Liverpool FC Forum

if fenway denied the allegations then why give them anything at all?
the club made a settlement and the allegations were withdrawn and courtcase dropped so you really think they got like a tenner or something in compensation to drop it?
very doubtful they gave up and accepted nothing.

on the front of tonights echo it`s saying H&G have admitted defeat and dropped their lawsuit against FSG.

Yeah, reading the article on the echo website they're pretty much saying that the two cowboys have not only not received ANY pay off they've been burnt again with all of the legal fees for the past couple of years.

     

FANTASTIC - the ultimate FO for T&T.

Good riddance.

Liverpool skipper Steven Gerrard has said he does not agree with the current transfer policy at Anfield with the emphasis being placed firmly on youth. He is quoted as saying: "I disagree with the policy to be honest. I've seen many signings throughout the world who have gone to clubs at the age of 28, 29 or even older and done fantastic jobs. Gary McAllister when he came here, for one. I can understand the policy that everyone wants young, bright, British players - but I don't agree 100% that that should be the only way. I learned bucket loads from Gary McAllister.

Sauce: Sly sport

Full story on the Torygraph Ken.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... ayers.html

i agree with him, the best sides tend to have a good balance of experience and youth.
the problem with constantly planning for the future is that future never seems to arrive, look at arsenal, how many times over the past decade have we seen impressive performances from their young players in cup competitions (like when their reserves beat our first team 6-3 at anfield in the league cup) and how many times did we hear commentators/media say that arsenal are going to have a great side in the future?
well for all their decade of planning and investing in youth arsenal havent won a trophy in 7 years and they have probably their worst team in the 17 years wenger has been there.

we had it ourselves in the early 90`s, when we had players like robbie fowler, ste mcmanaman, jamie redknapp, don hutchinson, rob jones, mike marsh, steve harkness, dom matteo and even david james (who was highly regarded when he was at watford) all coming through at the same time even united fans were all saying it`s only a matter of time before liverpool win the title again.
but most of them didnt live up to their early potential (james, marsh, hutchinson, harkness, matteo etc) and injury curtailed the careers of fowler and rob jones.

every team needs to bring players through their ranks but i think it`s almost impossible to build a team of 21 year olds and expect them to win the title in 4 or 5 years time. football doesnt work like that, some players that look like they are going to be world beaters when they first get into the team just dont kick on, for instance during the last 20 years or so the likes of kieran richardson, seth johnson, michael ricketts and marcus stewart were all tipped to go on to great things.

The problem for Arsenal has not been their youth policy, but their inability to keep their best players. Considering the players they have lost wenger have done an impressive job imo.

I think our wage policy will hurt us more than our youth policy, as we can expect the best players to leave when they get offered better contracts elsewhere.

mart » Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:56 am wrote:The problem for Arsenal has not been their youth policy, but their inability to keep their best players. Considering the players they have lost wenger have done an impressive job imo.

I think our wage policy will hurt us more than our youth policy, as we can expect the best players to leave when they get offered better contracts elsewhere.

top players arent going to hang aound forever at clubs who arent winning anything

Usually reliable twitter sources suggesting there have been Sneijder negotiations but owners
seem unwilling to match wage demands, however it could still be there for us if we want
it enough.

By all accounts his deal with Galatasary is £90k a week and he was holding out for a Premiership
move, but regrettably NESV seem unwilling to go that extra yard to seal such a top class player
which is a real shame not to mention a wasted opportunity for Liverpool.

They seem glued to a policy and are not prepared to be flexible and in part this is what Gerrard
himself is suggesting is a mistake.

ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:46 pm wrote:i agree with him, the best sides tend to have a good balance of experience and youth.
the problem with constantly planning for the future is that future never seems to arrive, look at arsenal, how many times over the past decade have we seen impressive performances from their young players in cup competitions (like when their reserves beat our first team 6-3 at anfield in the league cup) and how many times did we hear commentators/media say that arsenal are going to have a great side in the future?
well for all their decade of planning and investing in youth arsenal havent won a trophy in 7 years and they have probably their worst team in the 17 years wenger has been there.

we had it ourselves in the early 90`s, when we had players like robbie fowler, ste mcmanaman, jamie redknapp, don hutchinson, rob jones, mike marsh, steve harkness, dom matteo and even david james (who was highly regarded when he was at watford) all coming through at the same time even united fans were all saying it`s only a matter of time before liverpool win the title again.
but most of them didnt live up to their early potential (james, marsh, hutchinson, harkness, matteo etc) and injury curtailed the careers of fowler and rob jones.

every team needs to bring players through their ranks but i think it`s almost impossible to build a team of 21 year olds and expect them to win the title in 4 or 5 years time. football doesnt work like that, some players that look like they are going to be world beaters when they first get into the team just dont kick on, for instance during the last 20 years or so the likes of kieran richardson, seth johnson, michael ricketts and marcus stewart were all tipped to go on to great things.

there has been very few english younglads that have gone on to be world beaters or even live up to half the expectation placed on them.
you only have to look at the national side to see the failings.
add the likes of kieron dyer,jermaine pennant,franny jeffers,jermaine jenas etc the list is endless. you only have to look at the ballon dor winners in the last 34 years since keegan won it(2 in a row) and the only name is michael owen in 2001.
gerrard is dead right and i have been saying it for ages that we need the balance and i can only hope that he can influence rodgers to his way of thinking.

FSG's policy is flawed. Look at RVP, a 29 year old whom manure signed. For a footballer, that is not young and look at what he's achieving at O.T. They don't have this stupid policy of FSG and I'm sure RVP will score against Liverpool and manure will lift their 20th title in May. I hope the backs of FSG like their previous yank owners soon.

I don't believe they are against signing older players, I think they are just against paying over the odds in transfers or wages. To be honest, I raised an eyebrow at RVP's move to ManU, I thought he was injury prone and only last season did he have a great year at Arsenal, before that I didn't really rate him too much.

Every time when I commented that FSG are stingy and unwilling to invest heavily, some countered by saying that our net spend have been 3rd highest behind City and manure. I haven't check these accounting figures yet but assuming they're true, there must be a big gulf between us and those 2 other clubs. Why? Because, look at our squad, it is a thin squad which BR admitted and it is so thin such that we have to S.O.S. the youth academy for the teenagers there to play first team football. Sometimes we're playing up to 3 to 4 kids in the first team PL games. If our net spend is anywhere near the 2 who spent more than us, why aren't they fielding kids as well. So we're 3rd highest net spender, though may be true but NOT enough to get us back to glory.

I still hold the belief that if FSG are going to be reluctant to spend over the next 3 windows, they must sell up to someone who can. And that will be the next best thing they can do for Liverpool. I am having doubts about them being good owners. Their Boston Rd.Sx. are down in the pits now in their baseball league table recently.

alwayslfc » Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:32 am wrote:Every time when I commented that FSG are stingy and unwilling to invest heavily, some countered by saying that our net spend have been 3rd highest behind City and manure. I haven't check these accounting figures yet but assuming they're true, there must be a big gulf between us and those 2 other clubs. Why? Because, look at our squad, it is a thin squad which BR admitted and it is so thin such that we have to S.O.S. the youth academy for the teenagers there to play first team football. Sometimes we're playing up to 3 to 4 kids in the first team PL games. If our net spend is anywhere near the 2 who spent more than us, why aren't they fielding kids as well. So we're 3rd highest net spender, though may be true but NOT enough to get us back to glory.

I still hold the belief that if FSG are going to be reluctant to spend over the next 3 windows, they must sell up to someone who can. And that will be the next best thing they can do for Liverpool. I am having doubts about them being good owners. Their Boston Rd.Sx. are down in the pits now in their baseball league table recently.

Were going over old ground and not doubt you will suggest that the argument is wearing a bit thin! However the fact remains that FSG have allowed over £150m to be spent. Forget where it came from, if they were as bad as you make out they could have simply kept the money and bought in the bottom basement. Unfortunately the people responsible for spending most of the money paid top prices and ended up with players that are no better than you would get from the bottom basement. IS IT ANY WONDER THEY ARE BEING CAUTIOUS AFTER BEING CONVINCED THAT CARROLL WAS THE IDEAL REPLACEMENT FOR TORRES AT £35M. Not shouting forgot to take cap lock off - sorry.