13 Jun 2012

'Terminated!' - Liverpool star buys himself out of Anfield contract. Good news...?

Liverpool midfielder Alberto Aquilani looks set to end the confusion over his future by finally signing a permanent deal with AC Milan.

In a press conference recently, Milan CEO Adriano Galliani confirmed that the club would not be taking up the contractual option to buy Aquilani:

"We will not use our option to buy Aquilani before May 31, but we will re-open talks with Liverpool in June, though."

Now, according to a report today in Italian Newspaper Corriere dello Sport, Aquilani has reached an agreement with Liverpool that allows his contract to be terminated. According to the report:

* Aquilani met with Brendan Rodgers, who informed him he would not feature in his plans for next season.

* The 'termination' agreement involves Aquilani buying himself out of of the remainder of his contract, which would then basically make the Italian International a free Agent. The details are expected to be announced in the next few days.

I'm personally glad this is happening - Liverpool are never going to recoup serious money for Aquilani, so the club might as well just take it on the chin. After all, what's the point in having an unhappy player on the books?

Having said that, in a recent poll on this site, 68% of the 5000 fans who took part voted for an Aquilani return, so it seems lots of LFC fans would be happy if any Milan deal fell through.

FSG will not be happy though; if this actually happens, Liverpool face making an £18m loss on the player, and Aquilani will go down as one of the club's biggest transfer mistakes.

EDIT: Someone in the comment section claims that Roma only ever received £8m from Liverpool for Aquilani. That is wrong, as this snippet from the club's official accounts proves:

Aquilani Liverpool

As you can see, the club paid £20.4m for Aquilani and Sotiris Kyrgiakos, which categorically proves that Liverpool paid Roma the total amount for Aquilani (£18m approx).

The accounts don't lie.

EDIT 2: Aquilani's Agent Franco Zavaglia has provided an update:

"I can exclude the possibility that he will leave Liverpool on a free transfer. There was a meeting with Liverpool and we are now waiting for them to give us an answer. What did we ask them? We’ll keep that to ourselves"

Buying out a contract is totally different to leaving on a free transfer, and I'm sure we'll learn soon that the question asked by Aquilani was 'can I buy out my contract?'

Jaimie Kanwar


104 comments:

  1. I think its a good thing. All he has wanted to do since he signed was leave. Having players like this on the books, even if out on loan is not good for the club.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I really thought the player had ability. Many said he was too lightweight but I disagree with that theory. Look at David Silva, Luis Garcia. They both are/were resounding successes in the Premier League. I think the problem was purely home sickness and injuries. It's a shame his Liverpool career turned out the way it did but I wish him all the best at Milan or wherever he ends up. Now we must focus on bringing a suitable replacement in, we can't afford to rely on our current crop of midfielders.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Signed by Rafa but never really played for him. Rafa left before he had a chance to seriously use him.

    ReplyDelete
  4. He was not much chop as a player never had any games where he showed he was going to be a player that could live up to his price tag.
    2 Managers showed no interest in having him around thats a story in itself i wont miss him just a greedy mummas boy who could not handle life in the EPL.

    ReplyDelete
  5. let him go,we have to look competitive players

    ReplyDelete
  6. LFC dumped on from a great height i think, maybe next time we will make sure the player wants to play for us!! not sure who to blame here, he signed for Rafa, Rafa sacked, he was not sure if he was wanted, pride said i want to go back to Italy, Italian clubs sniff blood i.e.(cheap player) stall on deals etc. act with no honor as far as i can see, Liverpool lose out big time, lesson learned!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. he has the quality why are we being held ransom a few days ago there was news that he was leaving for £3million and I was annoyed that we where taking such a hit but for free thats taking the piss

    ReplyDelete
  8. let him go,we have to look for competitive players

    ReplyDelete
  9. sad but predictable news. in the 09/10 season of misery he was the only bright moments of interest when he played, always thought he looked good and could get better but if he didnt wanna be there then theres no point in this going on every year, 75 grand a week less is a lot of money. Him and joe cole moving on would free up near a million a month. crazy money

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hodgson killed Aqua's career for Liverpool.  Towards the end of Aqua's first season he was consistently named man of the match for Liverpool after struggling to regain fitness for much of the season.  Hodgson's ridiculously bland application of the 4-4-2 killed never would have worked for Aqua tactically he got shipped out.  I'm sure if given the chance, even Dalglish would have used him a lot more than Hodgson. It's just a pity about his career at Liverpool.

    ReplyDelete
  11. complete rubbish again from Mr Kanwar. Roma have only ever recieved 8 Million from liverpool for aquilani, add to this a 2 million loan fee from juve and 2.65 from milan. and what ever we get back from him buying out contract.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Good f---in riddance

    ReplyDelete
  13. One thing about Hodgson was he was never prepared to adapt his tactics.  4-4-2.  Sit deep.  Play not to lose.  Every time.

    Problem is of course, this stifles creativity and attacking as you don't need players who can keep the ball.  You just need tacklers, hoofers and a big man up front.

    ReplyDelete
  14. *sigh* You're wrong. The club paid the full amount for Aquilani, and the official accounts prove this. I will post the snippet in the article in a minute. Perhaps you should do some research before you spout this stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sadly, Aquilani was a mistake, not for the reasons that most people say, as he is a really talented player and I am one of the 68% who would have liked to see him back with us, but because it doesn't make sense to buy an injured player and certainly not for the sum we paid. Same thing with Carroll really. £35m for a player that wasn't even fit to play for a considerable time!

    I believe that he wasn't made welcome and the press kept saying that he was a flop, which wasn't true, so now he doesn't want to play for us or in England.

    I don't resent Aquilani at all, so I wish him well in Italy, just not too well when we get back to CL and have to play against him. Yes, if he doesn't want to play for us, we need him off of the books, take the financial hit and get it out of the way.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I've posted the proof that Liverpool paid the full amount for Aquilani in the article.  Care to provide proof that Roma received only 8m?

    I'm waiting.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Good move for both player and club.. We certainly could hv used him with the qualitg midfielders "or lack of" we have had all last season. He had significantly much better skilles tham what we had watched all last season.. Clearly kenny felt otherwise.. Good luck.
    FC

    ReplyDelete
  18. Any player signs for club not for manager. 

    ReplyDelete
  19. said to me mate at the time he signed that Aquilani would Rafas epitaph - wasted money on a midfielder (who couldnt play coz he was injured when signed) when we really needed striker cover! what a waste of dough akin to Cheyrou, Diarra etc...

    ReplyDelete
  20. I would've liked to c him back. Hes better than Adam. And definnetly won't b the last expensive player the club will lose money. I'll wait to c how much we will get for SD,JH and AC.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Jaimie - I can't comment whether Roma received all or part of the money but from the snippet you posted it doesn't prove anything. As it is a Balance Sheet event it doesn't actually relate to a cash transaction. It could simply state that we have aquired £20.4 million of asset but increased our creditors by £20.4 million. This means we have actually paid nothing but still owe £20.4 million.

    ReplyDelete
  22. His heart was never in it, he should never have signed in the first place. The whole deal was a disaster from day one and the guy never had the heart to turn it round once it wasn't working, so, all in all, its best he moved on and next time we want to buy an attacking playmaker, we should do a lot more research on their character as well as their ability.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Totally daft Rafa signing - £17 million for a known crock and by the way Martin Kelly for a young lad seems to pick up all kinds of injuries - might be best to sell him now ??

    ReplyDelete
  24. A questionable signing from the off (i.e. buying an injured player)

    ReplyDelete
  25. Why cant people accept he was a bad buy, money got lost and he is going. Not the first not the last, Veron, Per Kroldrup, Winston Bogarde there is a huge list of such players.
    However they all have mega bank accounts unlike your real football players like Tommy Smith who gave his heart and soul for LFC and now lives in poverty.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Jaime
    How about a discussion on the article in todays Echo where 55 fans have been thrown out of their prime main stand seats to accomodate Corporates. One family has had a ticket going back 108 years.

    ReplyDelete
  27. And who told Jaimie that BR has talked to Aquaman let alone reached an agreement?

    Oops here's where I get banned for criticising his Lordship

    ReplyDelete
  28. We signed injured player. That's it.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Perhaps if you stopped foaming at the mouth with misplaced vitriol for five seconds you'd be able to read properly. This is directly referenced in the article.

    ReplyDelete
  30. There is no way that Charlie Adams was better than Aquilani in class and in technical play or in passing ability or in pace. It seems that Alberto was not liked when Daglish took over and due to the fact that the player unfortunately spend so much time on the treatment table it was seen his not being fit enough. He expressed desire to move away because he wasn't not getting enough playing time, not because he didn't like Liverpool. I think it is best that the player be given a chance to move on. It is shame he doesn't get a chance to really play for us , since we already have too many players in that position. With Joe Cole coming back it is inevitable that Aquilani had to go. Good luck in Milan Alberto. When healthy he was his class was evident for all to see.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Agree, James.  He could've been great for LFC but it just wasn't meant to be. Our entire midfield needs an overhaul IMO. We can't go into next season with Downing, Henderson and Spearing as first-teamers.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Sorry Jaimie but that isn't correct. As I said before I can't say whether LFC paid all or any money to Roma from the snippet you provided.

    A post balance sheet event is exactly that. An event that happened after the reporting period that would affect the balance sheet. A balance sheet shows changes in assets and liabilities not specifically changes in cash.

    Although we cannot say exactly how much was paid at the time to Roma it is irrefutable that LFC will have to/have paid Roma that full amount because it is extremely unlikely that Roma will agree to reduce the amount that LFC have to pay purely because the transfer has not worked out.

    I'm not arguing what the value of the transfer is I'm merely stating that the snippet of proof you provided is not an indication of how much cash was actually paid at that time.

    It is irrelevant to the overall argument and probably very picky but it is the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  33. You have absolutely nothing to back up your view. You can't just go around stating things without proof. As I said, that figure for Aquilani is referenced again in the following year's accounts. It doesn't matter how much you try and deny it, the figure is fact.

    ReplyDelete
  34. A desperate purchase to bring in a replacement for Alonso in the dying days of the transfer window (similar to Carroll); agreed this is a lesson learned - should not be spending 20-30M on impulse buys!

    ReplyDelete
  35. It's a shame that he never worked out for LFC but it's definately good that both he and the club are maybe getting out of this limbo situation they've been in the last year or so.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Fairway's interpretation of the extract of the accounts is correct - all the accounts are doing is stating the total transfer fees agreed.  They are silent on the payment terms.  It may be that the sum has been settled in full or there may be an amount still owing - that extract wouldn't demonstrate it either way.

    Largely irrelevent though - unless the fees have been renegotiated then its fair to assume that the full amount is due to be settled in the fullness of time.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Jamie - the requirement under the post balance sheet events note is restricted to reporting the fee agreed.  It doesn't look to whether the amount has been 0%, 100% or 50% settled yet.

    However if the accounts for subsequent years show a breakdown of fees by player then I'd expect any rebate of £10m (which would be necessary to reduce the agreed fee from £18m to £8m) to also be disclosed.  I suspect that there's not been any such disclosure as we'd have heard about it meaning that the £18m figure was correct.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Exactly - plus, as I've already stated several times, Aquilani's fee appears again in the following year's accounts.

    ReplyDelete
  39. If Aquilani isn't happy in England there's no point forcing him to stay, and if Rodger can't fit him in then he should go.

    Aquilani has 2 years left on his contract, as he signed a 5 year one when he joined. Assuming he was on £60k a week the price of buying out his contract is surely 2*52*60k = £6.24 million, a reasonable fee to lose him for. Yes it's still a big loss, but him buying out his contract is hardly losing him for free.
    Considering Milan were only going to pay £5-6m is seems reasonable.

    I plucked the £60k a week figure out of the air, but does anyone think he'd be on less? If he's on more then Liverpool are getting even more out of it, no? Or am I misunderstanding the phrase 'buying out his contract'?

    ReplyDelete
  40. I'm not trying to deny the figure Jaimie - as Surrey Spring says, if there had been any adjustment to the figure we would have heard about it.

    I'm just pointing out that your snippet of proof doesn't prove how much of the agreed transfer fee has or has not been paid.

    I'm not denying that it will have to be paid at some stage so please don't try to make out that I'm not accepting the figure.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I thimnk Henderson could really progress under Rodgers. I think, provided he is more confident next season, he would be perfect in the centre of a 5 man midfield.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Re the following:

    "if there had been any adjustment to the figure we would have heard about it."

    Why would we have heard about it? LFC isn't in the habit of discussing transfer figures publicly. All we have to go on are the figures stated in the accounts.

    ReplyDelete
  43. End of Liverpool4:34 pm, June 13, 2012

    Guys sad news

    Giroud has signed for arsenal and they are looking to sign Benatia

    Jose Mourinho wants Agger, can we stop him

    Newcastle wants Debuchy

    Where is Liverpool, Why are we not making any big name signings otherwise Agger wont stay

    ReplyDelete
  44. FSG will not lose any money as they didn't buy him, he would have been an asset on the books but they they did not lay out any money directly for him so they will not lose any money.

    ReplyDelete
  45. All if's,but's & maybe's.. It just didn't happen so we move on. 

    ReplyDelete
  46. Is it really a £20m loss, and will FSG be unhappy? I thought that players fees were capitalised, and then amortised over the life of the contract - meaning that the accounting loss is much less than £20m. So, only reason FSG will be unhappy is if they were expecting a large fee to be recouped - which would be odd. Or have I got footballing accounting wrong? FSG will probably just be happy that the wages are off the bill.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Like Joe Cole and Dirk Kuyt, Aquilani's wages are pretty massive especially in relation to what he brings to the side. This is about balancing the books.

    ReplyDelete
  48. wonder what will rodgers say about aqua? probably same as kenny " we couldnt get him in the team" !!! which i never understood that word, no doubt aqua is talented and way better than some midfielders we have now in the squad but no one likes him, is it because hes italian?! anyway we've been too disrespectful with him and better let him go now and wish him the best in his future but 2 things are clear, 1. that we lost a great player by never using him, and 2. we should apologize him for the way we treated him, I mean the club.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I rate Henderson as well. But he's definitely not ready for a starting place. He will be picking up things from Gerrard all the time so maybe he could make his mark when our midfield inevitably gets ravaged by injury around christmas time. I'm hoping all the rumours about players like Diame disappear quicker than they appeared. We need to aim higher than that.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I have the full accounts and it doesnt even state that re 20.4m for aquilani...As I work for an accounts firm these are hardly proof of anything...

    ReplyDelete
  51. lets have it right were has he proved to anyone that hes a top player,doesnt seem to hold a regular place since he left roma and not in italys euro squad and i doent see clubs in anykind of bidding war for his signiture,if we get 3 to 4 mil take it i wouldnt expect another club as poor as liverpool to throw there money away as cheeply. 

    ReplyDelete
  52. Grim_reeper_0078:39 pm, June 13, 2012

    Dont blame him blame that drunk manager roy..he sends a 20m player on loan sends a decent lb at loan buys a 31 year old midfielder who cannot pass buys a 4m lb who cant defend...he wud have been our star if odgson wud have played him so blame that woy

    ReplyDelete
  53. This was posted on Roma website around time of transfer. We have spent a fortune on him alright, without counting wages

    Roma have released the following details on the breakdown of the fees

    The 20 million EURO transfer fee is broken up into the following:

    - 4 cash instalments of
    - - 5 million EURO upfront
    - - 3 million EURO by 4th January 2010
    - - 7 million EURO by June 30th 2010
    - - 5 million EURO by June 30th 2011.

    Further Add ons include:

    - 300,000 EURO for every year Liverpool qualify for the Champions League from 2010/11 to 2014/15

    - 250,000 EURO everytime the player reaches 35 appearancs, 70 appearances, 105 appeances and then 140 appearances.

    - 1 million EURO the first time Liverpool either wins the Premier League or Champions League by 30 June 2014.

    - 5% of any future transfer fee will be paid to Roma.

    ReplyDelete
  54. complete joke of a man, never came accross a bloke who lets  a club buy him while hes injured, and pay him a good wage and not even honour it one bit. good bye to nancy boys like him. i expect milan will pay him the cash once hes (bought) out his contract!!
    good talent but a gutless disloyal f#ggot.
    wasted money big time.
    who couldnt see it coming eh

    ReplyDelete
  55. jk when you agree to pay for something company accounts must show the full debt in the year the debt was incurred. I understand the club did agree a 18 million fee. I also believe there will be a redress in future accounts. The true loss on him will be circa 12m without wages paid should we receive a 3 million fee for him.
    using the same set of numbers company accounts can be made to show profit, loss or breakeven you cannot take a set of accounts in isolation or take them at face value. But you know this 

    ReplyDelete
  56. jk we only refuse to accept what is incorrect regardless of who writes it fact is fairway76 is 100% correct. You are correct with regards to the clubs legal obligation your interpretation is wrong

    ReplyDelete
  57. the figure is correct your interpretation is 100% wrong

    ReplyDelete
  58. As I said earlier, the accounts for the following year (09-10) include aquilani's transfer fee.

    Sent from Samsung Galaxy Note

    -------- Original message --------
    Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 'Terminated!' - Liverpool star buys himself out of Anfield contract. Good news...? | Liverpool-Kop.com

    ReplyDelete
  59. Yes, I posted that in an article whem.it was first released. Roma have since removed it for some reason.



    Sent from Samsung Galaxy Note

    -------- Original message --------
    Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 'Terminated!' - Liverpool star buys himself out of Anfield contract. Good news...? | Liverpool-Kop.com

    ReplyDelete
  60. No, the interpretation is not wrong. I don't have the time or the inclination to explain why. Let's agree to disagree.

    Sent from Samsung Galaxy Note

    -------- Original message --------
    Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 'Terminated!' - Liverpool star buys himself out of Anfield contract. Good news...? | Liverpool-Kop.com

    ReplyDelete
  61. No, your interpretation is wrong, and if you actually read the full accounts for the last 4 years and follow the figures/money trail for transfers over that period, you will see that. I have done that; you have not, which is why I know I am right.



    Sent from Samsung Galaxy Note

    -------- Original message --------
    Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 'Terminated!' - Liverpool star buys himself out of Anfield contract. Good news...? | Liverpool-Kop.com

    ReplyDelete
  62. For those not up with events, Aquilani asked Hodgson and Dalglish to go back to Italy. 

    ReplyDelete
  63. One word. Bullshit!

    ReplyDelete
  64. Aqua had 1 goal, 6 assists and 23 games last season meanwhile Charlie Adam had 2 goals, 6 assists and 28 games so not much better

    ReplyDelete
  65. smart man Rob. Yes they are, sports players are one of the few occasions that staff are deemed to be assets on the balance sheets as their contract provide the business with control over them.

    say he was bought for 20mil on a 5 year contract..that means that as he enters his 5th year of his contract his value on the balance sheet would be £4m. Therefore a sale of £2m yields a £2m loss and not the stupid £18m odd quoted by Jamie K

    ReplyDelete
  66. Out of curiosity, do we have any figures for loan fees received from Aquilani's loan to both Juventus and AC Milan? Also, were those two clubs covering the full wages of Aquilani? 

    Judging by current reports that suggest he has two years remaining on his contract (at a total of 12M euros) it would suggest that he's being paid roughly 115k euros per week.

    I've read the full thread on this and I just wanted to throw my two cents in there. Fairway is correct about accounting standards and balance sheet events. While we have gained 20.4M in assets and liabilities, it is also possible that the full amounts are not paid (even if they show up on the following year's legal report or whatever). I imagine it as something like:

    DR Aquilani 18M
      CR AS Roma 18M

    Later on as we pay in installments
    DR Acquisition Expense
      CR Cash

    It is also possible that if the asset depreciates, we can impair the asset. (Any accountants want to go over this?)

    Of course, if AS Roma recognized revenue from this transaction, that would be a totally different story. But its not the first time that revenues get revised in following years for the same reason.

    ReplyDelete
  67. monkeysandpirates11:14 pm, June 13, 2012

    An increase in his value every time Liverpool qualify for, or win the Champions League - HA! Jokes on them! :p

    ReplyDelete
  68. JK regardless of his transfer fees your analysis of the "18m loss" is wrong.
    Players are deemed assets as their contract provide the club with control which is a key condition needed in recognising assets. They are therefore capitalised to the balance sheet and amortised (depreciated) over the length of their contract. In this case aquaman was bought for 18m over a 5 year contract. this means his asset value decreases 3.6m (written off to the P&L each year) a year and 10.8m so far. Therefore if we were to sell him for free the loss would in fact be recorded as:Sale Price - Asset value = 7.2m
    if he bought himself out he would have to buy out his contract in which the loss we make would be lower.(based on an estimate value from media sources)

    ReplyDelete
  69. i wouldnt call it so much a desperate purchase more so a stupid purpose not tthe fact i dont rate aqua man just the fact at the time we new alonso was going to leave and the fact rafa didint stamp his foot and reject his transfer request , and then had the power over real madrid to say if you want alonso we want huntellar and snyder or vandervaaart ,2 players for one all the players mentioned were sitting on the bench at real madrid and were looking to move on them selves ,and low and behold all them players have move forward to other clubs and became three good players  they had no injuries and would of slotted straight into our team  i hope aqua man gets what he deserves some good playing time with milan and some how proves to us that we made a mistake and even though he has had his injuries woes in the past he some what achieves the results in the game im sure he loves

    ReplyDelete
  70. I'm more annoyed by the actions of the Italian clubs than those of Aquilani. They hold us to ransom for their players then offer peanuts to get them back - look what Utd paid for Veron, Chelsea for Shevchenko, PSG for Pastore, as examples. Italian football is run by crooks (like their politicians) and we shouldn't enter into any more deals with them, no matter how good a player is.
    Also gutted about Giroud going to Arsenal. They've spent less than £25m yet they'll have Podolski & Giroud up front next season with RVP - and this is the club with a strict wage structure too!

    ReplyDelete
  71. I seriously hope that the reason Aquilani isn't in Rodgers plans is not because he wants to bring in Sigurdsson instead. First it was Roy with Cole, then Kenny with Adam. We never learn do we?

    ReplyDelete
  72. What about the man that paid 20m for him when he was crocked.
    Oh of course we cannot blame Rafa.

    ReplyDelete
  73. The report states he has bought himself out of contract, which
    means, we are only saving on his wages.No fee.

    ReplyDelete
  74. No he didn't. Both Hodgson and Dalglish have stated the reason he was sent away was that there wasn't a place for him in their teams.

    Aquilani said this about going to Juve:
    “It was really fast, a blitz. One day I was speaking with Roy Hodgson
    and we were discussing Liverpool’s season, and three days later I found
    myself having a medical in Turin.
    Liverpool counted on me, and in the end I would also have stayed
    because at the end of last season I was getting in gear physically and I
    had played the last eight games of the campaign."

    Comolli said this about the Milan loan:
    "With him it was more a question of opportunities to play. He's
    obviously a big player, he's got a very good resume and he's a very good
    player. But Kenny and the coaching staff felt he would play in a
    certain position. As I told Alberto during the summer, unfortunately in
    that position is someone called Steven Gerrard and it would have been
    difficult for Alberto to play. There were different reasons. There were
    tactical reasons, the fact he was playing in this position and also we
    felt it would have been very difficult to keep him here not playing
    regularly.

    I've got to say I was very impressed with the way Alberto behaved
    throughout the process. He was really an act of class. He only wanted to
    play football. He was not obsessed about money or anything else and to
    be fair to him, I was very impressed by his attitude and his
    personality."

    ReplyDelete
  75. If your post is correct,he really must have hated living on
    Merseyside to throw away all that money.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Tommy Smith lives in poverty , rubbish, he`s a pensioner in the
    UK. You want to come to Thailand you would find out what
    poverty really is.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Aqua man is just a waste of time and space. Get over it. I NEVER rated this guy. Good riddance, BYE BYE!!!

    ReplyDelete
  78. come'on aquilani, since u cannot prove yrself in liverpool u better move yr a*s out of liverpool..we're nt welcoming a low self-confident player in our team, we'll accept u as a 1st n major failure in liverpool history since in cant prove it but we liverpool fans like to challenge u to prove us wrong..that is a example of a gud footballer..thank U for breaking our hope n confident on u..neway gud luck wt yr favourite n the club which use u as a backup subsitute as u rather being happy wit that..

    ReplyDelete
  79. Well that's just not true. Gylfi Sigurddson is a perfect example.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Jeez it's not Rafa's fault Hodgson and Dalglish both were too blind to use him. Rafa began to play him at the end of his last season and he looked really good. Would've been a great player if the manager who brought him here wasn't sacked.

    ReplyDelete
  81. You have no proof of that. That little argument in an Asian hotel room was less than audible. You might be right, but he also could've just wanted to play football any Dalglish believed Charlie Adam and Jordan Henderson to be better players. I could've understood had Meireles been the replacement for Aquilani, but no, Dalglish had to get rid of him too. 

    ReplyDelete
  82. Why would we? He sold Alonso for £30 million and got an £18 million replacement. He was injured, so what? He's still a terrific player and showed signs towards the end that he was a coming good before the manager who actually understood the role of a trequartista was replaced by a proponent of Wade's 4-4-2 and subsequently a manager who doesn't know what tactics are at all. 

    ReplyDelete
  83. Great bit of homophobia there. You sound like a top bloke. Good riddance to technically gifted players who play the beautiful game the way it was meant to be played. Hello to hardworking shift workers like Jordan Henderson and the ugliest Hollywood player of all time, Charlie Adam. 

    ReplyDelete
  84. Damn those Italians for being better at business than us!

    ReplyDelete
  85. How dare they not pay £35 million for Andy Carroll. Disgusting.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Difference is, Sigurdsson is actually a good player.

    ReplyDelete
  87. That's why you've never won two La Liga titles, a UEFA cup or a Champions League.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Heard that one before, mate. Our record with buying mid table one season wonders hasn't been exactly stellar lately. We shall see.

    ReplyDelete
  89. So your entire basis for buying a player is based around not buying players from mid table clubs because they've failed before and that means all will fail in the future. Got it.

    ReplyDelete
  90. This Jaimie K dude really thinks he knows it all lol

    rather amusing

    ReplyDelete
  91. If it meant getting rid of a player who has shown his quality just about every time he's played for us, pretty much, yep.
    So Sigurdsson or Aquilani, who would you choose then?

    ReplyDelete
  92. Where did I say get rid of Aquilani? Get rid of Adam and keep them both. Gerrard can't play forever.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Start focusing on facts Jamie! You make some shit up.

    ReplyDelete
  94. One day Jamie will stop being a plastic fan and actually go to anfield. Actually no he'll probably go to Old Trafford the amount of time he bitches about Liverpool. Jesus christ

    ReplyDelete
  95. You were replying to my original comment about exactly that - getting rid of Aquilani to bring in Sigurdsson. 

    Would be good if, like you said, we kept them both and got rid of Adam instead, but I just don't see that happening.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Tommy Smith, a legend sold his medals to live he was broke, he had his benefits took off him despite not being able to walk, caused by a knee injury which they used to inect cortisone into every week so he could play like they did then, he may not live in poverty to some Thailand people but he does compared to these over pampered over paid mercenaries paid an arm and a leg from people who watch football's money.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Your clueless nice boy. A player who can't stand the club were so desperate for?? A player who needs time on the ball.... Great in the prem eh?? Carry on playin it Xbox and watching seria a before slating me. U clearly have no idea

    ReplyDelete
  98. Never said he can't stand the club, never showed he needed time on the ball, just that he was injury prone. He could be great in the Premier League if given a chance. I don't do Xbox, I play Playstation. 
    You clearly have no idea how to construct a cogent argument.

    ReplyDelete
  99. no your right..............but clueless about the game, all great players get stuck in, hes not one of them. gutless with a contract and gutless in the prem..................your hero!!

    ReplyDelete
  100. visit sportbroker007.blogspot.com for accurate betting tips and hel

    ReplyDelete
  101. i think liverpool should also get a new team of scouts... our scouts sucks...

    ReplyDelete
  102. I agree with most of that, apart from the bit that says BR has had a meeting with Aquilani and told him that he isn't in his plans. Why would a new manager of any club go telling any player that he isn't in his plans without having a good look at him first? unless he's slept with his daughter or wife or something. A new manager generally means a fresh start for all the players at a club. 
    I personally don't think Aquaman wants to be in England, and that's the reason he won't be at Liverpool next season, nothing to do with not being part of BR's plans!

    ReplyDelete
  103. I'm sorry but you wouldn't understand accounting terms much. Fairway76 is correct

    ReplyDelete