Herein lies the other issue, we are one (if not two) CF’s short. Yes, we have temporary ‘fillers’ but that won’t be enough to compete for all trophies. Will LFC be shooting themselves in the foot if Isak doesn’t happen…?
This to me is rather fair, “Liverpool’s client journalists” have said fuck all.
The problem for Edwards and Cope is they paid to tell a line and then when the big move happened they weren’t fed it and a German journalist beat them to it 
Edwards can continue to bang on about 2 attackers but the point was always to sign someone like this guy. Wissa wasn’t quite the fit that they were replacing so that made sense but the “he’s only replacing Callum Wilson” line is utter bull. It’s around 80m and Wilson contributed one yellow card last season. There isn’t nothing to replace, it’s not like his injuries cost them a great season. They have to sell him now regardless and that will be to Liverpool, because I have no doubt Newcastle have tried to flog him elsewhere.
4 Likes
Ekitike was the natural replacement for Isak.
We’ve seen their stats before and we’ve seen their style of play. Both of them are pretty similar strikers.
That didn’t happen.
2 Likes
I still don’t understand the vitriol towards us. What terrible crime have we committed?
Why are they so angry at us and so forgiving of their own club for letting the situation arise in the first place?
3 Likes
Because we are part of the cartel who are stopping Newcastle’s fairy tale story with unfair rules
5 Likes
Keeping the Little 14 out of the Big 6 is clearly the only thing that matters to us.
1 Like
Bias and rose tinted specs - things that are visible on most forums to be honest.
2 Likes
There is a feeling among “the Other 14” that PSR was a trap built by “the Big 6” to stop clubs challenging them. Us taking Isak is seen as another confirmation of that.
While I don’t doubt that the top clubs do want to ringfence their dominance it seems to be forgotten that PSR rules were approved by a majority of Premier League clubs.
8 Likes
It’s mainly the likes of Newcastle.
It allows the likes of Villa to come on not to mention the likes of Brighton. There is literally nothing interesting in watching a Man City dominate the league. Everyone wanted to call last season a bore but that bollocks never surfaced under Man City and if it wasn’t for Klopp they would have had more seasons like that.
2 Likes
When does the transfer window end?
1 Like
Monday 7pm
2 Likes
They are fighting the good fight on behalf of every club who could theoretically be bought by the world’s biggest sovereign wealth fund and power their way to the top of the pyramid through spending money they haven’t earned. It’s a real Robin Hood story.
14 Likes
They also are not new nor exist in a vacuum. Financial Fair Play regulations were introduced by UEFA in 2010. This built on an existing licensing system that had been around for nearly a decade already and came from a near constant discussion of the destabilizing effect of external money on the market and one that was being felt most troublingly in smaller leagues. The rules were poorly branded because it was never about fair play, but they were brought in to try to mitigate the consequences of Roman spending money he stole from Russian peasants causing a cascade of events that pressures Red Star Belgrade into spending themselves in bankruptcy. European football at large had big flashing waring signs going off about its financial sustainability, even pending financial collapse, and the data show the regulations were unambiguously successful at achieving those aims.
The domestic rules are just an obvious extension of this because it makes no sense to allow clubs to win your competitions with a level of spending that will see them barred from Europe anyway. Everything that has come after the initial FFP rules has just been tweeking around the edges precisely to help clubs like Newcastle and make it less of a closed shop.
This is a grievance that is made up completely out of thin air and requires you think spending regulations were created only once the saudis bought newcastle.
4 Likes
It can also be argued that without United , Liverpool and their historical success , the PL wouldn’t be worth as much as it is today.
A lesser extent applies for arsenal as well.
Every other club has leveraged the goodwill of the above three clubs to grow themselves into this. So he grateful , if not anything else.
1 Like
That he is extending his strike!
1 Like
This is real, I was there.
2 Likes
Villa fans moan about it as well that they can’t go and get top players because of PSR rules but their fans don’t acknowledge that they’ve spent a tonne they’ve just been getting it wrong a lot. Last year they spent over £200m on Onana, Maatsen, Malen, Iling-Junior, Dobbin, Barrenechea, Garcia, Disasi (£6m loan fee), Barkley and then taking almost all of Rashford and Asencio’s combined £500k a week salary’s on loan.
Of all of them only one player they signed on a permanent deal made a proper impact on the first team (Onana). It’s not that clubs can’t spend because of PSR it’s that they waste tones of money on middling players rather than target one major signing like Liverpool tend to do.
4 Likes
Well as I said yesterday Newcastle had a net spend of minus 115m and we are on minus 120m, this deal takes them 80m over us and yet apparently they are plucky underdogs while we are buying the league.
Bar Isak they aren’t selling anyone and if this deal happens that will reduce it back to about 100m add Wissa for about 50m and they will have a net spend of about minus 150m compared if we sign Isak to one of about 250m, 100m difference but look over the last 4 windows and that suddenly becomes nothing.
Yet we are buying the league and they are plucky underdogs.
5 Likes