AVFCforever1991 Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Really need a Chelsea win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 I may be the only one to want Liverpool to win it then. They play attacking exciting football and won't have bought the league like City. Haven't bought the league? Henderson and Allen is nearly 30m! Less than how much Fernandinho cost, then. Did I say they spent more than Man City? No, but you did say that they had bought the league. Every club in the top 7 buys the league to some extent (bar Everton), if your idea of "buying the league" is spending less than 20m per player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 13, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted April 13, 2014 I don't get the Liverpool hate at all. It'd be amazing if they won itit would be an amazing achievement. But I hate Liverpool fans. So **** them. Anyone but them Media bias I get. Hating a whole fanbase not so much. A few of my mates are glory grabbing Liverpool fans (do you hate then too?) and as unbearable as it will make them I can't begrudge them a bit of happiness, life's too short to hate on everything.yes. I hate your friends. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 I may be the only one to want Liverpool to win it then. They play attacking exciting football and won't have bought the league like City. Haven't bought the league? Henderson and Allen is nearly 30m! Less than how much Fernandinho cost, then. Did I say they spent more than Man City? No, but you did say that they had bought the league. Every club in the top 7 buys the league to some extent (bar Everton), if your idea of "buying the league" is spending less than 20m per player. If they win it, they have bought it. They have spent millions and millions over the past few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 (edited) Mignolet 9M Johnson 18M Skrtel 9M Sakho 17M Coutinho 9M Henderson 16M Sturridge 13M Suarez 23M Allen 17M Let's not pretend that Liverpool are built on youth players and sound values. They have purchased a lot of expensive players the last years and many of them have been failures, such as Carroll and Aquillani. I don't want them to win the league at all, but if they do they deserve it. They have attacking momentum in every single game, but I think Chelsea will give them a huge test in two weeks. Lucky for Liverpool, again and again, Chelsea have to concentrate on the Champions League and they don't. As usual. Today Suarez should have had a red card for diving in the second half but he didn't get one, Skrtel was clearly pulling a shirt quite heavily on a corner in the end and then he punches the ball away like a goalkeeper. No penalty given, it's a travesty for Man City to be honest. Clear penalty, although a lot of players were in the area. No excuse though, the referee is not doing his job when he doesn't see that. Edited April 13, 2014 by Papillon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 (edited) I may be the only one to want Liverpool to win it then. They play attacking exciting football and won't have bought the league like City. Haven't bought the league? Henderson and Allen is nearly 30m! Less than how much Fernandinho cost, then. Did I say they spent more than Man City? No, but you did say that they had bought the league. Every club in the top 7 buys the league to some extent (bar Everton), if your idea of "buying the league" is spending less than 20m per player. If they win it, they have bought it. They have spent millions and millions over the past few years. It's all relative. When someone says that they haven't bought the title, the tacit implication is that they haven't spent anywhere near as much as City, Chelsea, and even Utd. Of course they have, technically speaking, bought it, but the technical definition of "bought" is not what we're really talking about, are we. Have Villa not spent "millions and millions" recently? We have to an extent bought (the little) success that we've had as well, it's just that we haven't done it as much as other clubs have. It's always a question of relativity. Edited April 13, 2014 by legov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Yes but there's levels of spending and Man City I hate because they have been taken over by the arabs they have ruined it for clubs like us. I don't hate City as a football club I just hate what they have done and if Liverpool can win it with a good level of spending but not rediculous then I won't begrudge them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 (edited) I may be the only one to want Liverpool to win it then. They play attacking exciting football and won't have bought the league like City. Haven't bought the league? Henderson and Allen is nearly 30m! Less than how much Fernandinho cost, then. Did I say they spent more than Man City? No, but you did say that they had bought the league. Every club in the top 7 buys the league to some extent (bar Everton), if your idea of "buying the league" is spending less than 20m per player. If they win it, they have bought it. They have spent millions and millions over the past few years. It's all relative. When someone says that they haven't bought the title, the tacit implication is that they haven't spent anywhere near as much as City, Chelsea, and even Utd. Have Villa not spent "millions and millions" recently? We have to an extent bought (the little) success that we've had as well, it's just that we haven't done it as much as other clubs have. It's always a question of relativity. Average past 4 years: Chelsea 103m Man City 99m Liverpool 62m Man United 52m Arsenal 41 Edited April 13, 2014 by dodgyknees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 I may be the only one to want Liverpool to win it then. They play attacking exciting football and won't have bought the league like City. Haven't bought the league? Henderson and Allen is nearly 30m! Less than how much Fernandinho cost, then. Did I say they spent more than Man City? No, but you did say that they had bought the league. Every club in the top 7 buys the league to some extent (bar Everton), if your idea of "buying the league" is spending less than 20m per player. If they win it, they have bought it. They have spent millions and millions over the past few years. It's all relative. When someone says that they haven't bought the title, the tacit implication is that they haven't spent anywhere near as much as City, Chelsea, and even Utd. Have Villa not spent "millions and millions" recently? We have to an extent bought (the little) success that we've had as well, it's just that we haven't done it as much as other clubs have. It's always a question of relativity. Average past 4 years: Chelsea 103m Man City 99m Liverpool 62m Man United 52m Arsenal 41 The 35 mil they wasted on Carroll bumped up Liverpools spending but they did recover 50 mil on Torres. It would be more accurate to see the net spending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Talk of Liverpool 'buying' the title is just silly. They will probably be the cheapest assembled squad to win the title in years and years. If they have 'bought' the title then we have bought our stay in the Premier League by spending millions each summer to stay up. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 I may be the only one to want Liverpool to win it then. They play attacking exciting football and won't have bought the league like City. Haven't bought the league? Henderson and Allen is nearly 30m! Less than how much Fernandinho cost, then. Did I say they spent more than Man City? No, but you did say that they had bought the league. Every club in the top 7 buys the league to some extent (bar Everton), if your idea of "buying the league" is spending less than 20m per player. If they win it, they have bought it. They have spent millions and millions over the past few years. It's all relative. When someone says that they haven't bought the title, the tacit implication is that they haven't spent anywhere near as much as City, Chelsea, and even Utd. Have Villa not spent "millions and millions" recently? We have to an extent bought (the little) success that we've had as well, it's just that we haven't done it as much as other clubs have. It's always a question of relativity. Average past 4 years: Chelsea 103m Man City 99m Liverpool 62m Man United 52m Arsenal 41 The 35 mil they wasted on Carroll bumped up Liverpools spending but they did recover 50 mil on Torres. It would be more accurate to see the net spending. We should delete the spending City have done on wasted talent too then? Same for Chelsea? Talk of Liverpool 'buying' the title is just silly. They will probably be the cheapest assembled squad to win the title in years and years. If they have 'bought' the title then we have bought our stay in the Premier League by spending millions each summer to stay up. Spent more than Arsenal and Man United. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 I wonder where you got your stats. because a quick search brought me these two tables: http://transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/transfer-league-table-last-five-seasons.html (scroll to the bottom) and That said, even if we use your set of stats, it is clear that they don't spend anywhere near as much as the big two spenders do. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 That is a far more relevant stat as it shows the current squad costs and not something that happened before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 I may be the only one to want Liverpool to win it then. They play attacking exciting football and won't have bought the league like City. Haven't bought the league? Henderson and Allen is nearly 30m! Less than how much Fernandinho cost, then. Did I say they spent more than Man City? No, but you did say that they had bought the league. Every club in the top 7 buys the league to some extent (bar Everton), if your idea of "buying the league" is spending less than 20m per player. If they win it, they have bought it. They have spent millions and millions over the past few years. It's all relative. When someone says that they haven't bought the title, the tacit implication is that they haven't spent anywhere near as much as City, Chelsea, and even Utd. Have Villa not spent "millions and millions" recently? We have to an extent bought (the little) success that we've had as well, it's just that we haven't done it as much as other clubs have. It's always a question of relativity. Average past 4 years: Chelsea 103m Man City 99m Liverpool 62m Man United 52m Arsenal 41 The 35 mil they wasted on Carroll bumped up Liverpools spending but they did recover 50 mil on Torres. It would be more accurate to see the net spending. We should delete the spending City have done on wasted talent too then? Same for Chelsea? Talk of Liverpool 'buying' the title is just silly. They will probably be the cheapest assembled squad to win the title in years and years. If they have 'bought' the title then we have bought our stay in the Premier League by spending millions each summer to stay up. Spent more than Arsenal and Man United. Arsenal and Man U have also spent truckloads, Man U have been outspending the league for 20 years to assemble their squad. How much is a team allowed to spend on players in pursuit of the title before dodgyknees declares they have 'bought' it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 That is a far more relevant stat as it shows the current squad costs and not something that happened before. There's another link as well, above the graph I put up. Whichever way you look at it, Liverpool have not spent much at all, by the standards of title contenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Why did Dowd take so long to send Chico off? It was the correct decision, but didn't look like he was going to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Cheats never prosper - unless your Louis Suarez. I really do loathe that man. As a footballer he is world class, no denying that, as a person he is a racist, cheating, vile man who has no morals. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Why did Dowd take so long to send Chico off? It was the correct decision, but didn't look like he was going to. Looked like he changed his mind after Chelsea harassed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avfc96 Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Cheats never prosper - unless your Louis Suarez. I really do loathe that man. As a footballer he is world class, no denying that, as a person he is a racist, cheating, vile man who has no morals. You also forgot he is a cannibal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ismail-villa Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Yay let's hope Chelsea batter swansea now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts