Liverpool FC Forum

by **dawson99** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:45 pm

Keane played the first 16 matches... how many of those did he play 90 minutes for?

by **bigmick** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:47 pm

dawson99 wrote:Keane played the first 16 matches... how many of those did he play 90 minutes for?

Not many mate. I take it your saying that Parry signed Riera as well then?

by **dawson99** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:47 pm

No, I'm just saying Rafa don't like Keane for a reason otehr than footballing stuff, just trying to work out what that reason is... maybe Keane did the dirty with mrs rafa or something?

by **Lando_Griffin** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:52 pm

bigmick wrote:
The_Rock wrote:Lets for arguementative's sake say that keane wasn't benitez preferred signing...

Rock mate I've read your post and it's fair enough, but lets not assume Keane wasn't Rafa's preferred signing. Why not? Because it is an absolutely ludicrous notion, so ridiculous as to be beyond any sensible debate.

He didn't want him? Would he have played him int he first sixteen matches this season then. He didn't want him? Does anyone think his pet journalist Ballaque wouldn't have commented at the time? Does anyone think Keane would have signed the contract without first discussing with the manager where he fit into his plans. Does anyone seriously believe Rafa would have gone through all of that if he didn't want him? Do people think Rafa got a phionecall from Parry, "Hey Rafa, you'll never guess what? I've just spunked 20 million quid on Robbie Keane! "

Transfers don't work like that. The whole idea is absolutely fecking ridiculous. It is wiuthout one single grain of truth.

So lets bear in mind that when we "for the sake of argument" it, we might as well discuss what would happen for the sake of argument if I played in goal against Chelsea

No offence to you Rock on this as I know it's not your rumour, but it's patently daft.

I think you'll find that owners often buy players over the manager's head, Mick.

Just because this particular one doesn't pander to the "Rafa is a c*nt" notion, you can't rule it out.

Not if you wish to remain credible, of course.

by **Thingy** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:52 pm

If he is out the squad tomorrow which it seems like he is, I hope to god its because he's being sold, because if Rafa is using him as a weapon to prove a point to Parry or anyone, its just naughty.

by **The_Rock** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:03 pm

bigmick wrote:No offence to you Rock on this as I know it's not your rumour, but it's patently daft.

None taken as always .......

But just hope this puts a stop to all the $hit about benitez

1)not signing his preferred players
or
2)when he does signs someone...he is usually his 7th or 11th choice .....

by **bigmick** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:11 pm

Lando_Griffin wrote:
bigmick wrote:
The_Rock wrote:Lets for arguementative's sake say that keane wasn't benitez preferred signing...

Rock mate I've read your post and it's fair enough, but lets not assume Keane wasn't Rafa's preferred signing. Why not? Because it is an absolutely ludicrous notion, so ridiculous as to be beyond any sensible debate.

He didn't want him? Would he have played him int he first sixteen matches this season then. He didn't want him? Does anyone think his pet journalist Ballaque wouldn't have commented at the time? Does anyone think Keane would have signed the contract without first discussing with the manager where he fit into his plans. Does anyone seriously believe Rafa would have gone through all of that if he didn't want him? Do people think Rafa got a phionecall from Parry, "Hey Rafa, you'll never guess what? I've just spunked 20 million quid on Robbie Keane! "

Transfers don't work like that. The whole idea is absolutely fecking ridiculous. It is wiuthout one single grain of truth.

So lets bear in mind that when we "for the sake of argument" it, we might as well discuss what would happen for the sake of argument if I played in goal against Chelsea

No offence to you Rock on this as I know it's not your rumour, but it's patently daft.

I think you'll find that owners often buy players over the manager's head, Mick.

Just because this particular one doesn't pander to the "Rafa is a c*nt" notion, you can't rule it out.

Not if you wish to remain credible, of course.

We must agree to differ Lando. John Craig may have pinpointed the only occasion I can think of in England where the "owners" may have bought a player over the managers head (and even then I'm not convinced).

As for Chief exuctives buying players

. Anyone who believes that happened shouldn't be concerning themselves with my credabilty I shouldn' think, that's the least of their worries.

As I've said a few times, if I came on here and claimed that Parry had signed Torres what sort of reception do you think I'd get?

Anyway, if people want to convince themselves that Parry bought Keane, thats fine

by **account deleted by request** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:12 pm

Lando_Griffin wrote:
bigmick wrote:
The_Rock wrote:Lets for arguementative's sake say that keane wasn't benitez preferred signing...

Rock mate I've read your post and it's fair enough, but lets not assume Keane wasn't Rafa's preferred signing. Why not? Because it is an absolutely ludicrous notion, so ridiculous as to be beyond any sensible debate.

He didn't want him? Would he have played him int he first sixteen matches this season then. He didn't want him? Does anyone think his pet journalist Ballaque wouldn't have commented at the time? Does anyone think Keane would have signed the contract without first discussing with the manager where he fit into his plans. Does anyone seriously believe Rafa would have gone through all of that if he didn't want him? Do people think Rafa got a phionecall from Parry, "Hey Rafa, you'll never guess what? I've just spunked 20 million quid on Robbie Keane! "

Transfers don't work like that. The whole idea is absolutely fecking ridiculous. It is wiuthout one single grain of truth.

So lets bear in mind that when we "for the sake of argument" it, we might as well discuss what would happen for the sake of argument if I played in goal against Chelsea

No offence to you Rock on this as I know it's not your rumour, but it's patently daft.

I think you'll find that owners often buy players over the manager's head, Mick.

Just because this particular one doesn't pander to the "Rafa is a c*nt" notion, you can't rule it out.

Not if you wish to remain credible, of course.

Yeah mate, I can just imagine our owners WANTING to spend £20million. Especially on a player with as they put it "limited sell on value."

by **Lando_Griffin** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:15 pm

I'm simply making the point that it happens.

If the Chief Executive has the power to block transfers, he must also surely have the power to make them.

by **account deleted by request** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:19 pm

Lando_Griffin wrote:I'm simply making the point that it happens.

If the Chief Executive has the power to block transfers, he must also surely have the power to make them.

Could you imagine Hicks allowing Parry that sort of power remembering what he said about Parry's incompetance.

"I know your a fkn idiot Parry, but heres £20million, go and buy us a decent player....... but so what you do don't tell my good buddy Rafa ...... I want it to be a surprise"

by **dawson99** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:20 pm

We were gonna spend 20mill on Barry but that went south. Then Rafa was told ages ago that he gets a budget, if he dont spend it, next year budget is smaller. so he had to spend it on the first half decent thing he saw.

Thats what i think

by **account deleted by request** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:23 pm

dawson99 wrote:We were gonna spend 20mill on Barry but that went south. Then Rafa was told ages ago that he gets a budget, if he dont spend it, next year budget is smaller. so he had to spend it on the first half decent thing he saw.

Thats what i think

But we were going to sell Alonso to pay for Barry, which would still have left us with the best part of £20million Daws. I like this one better though mate

by **dawson99** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:25 pm

The selling don't count. We get a kitty every year. Rafa had to spend or else come summer hed have 20 mill less than usual. It's like company's getting abudget, you dont spend it, next year you get less.

This is fact, no?

by **Effes** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:27 pm

dawson99 wrote:The selling don't count. We get a kitty every year. Rafa had to spend or else come summer hed have 20 mill less than usual. It's like company's getting abudget, you dont spend it, next year you get less.

This is fact, no?

by **Rush Job** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:28 pm

When ever Scolari is asked about transfers he says its not my job speak to peter Kenyon. Who just so happened brought in Bosingwa (sp?) in the summer.
Rafa wanted Barry but was told no because of his age there wouldnt be much sell on value, but they had no problem signing Keane, who I think is a little older for more.I think its that that Rafa didnt like, instead of getting the Barry deal done Parry was off speaking to spurs.
Im not saying he wasnt a player Rafa identified though.

Liverpool FC Forum

Robbie keane - [EDIT: On His Way Back to Spurs]

Who is online