Henderson to Liverpool

[Tom 14013]

Cwarr07 on twitter (pretend ITK)

cwarr07 Colin

Charlie Adam to #lfc to be announced this afternoon. Top player & another shrewd signing by Dalglish

 

[LeazesMag 0]

maybe he needs to be put up against James Perch ?

 

 

Doesn't make any sense at all but yeah, makes complete sense.

 

it probably makes perfect sense to anybody with half a brain.

 

Tell you what Gejon, on the basis that Mike Ashley is still owner of NUFC I'll bet you that Liverpool finish above NUFC next season [as you think they are doing it wrong and we are doing it right] ? And this time next year I'll give you the option of double or quits for the season after too ?

 

That would be after 6 years of Mike Ashleys "plan" by then ?

 

Yes or no ?

 

Well you compare a player that cost £1m with one that cost £20m, both who play in completely different positions anyway. Why didn't you go with Tiote? Is it because it would have made your stupid comment redundant?

 

Of course not you fucking moron. How many times have we finished above Liverpool in the last 20 years? Where did I ever say Liverpool's whole transfer policy was wrong? I even said I was jealous of the two forwards they signed in January. I picked one transfer I think they paid well over the odds on, I have pointed this out already. Just how thick are you really?

 

Honestly it really is like hitting my head against a brick wall but instead of it making me thicker you seem to be having the negative affects on the old brain cells.

 

You probably didn't, it'll be "you know who" making stuff up again.

 

Liverpools transfer policy is exactly like ours

 

 

when did we Liverpool's number 1 striker ?

Edited June 13, 2011 by LeazesMag

[GeeForce 0]

Can I ask leazes, would you agree that bar inflation in the game, Man city's current transfer policy is the same that chelsea had when abramovich took over?

[JawD 99]

LM, you are going on about Liverpools transfer style being the right way (while I would argue they are taking massive risks spending £35M on Carroll and £20M on Henderson - too risky a gamble for me).

 

But have you looked at Arsenal? They spend £10-£14M on the odd occasion and often spend £4-5M on players as well. More often than not though they have net surplus after the window closes having sold players.

 

Here is the list

 

Here is also a net spend table which makes interesting reading. What you would expect to see is the higher the transfer fees the more success?

 

Table

 

and another one, since 2006 a table of net spend. Again, would you expect to see higher payers at the top and visa versa? To support your argument, we are bottom, 20th in net spend. Despite being a current mid table side. But Arsenal are 2nd bottom? Man City waaaaay out in first yet havent won the league.

 

Net spend table

 

Stats eh

[NJS 4411]

I never thought we did well between 94 and 05 because we spent daft money - there were other clubs throughout that time who spent a lot as well. We did well because we had two managers who on the whole spent well and translated that money into good teams. We did poorly at the end because the money was spent badly by poor managers.

 

Spending money for its own sake is usually a waste of time as those stats tend to suggest.

 

I know the jury is out on Liverpool but I think they did well in Jamuary but Henderson is overpriced - I suppose the overall result depends on the net effect.

[JawD 99]

Id agree totally. It's not the value spent its the quality of players (not their fee) and how well they fit into the team. Man City a shining example of this.

[LeazesMag 0]

Can I ask leazes, would you agree that bar inflation in the game, Man city's current transfer policy is the same that chelsea had when abramovich took over?

 

i'm not talking about Man City and Chelsea, I've said this dozens of times. I'm talking about NUFC being run on the same levels as clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn.

 

Please keep up.

[LeazesMag 0]

I never thought we did well between 94 and 05

 

no point in reading the rest of that.

[LeazesMag 0]

LM, you are going on about Liverpools transfer style being the right way (while I would argue they are taking massive risks spending £35M on Carroll and £20M on Henderson - too risky a gamble for me).

 

But have you looked at Arsenal? They spend £10-£14M on the odd occasion and often spend £4-5M on players as well. More often than not though they have net surplus after the window closes having sold players.

 

Here is the list

 

Here is also a net spend table which makes interesting reading. What you would expect to see is the higher the transfer fees the more success?

 

Table

 

and another one, since 2006 a table of net spend. Again, would you expect to see higher payers at the top and visa versa? To support your argument, we are bottom, 20th in net spend. Despite being a current mid table side. But Arsenal are 2nd bottom? Man City waaaaay out in first yet havent won the league.

 

Net spend table

 

Stats eh

 

I realise you are trying to be more sensible than the fuckwits/others [or some of them] but where do you find another Arsene Wenger ? And to say Arsenal haven't backed their manager when he thinks he's seen a quality player is also a myth too.

 

Do you think NUFC should be competing with clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn, selling our best players to clubs like Spurs and Liverpool and replacing them with inferior players who in turn will not stay at the club long term even if they are the one player in 6 or 7 from this "bargain" basement who comes good ?

 

Yes or no.

[NJS 4411]

I never thought we did well between 94 and 05

 

no point in reading the rest of that.

 

Learn to read english fuckwit - the next word is "because".

 

Do you think it makes you "clever" or right" to post such pointless shite?

 

You're alienating every poster on here exactlly as you did on N-O. I hope the result is the same.

[LeazesMag 0]

I never thought we did well between 94 and 05

 

no point in reading the rest of that.

 

Learn to read english fuckwit - the next word is "because".

 

Do you think it makes you "clever" or right" to post such pointless shite?

 

You're alienating every poster on here exactlly as you did on N-O. I hope the result is the same.

 

You mean you hope I'm right that the club is going downwards under this owner ?

 

Anybody who seriously thinks "we did badly between 94 and 05" needs their heads examining chum.

 

By far the best period at the club for 50 years, despite you having your head up your arse, and not "every" poster disagrees with me. You should look at other posters who post "shite", among the pro-Ashley brigade and there are plenty of them, especially on the other 2 major sites.

 

I'm confident what I say will stand the test of time, I've been saying it for almost 4 years now, and its quite amazing that people like you are still trotting out the same "shite" in response.

 

As for wanting me banned, bollocks to you too, I would ban the likes of you for calling for people to be banned just because you disagree with somebody. Pathetic little boy.

Edited June 13, 2011 by LeazesMag

[JawD 99]

LM, you are going on about Liverpools transfer style being the right way (while I would argue they are taking massive risks spending £35M on Carroll and £20M on Henderson - too risky a gamble for me).

 

But have you looked at Arsenal? They spend £10-£14M on the odd occasion and often spend £4-5M on players as well. More often than not though they have net surplus after the window closes having sold players.

 

Here is the list

 

Here is also a net spend table which makes interesting reading. What you would expect to see is the higher the transfer fees the more success?

 

Table

 

and another one, since 2006 a table of net spend. Again, would you expect to see higher payers at the top and visa versa? To support your argument, we are bottom, 20th in net spend. Despite being a current mid table side. But Arsenal are 2nd bottom? Man City waaaaay out in first yet havent won the league.

 

Net spend table

 

Stats eh

 

I realise you are trying to be more sensible than the fuckwits/others [or some of them] but where do you find another Arsene Wenger ? And to say Arsenal haven't backed their manager when he thinks he's seen a quality player is also a myth too.

 

Do you think NUFC should be competing with clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn, selling our best players to clubs like Spurs and Liverpool and replacing them with inferior players who in turn will not stay at the club long term even if they are the one player in 6 or 7 from this "bargain" basement who comes good ?

 

Yes or no.

 

On the first part, kinda backs up what I said somewhere else. It's not the amount spent but the manager who identifies a player and then the club back the manager and buy him. Arsenal have backed AW, hence spending £15M on Arshavin. Point is though, they have spent very wisely and off-loaded players as needed. My point here really referred back to your "penny pinching" point. If we are going for £5M players, Arsenal have brought in some fantastic players for that value and under. Finding another AW though? I agree its damn hard. But like I say, my point is that it is possible to build a solid team without always spending silly money. But, Id like to think (well ok, I hope) that when we finally get a team worthy of a top 7 finish, we may need to add one £15M player a season, backed up by one or two £5M players.

 

To your second point, No.

 

But I'll add to it rather than just meeting your yes or no requirement

 

Selling our best players to Spurs and Liverpool. Which transfers did you have in mind? Carroll? Id have sold him for £35M, that was stupid money for an unproven kid. If they didnt have the Torres money no way would he have been valued at that. We had to take it. Who else though? I can't honestly think of another of our top players we have sold. In the same circumstance, I think Spurs and Liverpool would have sold as well. As for replacing with inferior players, again I can only look at Carroll as that is all we have sold? That is a question I can only answer at the end of this window (fucking stupid idea selling him when we did, we should have tried to hold on till this summer so we could replace. As it happens, it didnt harm us in the end as we stayed up. big risk though).

 

I honestly dont think we are competing with Bolton and Blackburn and I think we'll finish above both next season?

 

This said, I dont think we are competing with Spurs or Liverpool either. But we should be building towards that. Should be.

[GeeForce 0]

Can I ask leazes, would you agree that bar inflation in the game, Man city's current transfer policy is the same that chelsea had when abramovich took over?

 

i'm not talking about Man City and Chelsea, I've said this dozens of times. I'm talking about NUFC being run on the same levels as clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn.

 

Please keep up.

I didn't say you are, but on the basis I would like to use it as a comparison to show differing levels of growth speed etc please just answer the question, unless your scared of being called out that is!

[LeazesMag 0]

Can I ask leazes, would you agree that bar inflation in the game, Man city's current transfer policy is the same that chelsea had when abramovich took over?

 

i'm not talking about Man City and Chelsea, I've said this dozens of times. I'm talking about NUFC being run on the same levels as clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn.

 

Please keep up.

I didn't say you are, but on the basis I would like to use it as a comparison to show differing levels of growth speed etc please just answer the question, unless your scared of being called out that is!

 

scared of being called out ? What does that mean ?

 

Is the likes of Gejon/toonpack etc going to descend like a pack of vultures when I don't answer a question [unlike posters such as "Mad Jock" etc, to name but one who has buggered off without answering mine]

 

Don't you think Man City and Chelsea are singing from the same sheet here ? They are [were in Chelsea's case] prepared to throw massive funds in the short term to get success [but maybe when they realise it isn't so easy they will curb it, a handful of managers later ] .... is this what you mean ? What does that have to do with NUFC ?

 

I've said lots of times mate, Man City, Chelsea are a different sort of animal, and ManU too because of their global appeal. Haven't you seen these posts [although if you haven't, fair enough] but others are "putting words into my mouth" then accusing me of the same thing, when I'm not. I just think we should be acting like a big club, and since Mike Ashley bought it, we have steadily declined, and the seeds for long term decline continue to be sown. Sorry like but that is how I see it.

Edited June 13, 2011 by LeazesMag

[trophyshy 7084]

I never thought we did well between 94 and 05

 

no point in reading the rest of that.

 

Learn to read english fuckwit - the next word is "because".

 

Do you think it makes you "clever" or right" to post such pointless shite?

 

You're alienating every poster on here exactlly as you did on N-O. I hope the result is the same.

 

You mean you hope I'm right that the club is going downwards under this owner ?

 

Anybody who seriously thinks "we did badly between 94 and 05" needs their heads examining chum.

 

By far the best period at the club for 50 years, despite you having your head up your arse, and not "every" poster disagrees with me. You should look at other posters who post "shite", among the pro-Ashley brigade and there are plenty of them, especially on the other 2 major sites.

 

I'm confident what I say will stand the test of time, I've been saying it for almost 4 years now, and its quite amazing that people like you are still trotting out the same "shite" in response.

 

You have completely misquoted him Leazes. Reread his post and stop being so obstreperous man.

[LeazesMag 0]

I never thought we did well between 94 and 05

 

no point in reading the rest of that.

 

Learn to read english fuckwit - the next word is "because".

 

Do you think it makes you "clever" or right" to post such pointless shite?

 

You're alienating every poster on here exactlly as you did on N-O. I hope the result is the same.

 

You mean you hope I'm right that the club is going downwards under this owner ?

 

Anybody who seriously thinks "we did badly between 94 and 05" needs their heads examining chum.

 

By far the best period at the club for 50 years, despite you having your head up your arse, and not "every" poster disagrees with me. You should look at other posters who post "shite", among the pro-Ashley brigade and there are plenty of them, especially on the other 2 major sites.

 

I'm confident what I say will stand the test of time, I've been saying it for almost 4 years now, and its quite amazing that people like you are still trotting out the same "shite" in response.

 

You have completely misquoted him Leazes. Reread his post and stop being so obstreperous man.

 

do you always talk like that ?

 

Basically mate, I can't be bothered with 1. people making excuses for Mike Ashley, and 2. moving the goalposts re the reasons they wanted the old owners replaced at the time.

 

Edit. I'll answer JawD later, when I think about what he is saying, I generally agree with what he says, at least he isn't doing one of the 2 things above.

Edited June 13, 2011 by LeazesMag

[sniffer 0]

LM, you are going on about Liverpools transfer style being the right way (while I would argue they are taking massive risks spending £35M on Carroll and £20M on Henderson - too risky a gamble for me).

 

But have you looked at Arsenal? They spend £10-£14M on the odd occasion and often spend £4-5M on players as well. More often than not though they have net surplus after the window closes having sold players.

 

Here is the list

 

Here is also a net spend table which makes interesting reading. What you would expect to see is the higher the transfer fees the more success?

 

Table

 

and another one, since 2006 a table of net spend. Again, would you expect to see higher payers at the top and visa versa? To support your argument, we are bottom, 20th in net spend. Despite being a current mid table side. But Arsenal are 2nd bottom? Man City waaaaay out in first yet havent won the league.

 

Net spend table

 

Stats eh

 

I realise you are trying to be more sensible than the fuckwits/others [or some of them] but where do you find another Arsene Wenger ? And to say Arsenal haven't backed their manager when he thinks he's seen a quality player is also a myth too.

 

Do you think NUFC should be competing with clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn, selling our best players to clubs like Spurs and Liverpool and replacing them with inferior players who in turn will not stay at the club long term even if they are the one player in 6 or 7 from this "bargain" basement who comes good ?

 

Yes or no.

 

On the first part, kinda backs up what I said somewhere else. It's not the amount spent but the manager who identifies a player and then the club back the manager and buy him. Arsenal have backed AW, hence spending £15M on Arshavin. Point is though, they have spent very wisely and off-loaded players as needed. My point here really referred back to your "penny pinching" point. If we are going for £5M players, Arsenal have brought in some fantastic players for that value and under. Finding another AW though? I agree its damn hard. But like I say, my point is that it is possible to build a solid team without always spending silly money. But, Id like to think (well ok, I hope) that when we finally get a team worthy of a top 7 finish, we may need to add one £15M player a season, backed up by one or two £5M players.

 

To your second point, No.

 

But I'll add to it rather than just meeting your yes or no requirement

 

Selling our best players to Spurs and Liverpool. Which transfers did you have in mind? Carroll? Id have sold him for £35M, that was stupid money for an unproven kid. If they didnt have the Torres money no way would he have been valued at that. We had to take it. Who else though? I can't honestly think of another of our top players we have sold. In the same circumstance, I think Spurs and Liverpool would have sold as well. As for replacing with inferior players, again I can only look at Carroll as that is all we have sold? That is a question I can only answer at the end of this window (fucking stupid idea selling him when we did, we should have tried to hold on till this summer so we could replace. As it happens, it didnt harm us in the end as we stayed up. big risk though).

 

I honestly dont think we are competing with Bolton and Blackburn and I think we'll finish above both next season?

 

This said, I dont think we are competing with Spurs or Liverpool either. But we should be building towards that. Should be.

 

 

 

Let's see. Alan Kennedy, Terry MacDermott, Peter Beardsley, Chris Waddle, Paul Gascoigne, David Ginola, Sebastian Bassong. Hmm.

[GeeForce 0]

To be honest I can't be arsed with this conversation I am afraid. It was a simple question which required a simple yes or no answer and I think I speak for a lot of people on here when I say that I am sick of wading through the bullshit to try and gleam something positive from your posts. I struggle to find anything in what you say time and again which I agree with.

 

You have set your stall out to be controversial and I must admit it has certainly worked and got some peoples backs up but it is a shame you can't be involved in a single thread without reverting to the same unresolved argument over and over again. The unfortunate fact is you bring absolutely nothing to the board whatsoever, yet you continue with the same drivel over and over.

[LeazesMag 0]

To be honest I can't be arsed with this conversation I am afraid. It was a simple question which required a simple yes or no answer and I think I speak for a lot of people on here when I say that I am sick of wading through the bullshit to try and gleam something positive from your posts. I struggle to find anything in what you say time and again which I agree with.

 

You have set your stall out to be controversial and I must admit it has certainly worked and got some peoples backs up but it is a shame you can't be involved in a single thread without reverting to the same unresolved argument over and over again. The unfortunate fact is you bring absolutely nothing to the board whatsoever, yet you continue with the same drivel over and over.

 

controversial ? No. What you mean is people don't "agree" with me, like you.

 

I don't get your question, what does Man City and Chelsea have to do with NUFC ? You want me to say that I think Mike Ashley should be bankrolling the club like they are don't you ? That is what is pissing you off, so I'm telling you I have NEVER said that and never will either. My point is take out the 3 teams I've mentioned, and there is NO excuse for a club like NUFC not to aim to beat everybody else, which is what I have been saying for ages now, if you read the posts properly without looking for something which isn't there. But we will NEVER finish above these teams if we sell our best players to them and don't even give the money to the manager to help him replace them properly. I hope you don't class this last point as "drivel" because if you do, you are indeed clueless.

 

I am in fact one of the most positive minded people on here, because I don't think - like some - we should settle for anything less.

Edited June 13, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Pacinofan 0]

LM, not sure if you've heard of a book called Pay As You Play, it's by a Liverpool supporter who has always looked in to the stats of situations. This book though is about all clubs, and covers all the Premier League years. Once you get the gist of his/their way of working with the stats it becomes really interesting.

 

This is the book

 

Pay As You Play

 

It's also available on Kindle for £4.78

 

This is one of the chapters on Newcastle where he assesses the cost per point from individual managers and creates a table where Sir Bobby surprisingly sits at the lower end of it. It's not a slight on him it's to do with the amount of managers you've had.

 

Sample Chapter

[GeeForce 0]

To be honest I can't be arsed with this conversation I am afraid. It was a simple question which required a simple yes or no answer and I think I speak for a lot of people on here when I say that I am sick of wading through the bullshit to try and gleam something positive from your posts. I struggle to find anything in what you say time and again which I agree with.

 

You have set your stall out to be controversial and I must admit it has certainly worked and got some peoples backs up but it is a shame you can't be involved in a single thread without reverting to the same unresolved argument over and over again. The unfortunate fact is you bring absolutely nothing to the board whatsoever, yet you continue with the same drivel over and over.

 

controversial ? No. What you mean is people don't "agree" with me, like you.

 

I don't get your question, what does Man City and Chelsea have to do with NUFC ? You want me to say that I think Mike Ashley should be bankrolling the club like they are don't you ? That is what is pissing you off, so I'm telling you I have NEVER said that and never will either. My point is take out the 3 teams I've mentioned, and there is NO excuse for a club like NUFC not to aim to beat everybody else, which is what I have been saying for ages now, if you read the posts properly without looking for something which isn't there.

 

No, that was not going to be my point at all actually but if you think Man City and Chelsea have nothing to do with NUFC then why does Liverpools transfer policy bother you so much? what is the difference between them and Man City or Chelsea? (Not my original point btw, however Liverpool are being bankrolled by new owners at present at quite an alarming rate)

 

Also, may I point out you keep saying that because Liverpool signed our best striker that immediately makes our transfer policy bad and theres good! I am afraid time has shown, especially at our club under the shepherd regime, that buying a clubs so called best players does not always work (Shearer being an obvious exception) but at the other end of the scale G'uivarch was hyped to the max, leading the french line in the world cup and he was abysmal!

 

Many clubs have shown in the past that selling your best players can indeed be beneficial if it helps a club progress as a team. Would Tottenham have the strength of squad if they had kept carrick and berbatov? I would argue that at the time when sold probably the two most influential players, however, the money brought in and spent improving the whole squad has put them in a much better position than they have been in with those players. We must now give Ashley a bit of time to see if he can do the same. He isn't going to bankroll the club and I would not expect him too, but selling andy carrol could end up being the best thing that happened to the club should the money be spent and spent correctly!

[LeazesMag 0]

To be honest I can't be arsed with this conversation I am afraid. It was a simple question which required a simple yes or no answer and I think I speak for a lot of people on here when I say that I am sick of wading through the bullshit to try and gleam something positive from your posts. I struggle to find anything in what you say time and again which I agree with.

 

You have set your stall out to be controversial and I must admit it has certainly worked and got some peoples backs up but it is a shame you can't be involved in a single thread without reverting to the same unresolved argument over and over again. The unfortunate fact is you bring absolutely nothing to the board whatsoever, yet you continue with the same drivel over and over.

 

controversial ? No. What you mean is people don't "agree" with me, like you.

 

I don't get your question, what does Man City and Chelsea have to do with NUFC ? You want me to say that I think Mike Ashley should be bankrolling the club like they are don't you ? That is what is pissing you off, so I'm telling you I have NEVER said that and never will either. My point is take out the 3 teams I've mentioned, and there is NO excuse for a club like NUFC not to aim to beat everybody else, which is what I have been saying for ages now, if you read the posts properly without looking for something which isn't there.

 

No, that was not going to be my point at all actually but if you think Man City and Chelsea have nothing to do with NUFC then why does Liverpools transfer policy bother you so much? what is the difference between them and Man City or Chelsea? (Not my original point btw, however Liverpool are being bankrolled by new owners at present at quite an alarming rate)

 

Also, may I point out you keep saying that because Liverpool signed our best striker that immediately makes our transfer policy bad and theres good! I am afraid time has shown, especially at our club under the shepherd regime, that buying a clubs so called best players does not always work (Shearer being an obvious exception) but at the other end of the scale G'uivarch was hyped to the max, leading the french line in the world cup and he was abysmal!

 

Many clubs have shown in the past that selling your best players can indeed be beneficial if it helps a club progress as a team. Would Tottenham have the strength of squad if they had kept carrick and berbatov? I would argue that at the time when sold probably the two most influential players, however, the money brought in and spent improving the whole squad has put them in a much better position than they have been in with those players. We must now give Ashley a bit of time to see if he can do the same. He isn't going to bankroll the club and I would not expect him too, but selling andy carrol could end up being the best thing that happened to the club should the money be spent and spent correctly!

 

you are talking about one transfer window How many transfer windows have we sold a player "too late to replace him", the manager has already said he will have to use the money in wages etc and not just transfers.

 

Mike Ashley has had 4 years already and has got nowhere near his predecessors and the club is not set up to do so. He has made it clear that we are operating below the wage level that top players are paid. They are not going to come here. His only aim is to make a profit each year by staying in the premiership with as small an outlay as possible and if that means selling a good player then he will do it. This is why Carroll was sold, not to give the manager the money and strengthen the team overall. The manager will not get that money. Wake up and give your head a shake man.

 

I am sorry if you think this is "drivel" just because you have your head in the sand, but it isn't, believe me. The club is operating at a level below that which it ought to be doing now. If you don't pay the wages, you will not get the players, and if you don't get the players, the next ones go elsewhere too because they see you as a club going nowhere and they want to play in europe, especially the foreigners because that is their mentality, they see it as a global game and that is where they want to be.

 

I would put it to you that using Spurs as an example is as meaningless as those who say anybody who spends money will go bankrupt like Leeds [although they are on their way back, and playing in the San Siro even once or twice is a damn sight better than spending an eternity in the bottom half of the table with a safety net and doing precisely nowhere], because both of these are the exception rather than the rule.

 

You know what mate, I said 4 years ago now that people didn't appreciate the last owners and took what they did for granted, and slowly people realised it to be correct, it will take a few more years yet for this idea they have that scratting around the lower leagues and selling your best players will give you a good football team doesn't work, but it will eventually sink in.

Edited June 13, 2011 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

LM, not sure if you've heard of a book called Pay As You Play, it's by a Liverpool supporter who has always looked in to the stats of situations. This book though is about all clubs, and covers all the Premier League years. Once you get the gist of his/their way of working with the stats it becomes really interesting.

 

This is the book

 

Pay As You Play

 

It's also available on Kindle for £4.78

 

This is one of the chapters on Newcastle where he assesses the cost per point from individual managers and creates a table where Sir Bobby surprisingly sits at the lower end of it. It's not a slight on him it's to do with the amount of managers you've had.

 

Sample Chapter

 

if you like that, you may like this, its a bit heavy going sometimes, and deals with football in general. Thanks for that link, I can't read it just yet but I've saved it and I'll read it later or tomorrow.

 

[LeazesMag 0]

Gee Force.

 

Ok, lets say Man City are trying to do what Abramovic did at Chelsea [and they are and maybe more], so what exactly is your point ?

 

I hope after the flak you gave me, you have something to say that is worthwhile, taking into account my replies which I think are quite clear.

[GeeForce 0]

Give my head a shake, you are asking the owners to spend money the club doesnt have. We have made losses in the last four years so even a net profit on transfers does not condone buying new players. You can't look at a business in separate sections it must be as a whole and if the result is a loss then this must be rectified.

 

I would hate Ashley much more if we had no club than us having a below average team and I am willing to accept that until the club is sold. Ashley has made mistakes but we are ahead of most clubs when it comes to financial fair play when that is finally implemented and that includes many clubs above us in the league. The transfer window has started off quite promising and for some reason to me it feels like he will actually keep his word and spend the money, on players and wages which I am fine with for the reason given above or close to it at least.

 

As I have said to you previously your point of view re: finances is what is wrong with the world, spend it now and worry later when others will bail us out. It gives a good indication as to the type of person you are really and it is extremely worrying that know matter how many people tell you the same you can't see the wood for the trees so to speak!