KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Third party ownership

But we've not tried to compete with Chelsea or City as we can't. Chelsea nicked Willian from Spurs after they nicked him from us but apart from that I can't think of many. We didn't try for Costa last summer but he didn't want to join us the summer before so why would that have changed? We fukked the Salah deal by dithering around as stated by their people. Can't think of anyone that went to City that we were linked to either.

Why do you honestly think Costa didn't want to join us then?

Could it not be due to a salary issue?

Or was it that he just had to remain in Spain for another 10 months and enjoy the famous Spanish sunset?

It was reported that he wanted another year in Spain. If you believe the article in the OP, we never got the chance to talk to him so wouldn't have got as far as wages.

I'm not saying we always offer good enough terms but not everything is always because the club don't offer enough. Sometimes players don't want to move or want to go else where. Sanchez made it clear eat on that he wanted to play for Arsenal for example. That might be because we didn't offer him as much or it might be, as he reportedly said, that they are more regular ECL qualifiers or he might have wanted to at for Wenger? I don't know but I'm not just going to automatically think it's because we offered him a tenner and a Mars bar a week .

But who would come out in the open and admit we offered too low wages then?

None I would say, as that would prove the player to be a mercenary, who does only care for his own wealth.

Of course all players we are after won't come to LFC, but it seems strange that we have to pay over the odds money for under the odds players all the time. And at the same time we manage to miss out on all our main targets.

I don't know. Maybe it's just time to call it a day and admit we are mid table dross who will never again be able to attract ready made top players.

All I do is draw conclusions from what's in the media. It's all I can do is it not? If something is widely reported and seems plausible then why not? If there's one report that seems iffy then it's probably false.

I know we're not great at signings, far from it. But with the ones mentioned I don't believe we fukked up. Kono fee and terms were agreed but nothing would've been signed until payment to Dnipro was sorted. That was the stumbling block and widely reported, even by their camp. Why would that lie to help FSG? The only thing we fecked up was not getting in there sooner.

It was widy reported that we offered the same as Dortmund for Miki. He chose them who were ECL finalists had won the Bundesliga and were qualifying year on year for the ECL. Maybe we could've offered more but we didn't. All seems plausible to me.

Not sure what went on with Costa. He said he wanted one more year at Atletico which looked like a good choice having won La Liga and nearly the ECL. I don't remember anything that suggested we offered low wages to him but maybe we did?

We fukked the Salah deal though. Iirc we had things agreed with Basel in December and then dithered and tried to change terms etc so Chelsea nipped in.

Like I say, not everything is a conspiracy.

I’ve read all the arguments, and find that on both sides, the evidence is circumstantial. Therefore as the self appointed Judge and Jury on here, I find on the balance of probability, in favour of sixties. Sentence will be passed upon FSG at a later date!

Well you're wrong I'm afraid. More evidence, even if it is circumstantial, that we didn't feck them all up. But feel free to join the conspiracists with your tin foil hats on!

Not getting anything in a twist. I just know I'm right. Life is a simple thing and the most simple answers are generally the right ones.