Dear Guest
Thank you for visiting! est189 will soon be closing its doors (do forums have doors?) please visit the following thread - (to wail & cry perhaps?)
https://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4002484#post4002484
Thanjk you.
Paul.S
And lets not forget how long it took a certain Peter Crouch to get settled.
Yes it is frustrating, but from the odd glimpses of AC's real potential we have already seen, I am certainly expecting him to come good and show us the player he really is.
"Its not about the long ball or the short ball, its about the right ball." Bob Paisley
I wish people would just get over his ****ing price tag, its done, the money has been spent, the best thing we all can do now is get behind the lad and encourage him and whilst the rest of the world might be getting on his back including the so caled fans of his own cities football club, the Liverpool faithful should be able to show him why we beleive our club is special otherwise we will turn into Chelsea with just a sea of cunts if we are not careful
People will always bang on about it, it's done now and we need to get on with it it's not going to make a blind bit of difference now.
Carroll is a good young player and under the guidance of those around him his career is only going to move forward and improve.
People will soon stop once he starts banging them in which like Crouch is only a matter of time.
Klopp on LFC vs MUFC (March 9th 2016) - "This is why I love football. This is why we watched it when we were young. I can still not have enough of it."
Always, keep your face to the sun, and shadows will fall behind you.
Again you are linking the Torres and the Carroll buys. Why?
Just because Chelsea paid £50m didn't mean we had to spend money like a drunken sailor on shore leave.
You argument seems to be that its ok because we are not the biggest idiots in the room because there is someone even thicker than us. This does not hold water.
Why not try to be the smartest person in the room....
Yes! If they agreed to pay £35million for Andy Carroll then yes that decision needs to be questioned. Once Newcastle started asking for that kind of silly money we should have looked at other options.
If the owners are willing to pay, and we have the money. I really dont see a problem? Its not like buying Andy Carroll effected other purchases did it?
1:It means that less money was available for other transfers
2:It means that all fees we have paid since have been vastly inflated unless dealing with players with little left on their contract.
3:The owners spent our club money on this and not their own. Thus far they have not spent any of their own money on transfers
1:It means that less money was available for other transfers
2:It means that all fees we have paid since have been vastly inflated unless dealing with players with little left on their contract.
3:The owners spent our club money on this and not their own. Thus far they have not spent any of their own money on transfers
But they did spend a sum paying off the majority of our debts and acquiring the club.
1:It means that less money was available for other transfers You assume
2:It means that all fees we have paid since have been vastly inflated unless dealing with players with little left on their contract. You assume
3:The owners spent our club money on this and not their own. Thus far they have not spent any of their own money on transfers Proof?
Tell me one incident where we didnt go for a player because we couldn't afford him? We got all of our targets, and the ones we supposedly lost out on were for footballing reasons.
1:It means that less money was available for other transfers
2:It means that all fees we have paid since have been vastly inflated unless dealing with players with little left on their contract.
3:The owners spent our club money on this and not their own. Thus far they have not spent any of their own money on transfers
This is a scandal.
They must be taken outside and shot to death until they admit the errors of their ways. It's the only solution.
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
Comment