• Hey Guest!
    Enjoy the This Is Anfield Forums but want to remove the adverts? Now you can do so by clicking here.
    Thanks for your support!

The Unreliable Rumours Thread

Dutch

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
1,768
I don't believe the lack of money was the problem this summer, I think we could not get the player(s) we wanted and decided like Klopp always does to go with what he has. Don't believe for a moment we have to sell our best player(s) next summer.
 


redbj

hurry up, July 1st, let's get the show on the road
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
17,595
I mean, if they are owned by the same owners, they are unequivocally financially related, despite any firewalls they may place in business operations. The money still comes from and goes to the same group of people.

I'm guessing they probably make more money from gameday operations at Fenway Park than they do at Anfield. But player wages - especially at the top - are higher in baseball, and you don't "sell" players for big wads of cash in the major American sports leagues. International revenue obviously tips towards Liverpool, too.

Jib jab; ‘we need 13 million’

Micheal Edwards ; ‘ here, hold my beer’
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
13,703
I cant see tax on Red Sox being an issue for LFC. The club is run with little debt, and given the expected increase to commercial deals over the next year or two if we really needed a player or two, we could i'm sure find that money without selling a key player to fund it.

Given the way the club operates, we will probably be only spending big money when there are big outgoings (with the odd exception)
 

Limiescouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
14,010
If the Red Sox were running a wage bill their published finances suggested they could not afford, then Id understand the complaint. What the Red Sox have done is overspend in the short term to push for present day success and are now trying to get out from under it. I dont get how that in any way relates to us.
 



vjcpatriot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2015
Messages
917
Not 100% sure but I thought I read that, despite the same owners being involved, the clubs are in no sense financially related.

Also I would have thought Liverpool make more money than the Red Sox in advertising etc worldwide. You won't find too many non-Americans who can name 10 baseball players. It would surely be more important to keep Liverpool competitive than the Red Sox.
Agreed. LFC and the Red Sox are separate entities with separate payrolls and financial structures in place. One has nothing to do with the other.

LFC is very profitable and when the Nike jersey deal finally arrives it will only become more so. Certainly winning the Champion's League and being current participants also greatly enriches the club due to all the monies that entails.

This to note.

2019 summer spendings of Manchester City: £141.2m.
2019 summer spendings of Liverpool FC: £1.6m.

Current PL Standings.
Liverpool FC 1st place.
Manchester City 2nd place.

Hmmm. A certain disparity in spending vs performance that's almost poetic justice, isn't it? :)
 

JibJab

Mo Mane Mo' Problems
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
836
I admit that my theory is just a bit of galaxy-brained speculation. But I can see how the dots could connect between Liverpool and the Red Sox. It's been theorized that the reason why Stan Kroenke was cheap with Arsenal for a couple windows was because of his significant financial investments in the LA Rams - including a billion dollar stadium. I don't think you can firewall the financial implications of assets that easily.

I should say that I believe Liverpool is a well-run club and I credit FSG for their direction since they appointed Edwards and Klopp. I do not mean to suggest some sort of evil plot on their part.
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
13,703
I admit that my theory is just a bit of galaxy-brained speculation. But I can see how the dots could connect between Liverpool and the Red Sox. It's been theorized that the reason why Stan Kroenke was cheap with Arsenal for a couple windows was because of his significant financial investments in the LA Rams - including a billion dollar stadium. I don't think you can firewall the financial implications of assets that easily.

I should say that I believe Liverpool is a well-run club and I credit FSG for their direction since they appointed Edwards and Klopp. I do not mean to suggest some sort of evil plot on their part.
Stan Kroenke was tight with Arsenal because that is his ownership strategy. It had little to do with being stretched by his ownership of the Rams. I thought much of the stadium cost was being paid for by the state, not by him.
 

JibJab

Mo Mane Mo' Problems
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
836
Stan Kroenke was tight with Arsenal because that is his ownership strategy. It had little to do with being stretched by his ownership of the Rams. I thought much of the stadium cost was being paid for by the state, not by him.
Well, he's privately financing the stadium himself. The investment could top $5 Billion because he's spending a ton on surrounding development. He may be getting tax breaks from Inglewood, but I'm not sure about their scope. It's an extraordinary investment by what we've seen elsewhere, where teams basically hold cities hostage for funding for their projects (I'm opposed to state funding for stadiums, but that's another conversation entirely).
 



Carrard

New Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2016
Messages
8
From TribalFootball:
The former agent of Real Betis midfielder Nabil Fekir has come clean on why a move to Liverpool fell through.
Jean-Pierre Bernes has revealed to Canal Plus that a third party had been at fault for the failed transfer.
He said, "Nabil was Liverpool's priority. I worked for four months with the Liverpool representatives, with Jurgen Klopp, Jean-Michel Aulas, everything was ready.
"Nabil was already aware of his future contract, which would have seen him earn around €45m over five years.
"And on the day that the contract was supposed to be signed, at Rambouillet, we saw a lawyer and Nabil's brother-in-law arrived who said: 'Stop everything, discussions have to start all over again'. It was surreal. We thought that we were in a Walt Disney film."
He added: "There were two elements. The player's medical was negative and the second element was that when you want to sign for a big club like Liverpool, you need a certain attitude.
"When the Liverpool guys witnessed this cinema, they immediately… Sometimes when a player has an injury representatives can make an effort to make it work.
"The brother-in-law of Nabil all of a sudden acted like a player's agent. He wanted a commission, everyone knows, it is fashionable these days.
"[Fekir] was on a cloud, he seemed to have transformed, he didn't even greet the Liverpool representatives.
"He arrived after the medical, everyone was looking at each other, the Liverpool representatives were wondering where they were. I was ashamed."
 

vjcpatriot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2015
Messages
917
From TribalFootball:
The former agent of Real Betis midfielder Nabil Fekir has come clean on why a move to Liverpool fell through.
Jean-Pierre Bernes has revealed to Canal Plus that a third party had been at fault for the failed transfer.
He said, "Nabil was Liverpool's priority. I worked for four months with the Liverpool representatives, with Jurgen Klopp, Jean-Michel Aulas, everything was ready.
"Nabil was already aware of his future contract, which would have seen him earn around €45m over five years.
"And on the day that the contract was supposed to be signed, at Rambouillet, we saw a lawyer and Nabil's brother-in-law arrived who said: 'Stop everything, discussions have to start all over again'. It was surreal. We thought that we were in a Walt Disney film."
He added: "There were two elements. The player's medical was negative and the second element was that when you want to sign for a big club like Liverpool, you need a certain attitude.
"When the Liverpool guys witnessed this cinema, they immediately… Sometimes when a player has an injury representatives can make an effort to make it work.
"The brother-in-law of Nabil all of a sudden acted like a player's agent. He wanted a commission, everyone knows, it is fashionable these days.
"[Fekir] was on a cloud, he seemed to have transformed, he didn't even greet the Liverpool representatives.
"He arrived after the medical, everyone was looking at each other, the Liverpool representatives were wondering where they were. I was ashamed."
It appears to me that greed was Nabil's undoing. And he let it happen. I have no regrets at all that we passed on Fekir. Now he's playing for a second rate club in the spanish league (Real Betis 15th place) instead of for the European champions and competing for a domestic title.

Btw let's recap the window shall we.

Premier League biggest spenders
Manchester United - £148m
Aston Villa - £144.5m
Arsenal - £138m
Manchester City - £134
Everton - £118.5m
Tottenham Hotspur - £101.5m
Leicester City - £91m
[source of numbers: express.co.uk]

Where are they now?

Manchester United. 12th place. 9 points. Money doesn't solve all troubles does it? Struggling somewhere in the midtable strikes me as a mediocre result for the money spent.

Aston Villa. 15th place. 8 points. They splashed big, but are barely above relegation territory.

Arsenal. 3rd place. The gunners are in good position in the top 4. But Nicolas Pepe has looked like a phenomenal bust so far. £72m for just 1 goal and 2 assists from the Ivorian winger so far?

Manchester City. 2nd place. The oil backed side splashed the monies like there's no tomorrow. They were the favorites already and maintain a top 2 position.

Everton. 17th place. 7 points. Everton is in danger of relegation. It's hard to call them rivals when they might not even be in the prem by the time this season is through. It seems they either did not spend their money wisely or their manager failed to settle so many incoming transfers at the same time.

Tottenham. 9th place. 11 points. At the beginning of the season many of the so called experts pegged Tottenham to finish 2nd, just above Liverpool. A ludicrous prediction as Tottenham has never been serious title contenders in over 60 years of competitive play. To predict ahead of Liverpool looks asinine in retrospect.

Leicester City. 4th place. The Foxes gave Liverpool quite a go but were unable to steal a result in Anfield thanks to late game heroics by Milner.

Of the top spenders, three are in the top 4. The other top spends splashed a lot of cash but with mediocre to poor results shown from all the money burned. Liverpool FC of course is the one outlying club, spending less than 2% of any of the top spending clubs but sitting nicely at the top of the table currently 8 points clear of 2nd place City.
 

sportbilly1966

TIA New Signing
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,716
It appears to me that greed was Nabil's undoing. And he let it happen. I have no regrets at all that we passed on Fekir. Now he's playing for a second rate club in the spanish league (Real Betis 15th place) instead of for the European champions and competing for a domestic title.

Btw let's recap the window shall we.

Premier League biggest spenders
Manchester United - £148m
Aston Villa - £144.5m
Arsenal - £138m
Manchester City - £134
Everton - £118.5m
Tottenham Hotspur - £101.5m
Leicester City - £91m
[source of numbers: express.co.uk]

Where are they now?

Manchester United. 12th place. 9 points. Money doesn't solve all troubles does it? Struggling somewhere in the midtable strikes me as a mediocre result for the money spent.

Aston Villa. 15th place. 8 points. They splashed big, but are barely above relegation territory.

Arsenal. 3rd place. The gunners are in good position in the top 4. But Nicolas Pepe has looked like a phenomenal bust so far. £72m for just 1 goal and 2 assists from the Ivorian winger so far?

Manchester City. 2nd place. The oil backed side splashed the monies like there's no tomorrow. They were the favorites already and maintain a top 2 position.

Everton. 17th place. 7 points. Everton is in danger of relegation. It's hard to call them rivals when they might not even be in the prem by the time this season is through. It seems they either did not spend their money wisely or their manager failed to settle so many incoming transfers at the same time.

Tottenham. 9th place. 11 points. At the beginning of the season many of the so called experts pegged Tottenham to finish 2nd, just above Liverpool. A ludicrous prediction as Tottenham has never been serious title contenders in over 60 years of competitive play. To predict ahead of Liverpool looks asinine in retrospect.

Leicester City. 4th place. The Foxes gave Liverpool quite a go but were unable to steal a result in Anfield thanks to late game heroics by Milner.

Of the top spenders, three are in the top 4. The other top spends splashed a lot of cash but with mediocre to poor results shown from all the money burned. Liverpool FC of course is the one outlying club, spending less than 2% of any of the top spending clubs but sitting nicely at the top of the table currently 8 points clear of 2nd place City.
I'm sure these figures aren't gross spend as they dont include sales?
 

nikz200

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
1,014
From TribalFootball:
The former agent of Real Betis midfielder Nabil Fekir has come clean on why a move to Liverpool fell through.
Jean-Pierre Bernes has revealed to Canal Plus that a third party had been at fault for the failed transfer.
He said, "Nabil was Liverpool's priority. I worked for four months with the Liverpool representatives, with Jurgen Klopp, Jean-Michel Aulas, everything was ready.
"Nabil was already aware of his future contract, which would have seen him earn around €45m over five years.
"And on the day that the contract was supposed to be signed, at Rambouillet, we saw a lawyer and Nabil's brother-in-law arrived who said: 'Stop everything, discussions have to start all over again'. It was surreal. We thought that we were in a Walt Disney film."
He added: "There were two elements. The player's medical was negative and the second element was that when you want to sign for a big club like Liverpool, you need a certain attitude.
"When the Liverpool guys witnessed this cinema, they immediately… Sometimes when a player has an injury representatives can make an effort to make it work.
"The brother-in-law of Nabil all of a sudden acted like a player's agent. He wanted a commission, everyone knows, it is fashionable these days.
"[Fekir] was on a cloud, he seemed to have transformed, he didn't even greet the Liverpool representatives.
"He arrived after the medical, everyone was looking at each other, the Liverpool representatives were wondering where they were. I was ashamed."
If this is completely accurate, then its a reason i can live with as to why we did not sign him. As the guy says, when a player as a injury there can be made efforts to make it work, but when the family and all this come in and get involved, it simply complicates matters and they should fuck straight off. Which is really unfortunate cause had Fekir joined us i am convinced Klopp would have been able to improve him to the point where he would be a frequent feature of our attack.



It appears to me that greed was Nabil's undoing. And he let it happen. I have no regrets at all that we passed on Fekir. Now he's playing for a second rate club in the spanish league (Real Betis 15th place) instead of for the European champions and competing for a domestic title.

Btw let's recap the window shall we.

Premier League biggest spenders
Manchester United - £148m
Aston Villa - £144.5m
Arsenal - £138m
Manchester City - £134
Everton - £118.5m
Tottenham Hotspur - £101.5m
Leicester City - £91m
[source of numbers: express.co.uk]

Where are they now?

Manchester United. 12th place. 9 points. Money doesn't solve all troubles does it? Struggling somewhere in the midtable strikes me as a mediocre result for the money spent.

Aston Villa. 15th place. 8 points. They splashed big, but are barely above relegation territory.

Arsenal. 3rd place. The gunners are in good position in the top 4. But Nicolas Pepe has looked like a phenomenal bust so far. £72m for just 1 goal and 2 assists from the Ivorian winger so far?

Manchester City. 2nd place. The oil backed side splashed the monies like there's no tomorrow. They were the favorites already and maintain a top 2 position.

Everton. 17th place. 7 points. Everton is in danger of relegation. It's hard to call them rivals when they might not even be in the prem by the time this season is through. It seems they either did not spend their money wisely or their manager failed to settle so many incoming transfers at the same time.

Tottenham. 9th place. 11 points. At the beginning of the season many of the so called experts pegged Tottenham to finish 2nd, just above Liverpool. A ludicrous prediction as Tottenham has never been serious title contenders in over 60 years of competitive play. To predict ahead of Liverpool looks asinine in retrospect.

Leicester City. 4th place. The Foxes gave Liverpool quite a go but were unable to steal a result in Anfield thanks to late game heroics by Milner.

Of the top spenders, three are in the top 4. The other top spends splashed a lot of cash but with mediocre to poor results shown from all the money burned. Liverpool FC of course is the one outlying club, spending less than 2% of any of the top spending clubs but sitting nicely at the top of the table currently 8 points clear of 2nd place City.

The problem is we need to take this in direct contention with Uniteds commercial value. Apparently on that alone they can keep tanking big spends without worrying about the consequences while supposedly we can't do that cause our commercial value is not as great as theirs (i could be wrong here, cause its based off a conversation i had with my friend who supports united.)
 

[email protected]

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
3,252
...



The problem is we need to take this in direct contention with Uniteds commercial value. Apparently on that alone they can keep tanking big spends without worrying about the consequences while supposedly we can't do that cause our commercial value is not as great as theirs (i could be wrong here, cause its based off a conversation i had with my friend who supports united.)
United commercial value is not infinite. It's staggeringly big, of course, but not infinite to the point where they can have a Sanchez like failure and just keep absorbing it and their wage bill is completely off the scale and worse, extremely unbalanced. They're paying absolute top dollar wages to players not really worth it and that is going to affect their efforts to bring in an established player not to mention that they're going to get royally fleeced with the transfer fee as well.

They are set up to be a monster off the pitch but they are also carrying massive overheads and as was being discussed in the United thread, money is leaving the club like an open sluice and they are facing a massive cut in that shirt sponsorship if they don't qualify for the CL. The attitude amongst fans just aren't seeming to grasp the reality that they aren't just a few players off from clicking; this is the worst United team I have ever seen managed by the worst United manager I have seen overseen by the worst Chief Exec I have seen. They cannot just continue absorbing failed players and throwing money at it but throwing money is pretty much what they have to do to gain short term success to avoid major losses. Its just a massive risk now and throwing money at it and still failing, which with the current set up is extremely likely, could very well hamstring the club for the better part of another decade. Ferguson milked the squad absolutely dry, Rooney started the trend of being paid far more than his actual worth and Mourinho might be gone but the chickens from all that are coming home to roost. Ironically, the two they disliked the most in Van Gaal and Moyes could actually be the ones who did the least long term damage.
 



nikz200

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
1,014
United commercial value is not infinite. It's staggeringly big, of course, but not infinite to the point where they can have a Sanchez like failure and just keep absorbing it and their wage bill is completely off the scale and worse, extremely unbalanced. They're paying absolute top dollar wages to players not really worth it and that is going to affect their efforts to bring in an established player not to mention that they're going to get royally fleeced with the transfer fee as well.

They are set up to be a monster off the pitch but they are also carrying massive overheads and as was being discussed in the United thread, money is leaving the club like an open sluice and they are facing a massive cut in that shirt sponsorship if they don't qualify for the CL. The attitude amongst fans just aren't seeming to grasp the reality that they aren't just a few players off from clicking; this is the worst United team I have ever seen managed by the worst United manager I have seen overseen by the worst Chief Exec I have seen. They cannot just continue absorbing failed players and throwing money at it but throwing money is pretty much what they have to do to gain short term success to avoid major losses. Its just a massive risk now and throwing money at it and still failing, which with the current set up is extremely likely, could very well hamstring the club for the better part of another decade. Ferguson milked the squad absolutely dry, Rooney started the trend of being paid far more than his actual worth and Mourinho might be gone but the chickens from all that are coming home to roost. Ironically, the two they disliked the most in Van Gaal and Moyes could actually be the ones who did the least long term damage.
Yeah, you are right, its just somehow someway the media and their fan base keeps feeding us this info that they can buy their way out of this. BBC has already reported that United is going to spend big in january...... i just don't know why players would want to go to that mess anyway.


While i think somehow we have managed so far, i do think we need to buy players , even if its just one in january to help bolster our firepower. Ox hasn't come up big yet, Klopp has probably fallen out of faith with shaq and Keitas legs are a unknown factor. Unless Elliott is the one who will break into first team contention later this season.
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
13,703
Extremely unreliable (source is Calciomercato) but looks like we're being linked with a move once again for Martin Odegaard, who is apparently doing quite well on loan at Sociedad this season.
I think the guardian rumours were linking us with Haaland, dont know which source they were using but that is something i heard before the Red Bull game. I wouldnt be surprised if we were lining up moves for one or two of their players should we have a need to sign someone.
 

costared

TIA Reserve Team
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
3,496
Yeah, you are right, its just somehow someway the media and their fan base keeps feeding us this info that they can buy their way out of this. BBC has already reported that United is going to spend big in january...... i just don't know why players would want to go to that mess anyway.


While i think somehow we have managed so far, i do think we need to buy players , even if its just one in january to help bolster our firepower. Ox hasn't come up big yet, Klopp has probably fallen out of faith with shaq and Keitas legs are a unknown factor. Unless Elliott is the one who will break into first team contention later this season.
Elliot looks a good prospect butI think he will need another seasons development.
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
13,703
Ox hasn't come up big yet, Klopp has probably fallen out of faith with shaq and Keitas legs are a unknown factor.
I disagree here. Shaq has had his season interupted by injury. Keita has plenty in the engine, and given he has barely played this season most likely has plenty in the tank - his issue has been niggly injuries at inopportune moments hence why he isnt being rushed back. Ox too is being eased back in. Klopp is big on keeping the same team whenever possible because he believes in rhythm (Partly explains why we always look so poor following a break). It wouldnt surprise me if Klopp gives Ox and Keita a proper run in the team when he finally does pick them. Shaq, offers less in terms of pressing so his minutes are always likely to be more at risk.
 



wibseyred

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
461
For me the weekend was the must telling indicator that Keita doesn't have Klopps full trust. Salah goes down we need a goal who does Klopp go for not Keita.
 

vjcpatriot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2015
Messages
917
Yeah, you are right, its just somehow someway the media and their fan base keeps feeding us this info that they can buy their way out of this. BBC has already reported that United is going to spend big in january...... i just don't know why players would want to go to that mess anyway.


While i think somehow we have managed so far, i do think we need to buy players , even if its just one in january to help bolster our firepower. Ox hasn't come up big yet, Klopp has probably fallen out of faith with shaq and Keitas legs are a unknown factor. Unless Elliott is the one who will break into first team contention later this season.
Indeed there's only so much mismanagement a club can do financially before they start to get into trouble. No matter how wealthy they originally are and their 'name brand' power, MU is in trouble and might be so for years, particularly since they are getting into Europa League instead of the CL.

As for January, it would have to be the perfect fit for Klopp to make a move. We rarely spend in January. But an exception can be made if it's the right player, see Van Dijk. As for Elliot, he's a really promising young player but it's hard to ask a teenager to break into the 1st team, particularly one who is still only 16 years old. I wouldn't expect it.

Hopefully Ox and Keita can bounce back with a little more health and time. But that midfield is a concern. LFC is still looking for that creative 8/10 player to fully unlock the attack.

Maybe if Mbappe asks for a transfer?
 

FilthyBloke

Undervalued member.
Joined
Feb 26, 2018
Messages
1,900
Indeed there's only so much mismanagement a club can do financially before they start to get into trouble. No matter how wealthy they originally are and their 'name brand' power, MU is in trouble and might be so for years, particularly since they are getting into Europa League instead of the CL.

As for January, it would have to be the perfect fit for Klopp to make a move. We rarely spend in January. But an exception can be made if it's the right player, see Van Dijk. As for Elliot, he's a really promising young player but it's hard to ask a teenager to break into the 1st team, particularly one who is still only 16 years old. I wouldn't expect it.

Hopefully Ox and Keita can bounce back with a little more health and time. But that midfield is a concern. LFC is still looking for that creative 8/10 player to fully unlock the attack.

Maybe if Mbappe asks for a transfer?
As much as I agree that we could do with a creative midfield (assuming keita and Ox are permacrocks) we still have Henderson, Fabinho, Wijnandum, Milner, Ox, keita and lallana on our books with grujic still to come back. I can’t see us signing another midfielder without getting rid first of at least 3 of the above players mentioned.
 

The Elusive 19th

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
4,983
As much as I agree that we could do with a creative midfield (assuming keita and Ox are permacrocks) we still have Henderson, Fabinho, Wijnandum, Milner, Ox, keita and lallana on our books with grujic still to come back. I can’t see us signing another midfielder without getting rid first of at least 3 of the above players mentioned.
Lallana will be let go this summer. And there is a chance that Milner may retire and move to a staff role or become a pundit. Then we will be left with Fab, Hendo, Gini, Ox and Keita. Add Grujic to that and another creative option (Eriksen for me), we should be well set.
 

legalalien

Watcher of the skies
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
8,910
Yeah, you are right, its just somehow someway the media and their fan base keeps feeding us this info that they can buy their way out of this. BBC has already reported that United is going to spend big in january...... i just don't know why players would want to go to that mess anyway.


While i think somehow we have managed so far, i do think we need to buy players , even if its just one in january to help bolster our firepower. Ox hasn't come up big yet, Klopp has probably fallen out of faith with shaq and Keitas legs are a unknown factor. Unless Elliott is the one who will break into first team contention later this season.
I know this is going off thread but ... Brewster never gets a mention. Is he injured? I don't think he's been on the bench much either.
 



GaryBarlow99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
601
Lallana will be let go this summer. And there is a chance that Milner may retire and move to a staff role or become a pundit. Then we will be left with Fab, Hendo, Gini, Ox and Keita. Add Grujic to that and another creative option (Eriksen for me), we should be well set.
I think Milner will play for another couple of seasons. Maybe not for us but I hope he does. Iceman.
 

The Elusive 19th

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
4,983
I think Milner will play for another couple of seasons. Maybe not for us but I hope he does. Iceman.
I hope not. He is great professional. We need to tie him up with a role for us. If it is as a player - fine. If not a coaching staff/Ambassador/tea lady - anything will do. We would be mad to let go off him.

I always think what would have happened if Milner directly came to us instead of going to Man City.