I reckon we get Lavia now, we've done the groundwork with the player and also just pushed Chelsea £5m higher. There has to be an end to their supposed bottomless pit of money.

comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 11 minutes ago
I have no idea why we’re trying to hijack another Chelsea deal tbh. Sounds like Lavia is set on Chelsea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why?

We’re just taking our medicine with Lavia, which I’m relieved about tbh. We could easily have not done so and been left with nothing. Hopefully we can move on and maybe even get a CB now and hopefully Andre in January

comment by (K̇ash) - Liverpool 7-0 Man U (U1108)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Running Up That Hill (U8966)
posted 2 minutes ago
Can we spend the other 50m on Michael edwards?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not with Klopp having more or less full control on player incomings and outgoings
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You implying Klopp didn’t like edwards doing everything back then?

Edwards was god with his dealings, now we have this oaf who doesn’t have a clue

comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 2 minutes ago
Agreed a £60m deal for Lavia apparently.

He should pick us over Chelsea as he left City for game time, but we've basically paid £10m more than we could have got him for last week
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He'd play alongside Caicedo for Chelsea. Poch likes a double pivot and wants to push Enzo forward. He won't chose us just for game time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't agree with this but hey ho
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which part out of interest?

comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 2 minutes ago
Agreed a £60m deal for Lavia apparently.

He should pick us over Chelsea as he left City for game time, but we've basically paid £10m more than we could have got him for last week
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He'd play alongside Caicedo for Chelsea. Poch likes a double pivot and wants to push Enzo forward. He won't chose us just for game time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't agree with this but hey ho
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which part out of interest?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Caceido and lavia in a back three is too defensive

an extra 10mil facking amatuers

comment by Running Up That Hill (U8966)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by (K̇ash) - Liverpool 7-0 Man U (U1108)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Running Up That Hill (U8966)
posted 2 minutes ago
Can we spend the other 50m on Michael edwards?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not with Klopp having more or less full control on player incomings and outgoings
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You implying Klopp didn’t like edwards doing everything back then?

Edwards was god with his dealings, now we have this oaf who doesn’t have a clue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you believe reports they fell out over Hendo new contract and year before he wanted Gini to get a new contract. Only 1 winner which is Klopp.

comment by Naby8 (U6997)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 5 minutes ago
I have no idea why we’re trying to hijack another Chelsea deal tbh. Sounds like Lavia is set on Chelsea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Really? I'm sure I read something over the weekend that suggested the opposite - he'd prefer us. Although I've read so much over the last week and I'm sure at least half of it is total bollox.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah sounds like he's always been set on us despite Chelsea agreeing the deal.

comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 2 minutes ago
Agreed a £60m deal for Lavia apparently.

He should pick us over Chelsea as he left City for game time, but we've basically paid £10m more than we could have got him for last week
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He'd play alongside Caicedo for Chelsea. Poch likes a double pivot and wants to push Enzo forward. He won't chose us just for game time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't agree with this but hey ho
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which part out of interest?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Pretty much all if it.

That'd he'd play alongside Caicedo and that he'd not choose us just for game time.

comment by Neo (U9135)
posted 3 minutes ago
I reckon we get Lavia now, we've done the groundwork with the player and also just pushed Chelsea £5m higher. There has to be an end to their supposed bottomless pit of money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwork means fack all see Moises

comment by Running Up That Hill (U8966)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Neo (U9135)
posted 3 minutes ago
I reckon we get Lavia now, we've done the groundwork with the player and also just pushed Chelsea £5m higher. There has to be an end to their supposed bottomless pit of money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwork means fack all see Moises
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Chelsea did the groundwork and got him.

If we've submitted a new and improved bid fir Lavia I'd be super surprised if we didn't get Lavia and if we don't Schmadtke should be sacked on the spot.

comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 42 seconds ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 2 minutes ago
Agreed a £60m deal for Lavia apparently.

He should pick us over Chelsea as he left City for game time, but we've basically paid £10m more than we could have got him for last week
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He'd play alongside Caicedo for Chelsea. Poch likes a double pivot and wants to push Enzo forward. He won't chose us just for game time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't agree with this but hey ho
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which part out of interest?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Pretty much all if it.

That'd he'd play alongside Caicedo and that he'd not choose us just for game time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To be fair if I'm wrong about him playing alongside Caicedo the rest is a moot point as he'd clearly get more game time at Liverpool.

That said I've just re-read the article and it may be Enzo alongside Caicedo rather than Enzo further forward.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12397831/Chelsea-midfielder-Enzo-Fernandez-reveals-play-advanced-position-Mauricio-Pochettino-season-prepares-don-mythic-No-8-jersey-famous-club-legend-Frank-Lampard.html

I dare say either way that Chelsea will be a very exciting watch for years.

What's the point of a sporting director when the club could have paid the two release clauses of Mac and Dom without him.

I think Chelsea are going to absolutely bomb both short and long term. I reckon it's going to be a proper mess.

Could be wrong though.

comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted less than a minute ago
I think Chelsea are going to absolutely bomb both short and long term. I reckon it's going to be a proper mess.

Could be wrong though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They see city getting away with it

comment by Boca Seniors (CR7= Club Record, 7-0) (U19731)
posted less than a minute ago
What's the point of a sporting director when the club could have paid the two release clauses of Mac and Dom without him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This

comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted less than a minute ago
I think Chelsea are going to absolutely bomb both short and long term. I reckon it's going to be a proper mess.

Could be wrong though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the pitch yep they could be absolutely fvcked but I highly doubt it. You can't deny that there's a lot of talent in that team though.

If they had Nkunku yesterday it could have been really bad.

why exactly did we need to bid an extra 5 mil on top of chelsea bid, couldnt we just bid the same... (assuming the chelsea bid was accepted??)

Chelsea still lack a goalscorer and their defence looked shaky in the first 30 minutes when we broke their pressing.

It'll be a bit annoying to have to pay the extra £10m but to be honest I'm glad we took the gamble in trying to get Caicedo.

If it came off we'd have the better player and be singing the club's praises right now.

comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
If we've submitted a new and improved bid fir Lavia I'd be super surprised if we didn't get Lavia and if we don't Schmadtke should be sacked on the spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep this.

Honestly if we don't get him for £60m then that is humiliating.

Southampton must be in fvcking stitches watching this whole saga unfold in the background. Once again they have absolutely rinsed us and left us with our tails between our legs.

comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Running Up That Hill (U8966)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Neo (U9135)
posted 3 minutes ago
I reckon we get Lavia now, we've done the groundwork with the player and also just pushed Chelsea £5m higher. There has to be an end to their supposed bottomless pit of money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwork means fack all see Moises
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Chelsea did the groundwork and got him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He got that completely wrong

Essentially all this mess has meant we’re paying an extra £10m and Chelsea an extra £15m. Really embarrassing but good on Brighton and Southampton