Uilleam 5,488 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 30 minutes ago, JFK-1 said: Gerrard is said to be willing to listen to cut-price offers for Foderingham How does that work? First legal offer secures? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK-1 1,677 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 11 minutes ago, Uilleam said: How does that work? First legal offer secures? Sounds like he just wants him off the wage bill to me but i'm tired of taking 'cut price offers' for our players. But it might be something we just have to live with till he gets this squad shaped and trimmed to his satisfaction. I'm fervently hoping Gerrard is going to be around till the end of his contract. The annual chopping and changing is a large part of what's killing us. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,282 Posted July 20, 2018 Author Share Posted July 20, 2018 (edited) Hush KeraiVerified account @HushKerai 23m23 minutes ago .@skysportsnews understands @RangersFC have agreed a deal to sign @LFC winger Ryan Kent on a season-long loan #LFC (It looks like Kent's contract with Liverpool runs till next summer.) Edited July 20, 2018 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,488 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 6 minutes ago, JFK-1 said: Sounds like he just wants him off the wage bill to me but i'm tired of taking 'cut price offers' for our players. But it might be something we just have to live with till he gets this squad shaped and trimmed to his satisfaction. I'm fervently hoping Gerrard is going to be around till the end of his contract. The annual chopping and changing is a large part of what's killing us. We always seem to be in a position where we need to move players out and on. In that situation, it is difficult to hold out for top dollar, I suppose. The transfer window doesn't help, and neither does a roster of contracted players who ain't worth a fuck. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannochsidebear 2,320 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 I am absolutely amazed that we would consider taking a player on loan from a club that puts playing time stipulations into the contract. 70% of game time for a loanee is a huge number for an under-developed player. We cannot afford to take a player on loan who still needs a lot of work (otherwise he would be playing for his contracted club or be sold to another club), we need to be winning games playing our best players who are fit and in form. Something needs to be done about the number of players a club can have under contract. The farce that was Chelsea sending out something 40+ players on loan is not good for the game, especially if these types of clubs are putting in stipulations about who another manager has to play in his team. The first 11 should be entirely down to our manager to pick whomever he wants to for that particular game, not be wondering if he has to play an inferior player just to meet a quota. If the mother club thinks that highly of their player, then they shouldnt need to stipulate this in the contract, they should be confident that their player will be better than what we have in that position and will be a first choice for us. If not, dont give us the player, give him to a lesser level club where he will be a first pick on talent alone. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK-1 1,677 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, Tannochsidebear said: I am absolutely amazed that we would consider taking a player on loan from a club that puts playing time stipulations into the contract. 70% of game time for a loanee is a huge number for an under-developed player. I largely agree on most of your post but there are other considerations. For example a loanee from the likes of Liverpool who can't get into that team doesn't necessarily mean he's not a really good player when you consider the quality they have occupying the first pick spots. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonzo79 13,750 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 This is just another example of rich clubs in rich leagues ruining football. Chelsea don't need 40+ players. The percentage of game time for a loanee is absolutely shocking! What if the lad scored 3 OGs and has a complete breakdown of confidence...do we still get fined for not playing him even if we play a Rangers youth player instead? EPL clubs don't need any more money. I'm annoyed! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 45 minutes ago, Tannochsidebear said: I am absolutely amazed that we would consider taking a player on loan from a club that puts playing time stipulations into the contract. 70% of game time for a loanee is a huge number for an under-developed player. We cannot afford to take a player on loan who still needs a lot of work (otherwise he would be playing for his contracted club or be sold to another club), we need to be winning games playing our best players who are fit and in form. Something needs to be done about the number of players a club can have under contract. The farce that was Chelsea sending out something 40+ players on loan is not good for the game, especially if these types of clubs are putting in stipulations about who another manager has to play in his team. The first 11 should be entirely down to our manager to pick whomever he wants to for that particular game, not be wondering if he has to play an inferior player just to meet a quota. If the mother club thinks that highly of their player, then they shouldnt need to stipulate this in the contract, they should be confident that their player will be better than what we have in that position and will be a first choice for us. If not, dont give us the player, give him to a lesser level club where he will be a first pick on talent alone. It was a whopping 53 players that Chelsea sent out on loan 2 or 3 years ago. Mind-boggling. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 Kent better not play Infront of Middleton 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffer 1,665 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 1 minute ago, trublusince1982 said: Kent better not play Infront of Middleton If he is better, I hope he does. Middleton then has to accept the standards he must reach if he's to get into the team. No-one is owed a place in the team, just because they've been here longer. The best 11 should start. That's the only way to motivate the others to reach the standard, because it's the only way they'll be picked. I do accept the point that we need to develop our own, but part of developing our own is to put them in the right space mentally, and that should mean realisation of the standards we expect. Nothing less should be tolerated, not even for a promising young talent like GM. Having said all this, I hope Middleton rises to the challenge and grabs one of those starting shirts. At least when he wears it he will know he deserves it because of his talent, rather than as a result of him being owed anything. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.