badly conducted from start to finish and we will miss out on a very talented player because of our inability to conduct our affairs in a proper manner.

Agree10 Disagree11

08 Jun 2017 08:45:12
This is all getting a bit much this morning Ed001! Now Roma are also investigating Liverpool's approach with Salah. I think what the club needs is to miss out on some of their top targets this summer due to their actions, hopefully that will start to put manners on them and show they can't just get things their own way. I work in business in financial services and I place a lot of value personally in the amount of trust I have with people I deal with. The club I love unfortunately doesn't share this value.

Agree5 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - Ed002 did allude to Roma looking into things yesterday I believe.}

08 Jun 2017 09:02:05
So now roma are investigating liverpools approach to salah. just when does the buck stop at the feet of the bloke in charge of transfers.

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - when he has been given a chance to fix the issues.}

08 Jun 2017 09:05:53
I think we've moved on. If, as reported, we're talking to Sporting and Gelson Martins then I'd say we've definitely moved on. I don't think we'd be after both.

People saying it's a negotiating tactic to force Roma into agreeing an offer, I think, have to be wrong. Surely we wouldn't be stupid enough to mess Salah, his representatives, Roma, Gelson and Gelson's representatives about? Would we? Actually, I don't know.

Agree0 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 09:09:42
If he had done his job properly in the first place there wouldn't be an issue never mind fix it.

Agree2 Disagree3

{Ed001's Note - and how do you know that? How long has he even been in the role?}

08 Jun 2017 09:14:11
Why on earth would Roma now be investigating us? They're trying to sell Salah, but are now "investigating" us in regards to approaches made.

We need to cut ties with them and tell them the deal is off. We're becoming a joke now and even Roma are having a go.

Agree3 Disagree2

08 Jun 2017 09:53:10
yeah doesn't make sense, what difference does it make for Roma if we tapped him up or not?

Agree1 Disagree2

08 Jun 2017 09:53:57
How long does he need to get the club a transfer ban.

Agree1 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 09:57:25
Should have been sacked yesterday with the apology the club sayin steps have been taken to avoid any further problems. his first 2 major deals and two almighty stikes maybe one more and we are out of havin to worry about transfers for a few windows.

Agree0 Disagree4

08 Jun 2017 11:08:45
A few of the supposed 'ITKs' still think VVD will sign for us, Graeme Kelly for example was tweeting last night and this morning that VVD is likely to hand in a transfer request and we'll still end up with him. Not sure how reliable any of this information is considering what has happened.

Agree5 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 11:32:45
Graeme is extremely reliable, he called this transfer months ago. VVD still wants to join only us, if he hands in a transfer request and we make another huge offer. He'll join, Southampton need the money.

Agree3 Disagree4

08 Jun 2017 11:33:01
So ed we could still very well get Salah onces all this settles and we offer enough money? I take it everything is on hold at the minute?

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - we could get both still if we throw enough money at it.}

08 Jun 2017 11:53:00
I'm of the opinion that we have royally f'ed up and we do now just need to throw money at it to make it go away.

If that means less money for another player (maybe missing out on Keita) so be it but we look like total pr1cks at the moment.

What players are going to want to talk to us when they see that we are so flagrantly abusing the rules and then leaving the players high and dry to fend for themselves.

We have convinved Van Dijk to join us and by all accounts he really wanted the move and we have messed him around. We just need to swallow our pride, approach Southampton properly and pay the money.

If we just leave VVD to fend for himself now it will send an awful message to other prospective signings.

I would rather spend an additional £10-20mill now to smooth all of this over than risk players not wanting to deal with us in the future. If that means missing out on another signing this window then so be it.

We only have ourselves to blame. We need to repair the reputation of the football club and that has to start now.

Agree6 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 12:38:53
I think this must be some sort of record? Screwing up the transfer window before it has even officially opened.

Agree3 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 13:23:12
You are right Ed001. We could still get Salah and VVd over the line now if we splash the cash on them now, and avoid problems in the transfer market in future. The problem is if FSg see it that way. Will they be willing to pay an extra 10 million and protect the club's reputation now or be stingy to get value for money and face future difficulties in signing players in the future.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 14:50:58
Any change of Sakho being thrown in to bring down the cash price/ sweeten the deal?

Agree0 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - why do people keep saying that? They have no interest in him, so it is unlikely to help.}

08 Jun 2017 06:28:27
Having spoken to the person who has been keeping me informed on this, to get clarity, I think it is time I gave the full explanation of what I am now being told. I am going to refer to the person as he/ him, just because it is easier rather than because it is a male.

So I have pestered him, because I wanted some clarification of the full story and to know if I am being deliberately fed misinformation to keep the club out of trouble. He claims that he is telling me exactly what he has been told, that there is no attempt to mislead me on his behalf, either knowingly or unknowingly. So this is basically the story as he gives it:

After matches Klopp will often chat with opposition players, just a friendly chat, nothing untoward, many managers will do it.

However, remarks were made to VVD along the lines of 'I would love to have you in my team' or similar when we have faced Southampton. Which VVD has obviously taken to heart, though we have no way of knowing if Klopp was making the first moves towards a signing or just making a throwaway remark regarding the player. So that could be seen as a problem in the light of following events, though would normally not even be noticed.

Anyway, last summer things were a bit unsettled there with Jose Fonte fighting to leave and it caused a few issues with a number of the players there, who felt Fonte was unfairly treated after his years of service to the club. There are a number of players there who did not like the treatment Fonte received and felt he should have been allowed to make his dream move, rather than held to his contract and then ended up in limbo before joining West Ham United just to get away from Saints. VVD has at this point made the decision he wants to go and asked his agent to put out feelers looking for interested parties.

We showed interest at this point, I don't have dates, I have never had any kind of dates to give, which is why I have never mentioned any, but I would assume this is just after the January window, as this was when he was disgruntled. However, instead of going direct to the club and seeking permission to speak to them and him over a summer move, we spoke directly to the agent.

Now our excuse, which is why I am told the club immediately backed out and apologised, is that we were told the agent and player came to us with Saints' blessing. I will leave you to make up your own mind over the truth of that claim, as I really do not know. I have no way to verify that information one way or the other.

To cut a long story short, the player, agent and club sorted out a deal, then and only then do LFC go to Saints to negotiate a price. That is when all hell broke loose and Soton investigated, made a complaint etc.

That is how he explained it to me, but I have no way to verify any of it, which is why I am giving you a full version as he tells it. In the past he has been reliable, though he has often asked me not to pass on things, the info he has given had checked out. This time I am not sure though, this feels too neat and like someone is trying to shift the blame. Either way the club is at fault for not ensuring they had permission to speak to the player.

Believable33 Unbelievable1

08 Jun 2017 06:43:11
Make you right ed001 with it sounding to contrived but it does not mean what he has said is not the truth. Like you say it's not difficult to follow the correct way of approaching a transfer a club either says yes or no what is the problem. Baffling really still men in suits are never the smartest.
Up the pool.

Agree1 Disagree2

{Ed001's Note - I just don't understand why the club still has this issue. We do not need to act underhand, the club is, in terms of brand power, according to those that measure these things, ahead of all but Man Utd in English football. We should not need to be underhand to attract quality players. They should want to play for us because of who we are. So just concentrate on getting the right deal with their current club, then worry about convincing the player.}

08 Jun 2017 06:48:37
Qyestion for the Eds, not just about this event. What is the situation regarding speaking to agents. As i understand it agents put feelers out to other clubs and that is ok. In those circumstances i assume it is ok for a club to speak to the agent. If that has happened can the club contact the agent again for further discussions? Is it a case of the player basically can't be in the room with them? Or more complicated, e. g. you can't talk beyond a certain point even with the agent? Thanks.

Agree4 Disagree1

{Ed025's Note - if a club wish to talk to a player who is under contract at a club then they must inform the parent club for permission DL, anything less is seen as "tapping up" even if its done through the agent mate..

08 Jun 2017 06:55:11
Shame Ed, at the very least I hope the club learn a lesson, I think we're sailing very close to the wind with our transfer activity.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 07:00:49
Thanks Ed025.

Agree5 Disagree1

{Ed025's Note - anytime mate..

08 Jun 2017 07:05:44
Its the premier league response that intreagues me. Would it not be the case that if they thought we were genuinely guilty of wrong doing on purpose then just an apology from us would be irrelevant?

Agree4 Disagree0

{Ed025's Note - i must say that you make a fair point slowdog, maybe we have not heard the last of it yet mate..

08 Jun 2017 07:15:27
We have read news that VVD agent also spoke to Conte and Pep; that would have constituted tapping too right?

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - no, you are missing the point, the intermediary can speak to others, it is the player himself that is unable to discuss things.}

08 Jun 2017 07:17:07
Do you think this is the end of the saga with LFC and VVD ed?

Agree2 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - depends on what Saints think. If they are satisfied with the apology and us backing away, then yes. Though a lot comes down to VVD himself as well.}

08 Jun 2017 07:31:15
If Saints had any decency, they'd accept the apology and move on. Liverpool acted underhandedly but, judging from ed001's post, not in a deliberate way. It's not like the club had been scheming to prevent a bidding war that Southampton were entitled to.

Agree4 Disagree5

08 Jun 2017 07:30:15
Thank you for letting us know the situation ED001, we appreciate it!

I was on these pages when the whole Clint Dempsey saga happened and it's beyond belief that the club can act in such a amateurish fashion! Or is it arrogance on the clubs part?

Considering how many times we have dealt with Southampton over the past few years makes this surprising as well as irritating to say the least!

Again, thanks for keeping us in the loop Ed.

Agree8 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it feels like arrogance to me, believing they can do what they want with no consequence.}

08 Jun 2017 07:35:05
Hey ED001. Is the extent to which the VVD deal played out in the media seen as a massive issue by the club? I know this doesn't excuse the club's behaviour but the extent to which transfer info is leaked is quite extraordinary. Similarly a lot has been written bout the Salah deal. Can the club not conduct business in a private professional manner, or is it just the case that this not easily done in modern football? Thanks Ed.

Agree1 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - it is always a concern, the club put a lot of effort into keeping things quiet in the past, hence the Jen Chang thing. Now it has gone back to the old flood of info coming out. It is not easy to keep things quiet, but it certainly should not be coming out in the amounts LFC are producing it.}

08 Jun 2017 07:35:11
eds i know this is an outrageous idea/ thought, but truth be known the window don't open until july between now and then the saints accept the apology after believing because of the blame game as you said, that the tapping up was accidentally stupid, could liverpool get the deal sorted and pay more as in a way to save face or is it just a stupid thought.

Agree4 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it could happen and has happened in the past. The likelihood is that we will not pay the price regardless.}

08 Jun 2017 07:37:52
Nice one ed.

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - welcome and RITH is wrong. The whole point of speaking to a player is to cut out the whole auction aspect of transfers by ensuring you get the best price with the player only wanting to join you.

As for Saints, they have done nothing wrong and RITH is just showing how bitter he is by constantly deflecting and blaming the victim.}

08 Jun 2017 07:57:21
Thanks for the info Ed. Legend.

Agree5 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - welcome.}

08 Jun 2017 08:03:54
Ed 1 - you make some great points here. We were discussing it in the pub last night and I think the consensus of opinion was that tapping up players has always gone on and always will to some degree. It is maybe a bit easier to hide behind agents and third parties these days than it was years ago but I think even an indirect approach - I. e. To an agent is tapping up. I know clubs often give players agents approval or even instructions to find a new club for a player maybe even with guidelines as to what a sell price may be. More often than not all of the above happens in secret.

You make a very good point that too much information seems to be leaked out of LFC and whilst it seems clear that the club has acted beyond what can be excusable (I. e. A sounding out of an agent etc. ) and especially with meeting the player directly, the leaks to the press in my view is what has really caused the most problems.

I hope there is a full investigation internally and these internal problems are fixed now or we could have a long summer of problems in the transfer market.

Agree4 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - not just a long summer, it will be the same every transfer window until we fix the internal problems.}

08 Jun 2017 08:10:12
Is there any suggestion that there will be any internal disciplinary actions taken by the club towards any LFC staff involved in the transfer Ed001? Do you think the VVD events will see Liverpool changing their approach to transfers and lack of professionalism? If nothing changes or there isn't an acceptance that change is needed then that would really stink of arrogance.

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - the first thing that will happen is likely to be an internal investigation to examine what went on, what the club did wrong and what the club did right. That analysis will have to lead to changes or this summer will be nothing compared to how bad things will get for the club in the future.}

08 Jun 2017 08:15:14
It's all just so distasteful. Look at what Lukaku is doing to them across the park. Young men who get paid millions to play a sport they love and show this kind of disrespect to their employers. Regardless of whether Liverpool's conduct was really dodgy or just downright dumb, I really do not like to see these spoiled players showing such an extreme lack of loyalty to the shirt and fans they represent. If I wanted to leave my job and go to a bigger company, I would have the decency to go to my boss and tell him to his face. Of course, I don't have a greedy agent trying to drum up a sale to line his own fat palm with silver.

Agree4 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 08:15:37
What does this mean for the player himself ed001? Is he also facing the prospect of a ban? Maybe not by his parent club who might not be able to afford it, but by the governing body.?

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it is unlikely to lead to any kind of ban for the player. His issue is that the club themselves could freeze him out and leave him in limbo and his chance to get a big move could go.}

08 Jun 2017 08:32:25
We appreciate you sharing your info ed, as you have already hinted i think this is standard practice for the americans and i can't see any follow up action apart from a public telling off and a private don't get caught next time.

With regards to vvd we were always going to get our pants pulled down over this deal so maybe its the best outcome overall aside from the massive embarassment.

Moving forward through this window at any rate we must do it correct though because i shudder to think what punishment the club will get if its caught doing the same thing twice in the same window.

Do you think this will have any bearing on players we are targeting not wanting to come considering we have left vvd high and dry?

Agree3 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it is common practice in business in general, end justifies the means for most companies.

That is a good point you raise, other players are going to be wary of dealing with us, if we leave VVD high and dry now.}

08 Jun 2017 08:32:27
Cheers Ed001. We've not covered ourselves in glory here at all, shambolic behaviour and unprofessionalism is what is smacks of.

Agree2 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 08:42:11
So just reiterating what has been in the press.

Agree0 Disagree3

{Ed001's Note - I have no idea. I do not read the press.}

08 Jun 2017 08:44:32
Thank you for the swift response Ed. Much appreciated mate. And thank you for all the hard work! This promises to be a window like no other for you guys! All the best :) .

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - not sure it is like no other. This seems to have become a recurring theme.}

08 Jun 2017 09:11:00
Thanks eds for the info. Really appreciate your time forwarding your knowledge on this situation.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 09:30:25
Agree with Max, thanks Ed, appreciate you sharing the info.

Agree3 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - cheers Lj.}

08 Jun 2017 10:25:18
Thanks Eds for the in depth post, we all appreciate it on here, we'd all be clueless if it wasn't for you lot.

Agree3 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - thank you mate.}

08 Jun 2017 11:52:37
Thanks for the info Ed's, but I have to ask, why is it so hard to do it properly, whether the agent instigated it or not? Even if the agent said that the player is doing it with his club's blessing, how hard is it to confirm that with the club? Something is really wrong somewhere within the club and it's not rocket science how it can be fixed!

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it is not that hard at all.}

08 Jun 2017 12:10:38
Ed is part of the problem that the powers of be just aren't from football background? Is it just simple naivity from people that don't know? Most if not all of our top brass are from everywhere BUT football. Is it just me being naive?

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - very few clubs have top brass from a footballing background.}

08 Jun 2017 12:11:08
What was Fonte's dream move ED001?

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - to play for Mourinho.}

09 Jun 2017 13:45:14
Ed001, Good of you to give us the detail, but I don't think you have to explain things. Everyone said this was going to happen, but then it turned out we built the house on sand, so things fell apart.

You guys run a really interesting site, and try to give us interesting insights. Sometimes things will go pear shaped. doesn't change things, you are giving us your honest (sometimes very honest) view on things. If it was called Liverpool-transfer-facts. co. uk, then that would be different, but I for one enjoy the site, and appreciate you guys giving us the insights that you do (although sometimes I cringe from the tongue lashings delivered :-) ) . If you will forgive me, part of the fun of this site is just like buying the euro millions ticket. the 2 days dreaming about what it would be like if Messi signed brings a smile and some joy, even if the reality is, it is never going to happen. BTW . any chance of Messi :-)

On a different note, I find it really hard to fathom how we can get ourselves into these situations. I have nothing to do with football, but I know you need permission from the other club before you speak to the player. I know from life, that if a middle man says "trust me this is all legit", then that is when you run for the hills. SO, this is either supreme arrogance (which I would hate for my football club, but I accept it is possible), or supreme naivete. I am not sure which is worse.

Thanks for all you guys do, I am looking forward to my near hourly visits to the site during the window!

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 04:35:01
Hi all

I am seeing numerous reports stating we will still sign VVD as it's believed he will hand in a transfer request and we will go through the proper channels.

Any truth in this?

Believable5 Unbelievable3

{Ed001's Note - I very much doubt we will pay the money required to do so.}

08 Jun 2017 05:45:35
Hi Ed

If Van Dijk hands in a transfer request, then wouldn't Southampton's bargaining power be greatly reduced? There would be no benefit for them to keep a player who is desperate not to be there anymore, so I really think they're shooting themselves in the foot if they try to hold out for 70m pounds. No one is going to pay that.

I know LFC hung onto Suarez when he wanted to go, but the difference there was Arsenal offered a sum that was essentially below what he was truly worth, and in the end Suarez was convinced to stay one more season anyway.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - no, we hung on to him because we felt he was worth more than the offers to us. Nothing to do with 'true worth' as no such thing exists. Saints are simply doing the same thing. It is blinkered bias that makes Liverpool fans so critical of Soton for doing what is right for them.

The benefit for them is that they get to keep him unless someone pays what they feel he is worth. Secondly it sends out a message that they are not a soft touch who are just going to sell players on the cheap as soon as someone shows interest. They are trying to build a side too.

Obviously it is not all benefit to them, as most of the players they sign are joining with the premise that they will get sold on to a 'bigger' club a few years down the line. So fighting so hard to keep their players, as they have been lately, is actually making their recruitment more difficult. In fact the battle with Jose Fonte over his move, which they completely scuppered, is the root cause of VVD's discomfort and desire to move now. However they have to do what feels right to them, for them.

You have to remember, all of this is LFC's fault for not getting permission to speak to the player. This could all have been avoided by doing so. Then, if no fee had been agreed, the player could easily have forced his way out legitimately to join us, if he so wished.}

08 Jun 2017 06:12:14
Ed001 summed up it up in that reply I just hope LFC learn to do things correctly it's just shaming our great club. Whatever happened to the days of our great executive Robinson a man of pure integrity eh ed it's shameful really is. Anyways
Up the pool.

Agree5 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it is embarrassing mate. It is so simple to do things the right way.}

08 Jun 2017 07:25:16
That's what I meant by true worth Ed. That 40m release clause was written before his performances improved. After Suarez' performances improved, Liverpool rightly felt he was worth far more than 40m.

The difference with Southampton is they felt he was worth, what, 50m? And all of a sudden, despite there being no bidding war, his value is now 70m? Nonsense if you ask me. Of course they know he's not worth 70m! I'm all for them sending out a message they won't just sell their best players on the cheap while they build a side, and for that a 50m price tag seemed reasonable. But they're having a laugh with 70m if their player is so desperate to leave.

I know Liverpool screwed up in not seeking permission, but that doesn't mean that Southampton haven't acted like complete asswipes IMO. They're just being salty and bitter, Liverpool were dumb, yes, but it's not like they were trying to be deceitful to Southampton.

I have my doubts the Fonte drama is a root cause. Van Dijk is 25 and knows he's a highly rated defender. He wants to move on to bigger things when he hits his peak, regardless of what happened to Fonte.

Agree1 Disagree5

{Ed001's Note - whatever you meant, it was nonsense. The club put the clause in and should have honoured it. It just shows how pathetic our fans are that they want it all the club's own way. When we are dishonourable constantly it is ok, so long as we benefit!

The difference is in your mind and utter nonsense dreamed up by tabloid hacks that people like you swallow and regurgitate on here for the rest of us to suffer through. They never set a value on him until asked and the price is what it is. You need to stop this now.

You are the bitter and salty one. Bitter towards anything that upsets the club you support and you are so bloody biased it is ridiculous. There was only one team at fault here - Liverpool. No one else is to blame for any of this mess. The only arsewipes are those believing the crap in the media.

You can have as many doubts as you want, but you are clearly clueless and just too busy viewing everything through your Liverpool blinkers.}

08 Jun 2017 07:25:19
Months of hardwork all went to the bin.

Agree1 Disagree2

08 Jun 2017 07:42:25
Ed I don't understand why you are so hostile?

Agree0 Disagree3

{Ed001's Note - because you are being ignorant and talking crap. You are clearly blaming the victim and it is pathetic. Get your Liverpool blinkers off and stop looking for someone else to blame. Our club is the one who is at fault.}

08 Jun 2017 07:56:40
With all due respect, you are overreacting to what I've said. I've never tried to shift blame, I always recognised LFC at fault here. All I did was call out Southampton's petulance, which I believe they're guilty of.

Agree1 Disagree3

{Ed001's Note - no you are deflecting constantly. Seeking to shift the blame onto the victim for being upset at being the victim. It is petty and you are the one showing petulance by doing so. They have every right to be upset. It is a pathetic indictment of the world we live in that victims so often get the blame for being victims and not being willing to just lie down and accept the crime committed against them.

If you get mugged you would be upset and angry, would you not want the perpetrator to be punished? Or would you say it is ok so long as they wore a Liverpool top while mugging you?}

08 Jun 2017 08:00:40
I don't care what the issue is the people in power should stop dragging our belowed clubs name.

Agree3 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 08:12:34
What blame have I shifted? I've always maintained that LFC were stupid and in the wrong. Christ, all I've added is that Southampton have IMO petulantly overreacted. Why is that such a bad thing to say? And no, I wouldn't be that upset and angry if the perpetrator was just stupidly unintentional in his actions. That analogy requires more context.

I still don't understand the hostility. All I'm trying to do is having simple discussion and you try to chase me out of here because you disagree with me! Seriously man!

Agree3 Disagree2

{Ed001's Note - what? You are constantly whining about Southampton, trying to deflect from Liverpool's faults.

As for the analogy, you are deliberately misinterpreting it. There was nothing stupidly unintentional in LFC's actions, they knew the rules and they chose not to abide by them. Whether or not the agent misled them is just deflection, there is no excuse for not picking up the phone and there was no excuse to meet the player regardless. It was as wilfully ignorant as you are being by bitching at Soton for being upset.

This is not the first time we have abused the trust of Southampton football club in our transfer dealings. It has happened every single damn time that we have gone behind their back.}

08 Jun 2017 08:23:24
To all the Eds how do you manage to bother logging in here in the morning. Go, have a cup of tea.

Agree3 Disagree2

{Ed025's Note - we are well past the tea stage polecat, its bottles of jack daniels now mate.. :)

08 Jun 2017 08:30:51
What do you mean 'what'? Do you not read my posts properly? I've constantly said or inferred that Liverpool is in the wrong.

You need to accept that many posters that come on here like myself don't have as much knowledge of the off-field dynamics like you do, so please, spare us some mercy if you think we get it wrong! It's just football after all!

Agree1 Disagree2

{Ed001's Note - I have never said you haven't. If you would do what you keep asking me to do, then you would see I am saying that you are trying to deflect away from the criticism of Liverpool by attacking Saints. Not that you are not criticising Liverpool, but that you are trying to soften it.}

08 Jun 2017 08:50:36
Not picking on you Robin in the Hood but it really isn't an overreaction on Southampton's part. We have tapped up one of their players which is a huge deal. The fact we did it on the understanding of verbal permission is not good enough. We should have known in the first place that a verbal agreement wasn't sufficient, because it could lead to tapping up if such an agreement didn't exist. Where was the due diligence?

Southampton has every right to refuse to do business with a club who has disrespected them like this. The ax needs to swing in my opinion. Dempsey and VVD dealings place a terrible, stinking reflection on our club that we don't want. We are globally one of the biggest clubs in the world and our conduct should correlate with that.

Agree2 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - it must be remembered that this is not the first time in our dealings with Southampton that we have been accused of underhand dealings and tapping up.}

08 Jun 2017 09:34:05
It's disgraceful to be honest ed, and as we've seen with the Sessegnon deal, it also affects are future dealings. Surely they have to make changes now.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - they did already make some changes, it has yet to show any effect. Hopefully the changes will now step in and make a difference.}

08 Jun 2017 10:13:22
I have a sneaky feeling the VVD deal could still go through. By apologising and distancing ourselves from the player we have given everyone time to calm down. It's a long time to the end of the transfer window and if he still wants the move come August I could see them backing down and a deal being done. Money talks. Time will tell I suppose.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 13:06:29
Robin, if Barcelona did come in for Coutinho and we believed he might have been tapped up to get him, would we be wanting him to go for a fee under what we valued him at? Well, that's all Southampton has done, we're the only guilty party here and it's getting embarrassing now!

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 13:15:54
Not sure Ed's why so many others are trying to suggest in any way that Soton are to blame? We arrogantly brushed them aside and they rightly said "right you can't do that he's OUR player". I'm sure we cld still get him but now almost entirely on their terms fee wise. In fact you cld say "well played them. Utter stinker us" A bit like the EL final.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 04:31:52
Eds, who will be fired for this saga?

Believable2 Unbelievable0

{Ed001's Note - I very much doubt anyone will lose their job. They should, but it won't happen.}

08 Jun 2017 06:52:38
Edwards should go as head of transfers he should have made sure the club was not put in this position.

Agree2 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - has he been there long enough to alter anything? I think he should be given the chance to resolve this first.}

08 Jun 2017 07:19:12
Personally thought it was a crazy appoitment in the first place.

Agree0 Disagree4

{Ed001's Note - why?}

08 Jun 2017 07:24:58
His previous role as technical director/ performance analysis gave him experience in how transfers are conducted? Obviously not.

Agree0 Disagree3

{Ed001's Note - I fail to see how that makes any difference? How many people have any experience in conducting them? The role has far more to it than simply negotiating transfers. Narrow minded comments like yours are embarrassing, give the guy a chance! He might well have the skills needed to perform the role to a high level for all you know.}

08 Jun 2017 08:50:41
So where does the buck stop for this embaressment if not at the feet of the bloke in charge of transfers.

Agree0 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - that depends on who was involved. The guy in charge is new to the role and might well have delegated it out while he got settled in. As for the buck stopping, Klopp is a repeat offender, he has to carry a share of the blame as well.

The question is how to proceed and ensure nothing like this happens again. That is the role that Edwards has to fulfil.}

08 Jun 2017 10:04:47
I am astounded how Klopp seems to routinely be implicated in these faux pas. Is it just naivety? Or trusting that other people are doing there jobs?

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 11:31:37
To be fair ed if we had got a monchi would this of happened. The fella might probe to be good but you can't deny putting someone ibto such a position without any real experience is a silly risk for such a big club as are. The smaller clubs can get away with stuff bt there is so much scruitiny on us we can't mess up.

Its the same issye as appointment a small time manager and big one. You do get different results.

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 01:54:54
Have we turned to de Vrij?

Believable6 Unbelievable1

08 Jun 2017 04:52:19
I did. For a four pack. It's going to be a loong summer.

Agree16 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 01:52:55
Eds, I've read our official release, but is there any chance we can revisit? We've said sorry. Pay a little bit more to make it worth their while. He wants to come. We want him to come. Any chance we can still get it done?

Believable3 Unbelievable1

{Ed001's Note - yes that is a distinct possibility that the club pays up to end the issue.}

08 Jun 2017 04:44:52
If we throw in Sakho plus the 60m, will it work?

Agree2 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - I doubt it, they are not interested in Sakho. While it is a distinct possibility, it is a possibility I really do not see the club taking.}

08 Jun 2017 04:45:28
I know we are already held in low regard in the way we deal in the market, but this would be embarrassing. The club statement said we have ended interest in the player.

Agree1 Disagree1

08 Jun 2017 05:46:54
It wouldn't be the first time a club signed a player after officially declaring they were no longer pursuing a player - PSG and Silva.

Agree2 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 10:07:13
So, sorry, I'm not clear - what is the release clause in VVD's contract? £70m or £50m? Or are the club now saying they want £70m, sort of like what we did with Suarez?

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Jun 2017 10:15:57
Us and Balotelli?

Agree0 Disagree0

07 Jun 2017 22:41:04
And on a side note, stories in the media are out that Lucas Leiva has had discussions with his original club, Gremio in Brazil, and will probably go back and play with them next year. If that is the case, I thank him for 10 years of sterling, loyal service and wish him all the best for his remaining career. There's always something special about players who knuckle down, give 100%, persevere, and just do their job despite all the drama and distractions, in the game. YNWA.

Believable10 Unbelievable0

07 Jun 2017 23:27:47
Really disappointing what's happened with Van Dijk. A summer of him, Salah, and a left back would have been dynamite. I hope we're looking at an alternative CB. I've read that Salah might not happen, and we're looking at Sporting's Martins instead, any truth to that?

Believable0 Unbelievable2

{Ed002's Note - In January Sporting made it clear to the one club who enquired that Gelson Martins is not for sale even at the €60M minimum realease fee that he has for Iberian clubs but this may not deter Manchester United from making a bid although he is not first choice. Real Madrid has been watching the player whilst Chelsea and Manchester City consider the price far, far too high. I am not aware of any approach from Liverpool and, again, he is a right winger so it makes no sense to me.}

08 Jun 2017 01:14:53
Approaches are not the liverpool way ed😆.

Agree0 Disagree0

 
Change Consent