|
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 404
Under 16 Player
|
|
Under 16 Player
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 404 |
Agreed LFCDU, but for some reason it seems to suit a couple of posters here to always try and lessen the blame on FSG when they fu*k up. Yep that's true, especially when they pick and choose information to forget that is crucial , like how on earth is Klopp to blame when the only reason we are in for VvD is because of Klopp ??? I'm puzzled how they never address this blatant peice of information in blaming issue. I think these are the same people who haven't read FSG's court statement upon buying the club, kindve a depressing statement but basically sums up FSG's motives exactly.
It is about pushing the train, not jumping on a running train.’ That is what we need here. It’s not allowed to take the history in the backpack
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
Agreed LFCDU, but for some reason it seems to suit a couple of posters here to always try and lessen the blame on FSG when they fu*k up. Again, who's trying to lessen the blame on anyone? Care to share any quotes? People are just pointing out that Klopp will have to take some blame here for reportedly meeting a player that he didn't have permission too after some suggested he was blameless. What people are doing, which doesn't suit your anti FSG stance, is pointing out that the club as a whole are to blame. I know, I know, the club is FSG and all that ball hang before you say it. Anyway, nothing we did is any worse than what goes on else where. This is more about Southampton spitting their dummy as they weren't going to get their bidding war that they wanted so reported us. Just the week before he wanted to join City FFS! By spreading the blame onto Klopp you are lessening it on FSG, and it should be obvious to all that the committee of which one of FSGs shareholders is a member would have been privy to the decision to make contact with the player. Also as LFCDU has repeatedly pointed out, Southampton's threat to report the club had more to do with their stupid attempt to cut out their rivals with their silly press releases and leaks, than it had to do with the "tapping up" exercise, so the full blame for this embarrassing debacle belongs with FSG.
Last edited by Hercules/AF 58; 21/06/17 08:13 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394 |
Agreed LFCDU, but for some reason it seems to suit a couple of posters here to always try and lessen the blame on FSG when they fu*k up. Again, who's trying to lessen the blame on anyone? Care to share any quotes? People are just pointing out that Klopp will have to take some blame here for reportedly meeting a player that he didn't have permission too after some suggested he was blameless. What people are doing, which doesn't suit your anti FSG stance, is pointing out that the club as a whole are to blame. I know, I know, the club is FSG and all that ball hang before you say it. Anyway, nothing we did is any worse than what goes on else where. This is more about Southampton spitting their dummy as they weren't going to get their bidding war that they wanted so reported us. Just the week before he wanted to join City FFS! By spreading the blame onto Klopp you are lessening it on FSG, and it should be obvious to all that the committee of which one of FSGs shareholders is a member would have been privy to the decision to make contact with the player. Also as LFCDU has repeatedly pointed out, Southampton's threat to report the club had more to do with their stupid attempt to cut out their rivals with their silly press releases and leaks, than it had to do with the "tapping up" exercise, so the full blame for this embarrassing debacle belongs with FSG. Klopp was part of the process and not once have I said he is to blame. I think if you care to read what I say instead of trying to make me out to be some kind of FSG mouth piece, I've said the club as a whole are to blame. You say the committee is to blame but is Klopp not a part of that? My posts about this only came about to challenge that Klopp was part of the process but must in some way be p!ssed off at FSG for cocking this up. I'll say it again just for clarity for you, I don't blame Klopp for this any more than I blame FSG. This has come about through the whole club cocking it up, everyone involved. Not just Klopp or not just FSG. And I'm still failing o see what we did that doesn't go on else where? The number of times you see in the press that player X wants to join club Y is very high so what was wrong with what came out? From Southampton's point of view it screwed over their desire for a bidding war so will of course fight back with the tapping up report. So for me, I'm not sure why anyone is to blame for doing something that all clubs do?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394 |
Agreed LFCDU, but for some reason it seems to suit a couple of posters here to always try and lessen the blame on FSG when they fu*k up. Yep that's true, especially when they pick and choose information to forget that is crucial , like how on earth is Klopp to blame when the only reason we are in for VvD is because of Klopp ??? I'm puzzled how they never address this blatant peice of information in blaming issue. I think these are the same people who haven't read FSG's court statement upon buying the club, kindve a depressing statement but basically sums up FSG's motives exactly. How about you choosing to not mention the fact that Klopp illegally met a player? As I've said many times and am getting bored of doing so (you obviously choosing to ignore this info.), I don't blame Klopp but has to take his share of it for his part in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,460
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,460 |
lots of newspaper n socia media trash.unless vvd or Klopp openly admit that they met, I am not buying that
Steven Gerrard: Heartbeat of LFC.
football is fuckingg cruel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,291
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,291 |
Agreed LFCDU, but for some reason it seems to suit a couple of posters here to always try and lessen the blame on FSG when they fu*k up. Yep that's true, especially when they pick and choose information to forget that is crucial , like how on earth is Klopp to blame when the only reason we are in for VvD is because of Klopp ??? I'm puzzled how they never address this blatant peice of information in blaming issue. I think these are the same people who haven't read FSG's court statement upon buying the club, kindve a depressing statement but basically sums up FSG's motives exactly. So you know for a fact that we are only in for Van Dijk because of Klopp? I don't pick and choose and information for the record, I'm one of the few people on here who try and have a balanced view. If that means not lambasting the owners at every possible moment then so be it. As a new poster to this website I'm struggling to understand how you can state me and Wilks, (it's obvious who you are aiming at) haven't read FSG's statement upon buying the club. You have absolutely no idea what my opinion is on the owners. Try reading what people post, I have stated many times that Klopp is partly to blame in the whole Van Dijk saga, IN MY OPINION! I have never said he is solely to blame, nor have I said FSG aren't to blame, the club as a whole has screwed up the transfer. Hope this is clear once and for all.
Last edited by Chris2402; 21/06/17 10:30 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054 |
FSG own the club and appoint the people running the club, so they are ultimately responsible for all employee's behaviour.
Senior employee's must have known Klopp had started discussions with VvD, so its a failure of the senior management at the club, which includes Klopp.
If we knew the Barca manager was discussing Coutinho's planned role in the Barca midfield next season with him without permission from LFC, we would not be happy with the situation.
Last edited by ecnirp98; 21/06/17 10:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054 |
It's the illegally meets a player bit that makes me believe he was given the nod by a suit so he thought it was approved to meet I don't believe he would of met him other wise imo I'm not so sure, only Klopp can answer that, these days it appears its quite common that the buying club agree the deal with the player before agreeing the fee with selling club, this puts the pressure on the selling club as they know the player wants to move if they have agreed a deal, usually on increase wage/package etc. Part of the issue with Vvd was probably that we are the third in line for him behind Man City & Chelsea from a financial point of view, but we have Klopp who can convince him of the LFC future/plans and guarantee him first team football, where at a City or Chelsea he is more of a squad player, look how Aguero/Harte have been treated. So it was probably key to our strategy to speak to him and convince him of LFC plans, then we agree the fee with Southampton after we know he will join and Southampton know that, which is pretty much what happened. The problem we made was that someone leaked it that he had agreed to join us and rejected Chelsea & Man City, which meant Southampton wouldn't get the bidding war they hoped for, so they wanted to kill the deal, so they threatened to use the evidence they probably had for weeks on our behaviour. I bet if we had bid £50million and Chelsea/City had bid £60 million, then we countered with £70million, I bet we would have got permission to speak with VvD then with no threats of reporting us. I expect we will make a big of around £65million in a few weeks and get him, after selling Sakho for £30million.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Merely pointing out that he had his part to play. He met a player he didn't have permission to so has done wrong. If you're telling me he was duped into thinking he had permission then maybe he's not all he's cracked up to be or he needs to resign as he's lost his primary target because the owners mis-led him.
I've consistently said that the whole club is to blame not just FSG or Klopp or G's favourite, the tea lady. Wilks the only agenda anti-FSG fans have is to see what's best for the club to reach the top, FSG have made good choices like keeping Anfield and signing Klopp, (and some stinkers like sacking dalglish along with many other internal mishaps) but it's not like they have to leave the club, they may have plenty good to give us and when they do part ways hopefully LFC club will be in a better place for it, financially AND trophies , I actually liked FSG at first and especially appreciated that we kept Anfield and got Klopp, but they now with Klopp they have their coach and no excuses , we have top four, EPL gave us a huge kitty, we have to walk the walk, maybe under Rodgers they could have a reason to low-ball , but this season it's time for them to change , their transfer committee better liven and smarten up if they want to get klopp's targets because Southampton will use anything dodgy against us if not, the way the salah deal panned out ( although good we signed him) hopefully isn't the strategy we plan to use with VvD. atm considering VvD is our main target , I will only be FSG out if VvD deal doesn't happen , it's that black or white with me because the player is that significant in klopp's plans and I cannot forgive such an incompetent stuff up if the transfer commitee can't get the VvD deal done, after all we shouldn't be blaming Klopp for "tapping up" but thankful because he wants to join us!!!!!! that's why the signing is so vital and why FSG must prove to the fans they have intent for success beyond what laptop deems as good business. In all fairness I don't think sacking Klopp is a constructive move even if your scenario is true, that leads us nowehere, it's funny how anti-FSG seems not constructive but it's actually blaming Klopp that hold absolutely no constructive value to LFC other than lessening the heat on FSG, FYI I have a feeling Klopp will shake up the committee enough to get VvD he's a coach that has the people power who isn't afraid to challenge FSG's thinking , So I'll be all for FSG if they give Klopp more power similar to Wenger But as it stands their structures in place are increasingly worrying so I've reserved final judgment until VvD deal. I still don't understand how a player who has had half of a season good and still coming back from injury is suddenly the new Messi
Last edited by RedsforChampions; 22/06/17 03:24 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
FSG own the club and appoint the people running the club, so they are ultimately responsible for all employee's behaviour.
Senior employee's must have known Klopp had started discussions with VvD, so its a failure of the senior management at the club, which includes Klopp.
If we knew the Barca manager was discussing Coutinho's planned role in the Barca midfield next season with him without permission from LFC, we would not be happy with the situation.
Yes, they can be ultimately responsible but not directly. Does anybody believe that they conned Klopp to talk to VvD so that the deal won't go through? Common people, use your brains.
|
|
|
|
|
