Transfer Window - COMPLETE. Where’s Gregg?

[islander200]

5 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

Think he knows more than us though. Tbh it has never looked, maybe Walton aside, like we were playing someone who wasn't worth their place, not for long.

Yeah and we won't HAVE to play VDB we will just have to compensate them.

If Nixon's article is correct then JDT has already spoken to the player and is comfortable with the deal.

Liverpool ain't dictating anything.We ain't forced to play the player, if he isn't worth his place then I presume he will be on the bench and not starting.

This is only an issue if VDB is picked solely for us to avoid having to pay the fine.

If the club are comfortable and the fine isn't excessive and we can afford it then I don't see the problem?

 

[jim mk2]

Just now, Sweaty Gussets said:

Yes you can drop him. The penalty is financial. It's not that difficult a concept. We literally did the same with Poveda. 

The contract is heavily weighted in Liverpool's favour. There's no risk for them and all the risk is with us. Under those circumstances we should not sign the player. It's not that difficult a concept

[Sweaty Gussets]

4 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

The contract is heavily weighted in Liverpool's favour. There's no risk for them and all the risk is with us. Under those circumstances we should not sign the player. It's not that difficult a concept

So after all that we're back to where we started. 

At least we're in agreement that Klopp isn't picking our team. 

[Mashed Potatoes]

4 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

The contract is heavily weighted in Liverpool's favour. There's no risk for them and all the risk is with us. Under those circumstances we should not sign the player. It's not that difficult a concept

Every signing carries risk in the form of a fee and wage costs which might not be reflected in a player's contribution. If you want to eliminate that then never sign a player.

[Norbert Rassragr]

I'm in the don't agree to the loan camp. Sure, you don't have to play Van Der Berg, but anything like a fine if they're not playing, or a clause saying he MUST play X number of games is outrageous. It strikes me as a bullying, strong arm tactic, and would lead other loans to have similar clauses.

[Sweaty Gussets]

4 minutes ago, Norbert Rassragr said:

I'm in the don't agree to the loan camp. Sure, you don't have to play Van Der Berg, but anything like a fine if they're not playing, or a clause saying he MUST play X number of games is outrageous. It strikes me as a bullying, strong arm tactic, and would lead other loans to have similar clauses.

Liverpool aren't forcing us to sign him. 

[Mike E]

13 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

The contract is heavily weighted in Liverpool's favour. There's no risk for them and all the risk is with us. Under those circumstances we should not sign the player. It's not that difficult a concept

If JDT reckons we'll be playing him in at least half our matches, including subs and as RB cover, then it's worth it.

It's not like we're being forced to loan an unknown quantity. WE are opting into the conditions of loaning a player proven at this level.

[tomphil]

Personally i'd rather see Carter than VDB but looks like his injury might be a long problem.

Or they'll loan in this lad and flog Carter to Pompey i wouldn't be surprised if that happened.

[rebelmswar]

4 hours ago, jim mk2 said:

Liverpool in effect picking the Rovers team and forcing the manager to play him

Tell them not so politely to go away 

There me be benifits in becoming a Scouse fiefdom but dont know if it's worth it. 

[Guest]

He’s good enough to get the opportunities to play, sign him up. 

[jim mk2]

43 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

Every signing carries risk in the form of a fee and wage costs which might not be reflected in a player's contribution. If you want to eliminate that then never sign a player.

This is a different kind of risk, one that favours heavily the parent club

[jim mk2]

46 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

So after all that we're back to where we started. 

At least we're in agreement that Klopp isn't picking our team. 

I never said he was. You made that up

[Tugayisgod]

2 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

This is a different kind of risk, one that favours heavily the parent club

Think you need to come in out of the sun now Jim 😎

[jim mk2]

2 minutes ago, Tugayisgod said:

Think you need to come in out of the sun now Jim 😎

It's raining here 😄

[Tom]

Those clauses are awful.

In the case of Poveda it could have resulted in coming on instead of the likes of Dolan purely to avoid triggering a ‘fine’ it’s a dangerous path to go down 

[Sweaty Gussets]

1 hour ago, jim mk2 said:

 

Liverpool stipulating how many games their players plays and effectively picking our team is being held to ransom. You're being blind to reason if you can't see this.

Your stance doesn't have any "principles" (lol). It just caves in to a so-called bigger and more powerful club

 

1 hour ago, jim mk2 said:

Our manager might not want to select him because of poor form or many other reasons but has to pick him because he is stipulated by the contract to do so. The manager can't do his job properly and team suffers because the contract is loaded in Liverpool's favour

Which is holding us to ransom. It's a bit silly to deny it

 

 

59 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

So after all that we're back to where we started. 

At least we're in agreement that Klopp isn't picking our team. 

 

13 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

I never said he was. You made that up

ok

[Silas]

Don't get the drama. Surely, like with any transfer, it all depends on if the player is worth the money.

If, for example, we suspect there may be 20 weeks max where we don't play him, incurring a 5k extra wages fine = £100k.

So, word it differently, if you want to loan this player it's going to potentially cost you an extra £100k on the fee. 

The question then = is that value for our club?... in terms of how desperate our need is for that position. It's a simple yes or no for me. 

Think people are focusing too much on the 'punishment' angle. 

Surely there's cost implications to every team sheet we put up - that player has a higher appearance fee, this player has a huge goal bonus and may score today etc etc.

This would just be another potential cost to add to the equation. No biggie.  

[jim mk2]

17 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

ok

Where's Klopp?

OK

[Sweaty Gussets]

2 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

Where's Klopp?

OK

All you have left is semantics. Pitiful. 

[jim mk2]

4 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

All you have left is semantics. Pitiful. 

All you have left is no arguments. Pitiful

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

Moderating this place in the summer must be fun 😭

[Sweaty Gussets]

6 minutes ago, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

Moderating this place in the summer must be fun 😭

I've learned a valuable lesson in self-moderation today. 

[K-Hod]

13 minutes ago, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

Moderating this place in the summer must be fun 😭

It is when people stop baiting each other! On that note, Any danger of people simmering down please? Thanks.

[rebelmswar]

17 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

It is when people stop baiting each other! On that note, Any danger of people simmering down please? Thanks.

And I was just going to be posting dictionary definitions of "ransom" too...

[JacknOry]

Thought the lad looked okay actually. Should have shot though.