It was the release clause (or so we were led to believe). Nothing stupid about the bid.
Clive Allen scored 49 in one season a couple of seasons after we signed him and sold him without playing him.
didnt get the player so yes the bid was stupid
Liverpool broke the rules just to stop us talking to Suarez. Why do you think they would have sold him to us ?
He would be in Spain now anyway.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
they sold torres to chelsea....if we bid £50mil he'd be our player no question.
it's this weak ass mentality that has us floundering again
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 15 minutes ago
It was the release clause (or so we were led to believe). Nothing stupid about the bid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing stupid about the bid
You'd have won the league that season for an extra few million for a start
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 15 minutes ago
It was the release clause (or so we were led to believe). Nothing stupid about the bid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing stupid about the bid
You'd have won the league that season for an extra few million for a start
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No we wouldn't - Because Liverpool wouldn't sell to us!!!
Not sure what part of that people don't get. Liverpool broke the rules, were rather vocal about doing it as well, and that was just to talk to Suarez before negotiations even take place.
The bid was pre-Suarez rise to Elite level, which he would have at Arsenal and got couple of title and season out of it..Liverpool not selling is Bs..no debate..They themselves agree only couple of more mil..not that humiliation of £1...Suarez would have won couple of trophies for Arsenal to say the least.
Wenger shooting Arsenal in the foot nothing new..since he gives no fk, as the team was capable of winning the fourth place trophy
They didn't break the rules and if Arsenal had bid £70m like Barca he'd be playing in London.
To be fair to Arsenal, if they were told the buy out clause was 40 mil, why do people think they should have bid 50 mil?
It was an error in hindsight and maybe should have been 40,500 or something less antagonistic.
'Luis Suarez is the top scorer in the English Premier League which is arguably the top soccer league in the world,' Henry said.
'And he had a buy-out clause - I don't know what degree I should go into this - but he had a buy-out clause of £40million - more than 60 million (US) dollars. So Arsenal, one of our prime rivals this year ... they offered £40million and one pound for him and triggered his buy-out clause.
'But what we've found over the years is that contracts don't seem to mean a lot in England - actually not in England, in world football. It doesn't matter how long a player's contract is, he can decide he's leaving
'We sold Fernando Torres for £50million. We didn't want to sell but we were forced to.
'For the first time (with Suarez) we took the position that we weren't selling.
'Since apparently these contracts don't seem to hold, we took the position we're just not selling and it's been great for Luis, it's been great for us, and what will happen at the end of year ... I think we"re going to make Champions League and we have a small chance of winning the Premier League this year."
Not sure where Henry says Liverpool would have sold if we offered a few more million
Liverpool simply were not going to sell to us. That is why they broke the contract and that is why they made a big show of it.
comment by Rauben_Hoody - gesticulation doesn't both... (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
They didn't break the rules and if Arsenal had bid £70m like Barca he'd be playing in London.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes they did. John Henry was very vocal about it.
Why not come back with 45, 50 etc
You have the money
I don't get why wenger gets blamed for the bid though
Doubt he negotiates transfer fees
comment by CANuLEIVA (U18359)
posted 33 seconds ago
Why not come back with 45, 50 etc
You have the money
I don't get why wenger gets blamed for the bid though
Doubt he negotiates transfer fees
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Liverpool made it clear they weren't selling to us no matter what.
No team ever came out saying they would sell their top player. It was clear at the time Liverpool would have sold him under right fee and Suarez himself wanted the move but the "£1" and soft footing by Wenger cost him his legacy...yep he is nothing going to do anything significant..A manger who will be forever known of what could've been if he had learnt little bit of courage from SAF.
comment by Lado -The Best Number 10 (U7144)
posted 45 seconds ago
No team ever came out saying they would sell their top player. It was clear at the time Liverpool would have sold him under right fee and Suarez himself wanted the move but the "£1" and soft footing by Wenger cost him his legacy...yep he is nothing going to do anything significant..A manger who will be forever known of what could've been if he had learnt little bit of courage from SAF.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, but Henry's comments are over a year later. Liverpool were not selling to us under any circumstance.
Suarez wanted a move to Spain, so didn't push hard for the Arsenal move. When the Spainish big clubs stayed quiet Suarez was soon happy to stay at Liverpool for another season.
Liverpool simply weren't selling to us.
The amount we offered was the exact we needed to. It would have been idiotic to go above a clause.
A manger who will be forever known of what could've been if he had learnt little bit of courage from SAF.
=======
The same manager who couldn't get Shearer, even though he did everything he could.
The same manager who couldn't get Vieira, even though he claimed Vieira was desperate to join United and United did everything they could to get him.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Rauben_Hoody - gesticulation doesn't both... (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
They didn't break the rules and if Arsenal had bid £70m like Barca he'd be playing in London.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes they did. John Henry was very vocal about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and the PFA looked through it and said Liverpool were fine. Apparently it just meant you guys could have a chat. If there was a breach of contract he would have gone.
Yes and the PFA looked through it and said Liverpool were fine. Apparently it just meant you guys could have a chat. If there was a breach of contract he would have gone.
==========
No they didn't. They said it was unclear and it was up to Suarez to sort it:
"We have tried to get a settlement of this but there are a number of other big-name players who are in situations where clubs are offering, clubs are refusing and it has to be sorted between the club and the player.
"What is quite clear is that an offer in the region of £40m has been turned down and if Luis Suarez is determined to leave you don't see any sense in a player being where he doesn't want to be.
"On the other hand we've a short period of time in the window and if you're going to lose a player as good as Luis Suarez you need time to replace him and you need good money and no doubt that will be on Liverpool's mind.
"It's created a real problem and that's why we need to be mindful in the future of such clauses and if it is going to be a buy-out clause it says that, and there's no ambiguity and no misinterpretations because it's obviously the case that that has happened."
^^^ That was what Gordon Taylor, PFA chief, said. Nowhere did he clear Liverpool. More the suggestion that Suarez didn't persue it.
if it is going to be a buy-out clause it says that,
================
Obviously not legally binding.
it has to be sorted between the club and the player.
=========
No conclusion from the PFA
Sign in if you want to comment
Suarez bags 49th goal this season
Page 1 of 4
posted on 20/4/16
It was the release clause (or so we were led to believe). Nothing stupid about the bid.
posted on 20/4/16
Clive Allen scored 49 in one season a couple of seasons after we signed him and sold him without playing him.
posted on 20/4/16
didnt get the player so yes the bid was stupid
posted on 20/4/16
Hindsight is 20/20
posted on 20/4/16
Liverpool broke the rules just to stop us talking to Suarez. Why do you think they would have sold him to us ?
He would be in Spain now anyway.
posted on 20/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 20/4/16
they sold torres to chelsea....if we bid £50mil he'd be our player no question.
it's this weak ass mentality that has us floundering again
posted on 20/4/16
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 15 minutes ago
It was the release clause (or so we were led to believe). Nothing stupid about the bid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing stupid about the bid
You'd have won the league that season for an extra few million for a start
posted on 20/4/16
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 15 minutes ago
It was the release clause (or so we were led to believe). Nothing stupid about the bid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing stupid about the bid
You'd have won the league that season for an extra few million for a start
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No we wouldn't - Because Liverpool wouldn't sell to us!!!
Not sure what part of that people don't get. Liverpool broke the rules, were rather vocal about doing it as well, and that was just to talk to Suarez before negotiations even take place.
posted on 20/4/16
The bid was pre-Suarez rise to Elite level, which he would have at Arsenal and got couple of title and season out of it..Liverpool not selling is Bs..no debate..They themselves agree only couple of more mil..not that humiliation of £1...Suarez would have won couple of trophies for Arsenal to say the least.
Wenger shooting Arsenal in the foot nothing new..since he gives no fk, as the team was capable of winning the fourth place trophy
posted on 20/4/16
They didn't break the rules and if Arsenal had bid £70m like Barca he'd be playing in London.
posted on 20/4/16
To be fair to Arsenal, if they were told the buy out clause was 40 mil, why do people think they should have bid 50 mil?
It was an error in hindsight and maybe should have been 40,500 or something less antagonistic.
posted on 20/4/16
'Luis Suarez is the top scorer in the English Premier League which is arguably the top soccer league in the world,' Henry said.
'And he had a buy-out clause - I don't know what degree I should go into this - but he had a buy-out clause of £40million - more than 60 million (US) dollars. So Arsenal, one of our prime rivals this year ... they offered £40million and one pound for him and triggered his buy-out clause.
'But what we've found over the years is that contracts don't seem to mean a lot in England - actually not in England, in world football. It doesn't matter how long a player's contract is, he can decide he's leaving
'We sold Fernando Torres for £50million. We didn't want to sell but we were forced to.
'For the first time (with Suarez) we took the position that we weren't selling.
'Since apparently these contracts don't seem to hold, we took the position we're just not selling and it's been great for Luis, it's been great for us, and what will happen at the end of year ... I think we"re going to make Champions League and we have a small chance of winning the Premier League this year."
Not sure where Henry says Liverpool would have sold if we offered a few more million
Liverpool simply were not going to sell to us. That is why they broke the contract and that is why they made a big show of it.
posted on 20/4/16
comment by Rauben_Hoody - gesticulation doesn't both... (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
They didn't break the rules and if Arsenal had bid £70m like Barca he'd be playing in London.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes they did. John Henry was very vocal about it.
posted on 20/4/16
Why not come back with 45, 50 etc
You have the money
I don't get why wenger gets blamed for the bid though
Doubt he negotiates transfer fees
posted on 20/4/16
comment by CANuLEIVA (U18359)
posted 33 seconds ago
Why not come back with 45, 50 etc
You have the money
I don't get why wenger gets blamed for the bid though
Doubt he negotiates transfer fees
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Liverpool made it clear they weren't selling to us no matter what.
posted on 20/4/16
No team ever came out saying they would sell their top player. It was clear at the time Liverpool would have sold him under right fee and Suarez himself wanted the move but the "£1" and soft footing by Wenger cost him his legacy...yep he is nothing going to do anything significant..A manger who will be forever known of what could've been if he had learnt little bit of courage from SAF.
posted on 20/4/16
comment by Lado -The Best Number 10 (U7144)
posted 45 seconds ago
No team ever came out saying they would sell their top player. It was clear at the time Liverpool would have sold him under right fee and Suarez himself wanted the move but the "£1" and soft footing by Wenger cost him his legacy...yep he is nothing going to do anything significant..A manger who will be forever known of what could've been if he had learnt little bit of courage from SAF.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, but Henry's comments are over a year later. Liverpool were not selling to us under any circumstance.
Suarez wanted a move to Spain, so didn't push hard for the Arsenal move. When the Spainish big clubs stayed quiet Suarez was soon happy to stay at Liverpool for another season.
Liverpool simply weren't selling to us.
The amount we offered was the exact we needed to. It would have been idiotic to go above a clause.
posted on 20/4/16
A manger who will be forever known of what could've been if he had learnt little bit of courage from SAF.
=======
The same manager who couldn't get Shearer, even though he did everything he could.
The same manager who couldn't get Vieira, even though he claimed Vieira was desperate to join United and United did everything they could to get him.
posted on 20/4/16
This convo again. Lovely
posted on 20/4/16
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Rauben_Hoody - gesticulation doesn't both... (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
They didn't break the rules and if Arsenal had bid £70m like Barca he'd be playing in London.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes they did. John Henry was very vocal about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and the PFA looked through it and said Liverpool were fine. Apparently it just meant you guys could have a chat. If there was a breach of contract he would have gone.
posted on 20/4/16
Yes and the PFA looked through it and said Liverpool were fine. Apparently it just meant you guys could have a chat. If there was a breach of contract he would have gone.
==========
No they didn't. They said it was unclear and it was up to Suarez to sort it:
"We have tried to get a settlement of this but there are a number of other big-name players who are in situations where clubs are offering, clubs are refusing and it has to be sorted between the club and the player.
"What is quite clear is that an offer in the region of £40m has been turned down and if Luis Suarez is determined to leave you don't see any sense in a player being where he doesn't want to be.
"On the other hand we've a short period of time in the window and if you're going to lose a player as good as Luis Suarez you need time to replace him and you need good money and no doubt that will be on Liverpool's mind.
"It's created a real problem and that's why we need to be mindful in the future of such clauses and if it is going to be a buy-out clause it says that, and there's no ambiguity and no misinterpretations because it's obviously the case that that has happened."
posted on 20/4/16
^^^ That was what Gordon Taylor, PFA chief, said. Nowhere did he clear Liverpool. More the suggestion that Suarez didn't persue it.
posted on 20/4/16
if it is going to be a buy-out clause it says that,
================
Obviously not legally binding.
posted on 20/4/16
it has to be sorted between the club and the player.
=========
No conclusion from the PFA
Page 1 of 4