** Official ** Summer 2010 Transfer Thread - Signings, Sightings and Rumor's in Here

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whilst Im willing to give Poulsen a chance, Im not really sure about bringing Crouch back. He left because he wanted more football, which means if he's willing to come back he must be convinced he's going to be at the very least 2nd choice or alongside Torres, which in theory means we wont be bringing in any more top strikers after him. Not good imo.
 
Burned_Alive said:
Whilst Im willing to give Poulsen a chance, Im not really sure about bringing Crouch back. He left because he wanted more football, which means if he's willing to come back he must be convinced he's going to be at the very least 2nd choice or alongside Torres, which in theory means we wont be bringing in any more top strikers after him. Not good imo.
Click to expand...

Who exactly were you hoping for us to sign? Given the situation we're in, a Crouch type signing is the best we could hope for imo.
 
BaZ87 said:
I'm hearing whispers that Crouch (and Poulsen) to Liverpool is a done deal.

edit: Reported fee of £7m. Maybe Spurs need to sell before they can buy after 'arry spent so much in the previous 18 months.

Of the 3 players I mentioned we've been linked with, Crouch is the only 1 that I wouldn't mind us signing. As well as providing another option, he's capable of playing alongside Torres or up front on his own if and when Torres is injured.
Click to expand...

Bah...so thats what, £7 mil on Crouch and £6 mil on Poulsen?

Crappy transfers imo, I really am not convinced that either are the quality that we should be going for nor am I convinced that we should be spending money on 2 players who turn 30 and 31 this season respectively. I would have much preferred to spend those amounts on some younger players upon which we can build.

I assume these two transfers arent being funded by the Mascherano money? In which case I would rather we spent the £12 million and bought Remy as our second striker, or alternatively spent the 12mil and gone for Steven Defour or have a phone and see what price Keisuke Honda would be.
 
Last edited:
The Scot admits he is an admirer of Ozil, who has previously said that he would relish the opportunity to move to England, but he insists that he is happy with his current squad.

Asked about his trip to Fulham, Ferguson told Sky Sports 1: "I was there to look at Fulham.

"Ozil is interesting a lot of teams but at this moment I trust the ones I've got. I've got a really good squad of players."
Click to expand...

BUT HES A BARGAIN and brings something new to the squad..behh
 
Nickg said:
BUT HES A BARGAIN and brings something new to the squad..behh
Click to expand...

Hypothetical question for you and ATPBX

Would you buy Ozil if harmed the development of one of the youngsters who potentially could be just as good in a year to 18 months time ?
 
Tombstone said:
Bah...so thats what, £7 mil on Crouch and £6 mil on Poulsen?

Crappy transfers imo, I really am not convinced that either are the quality that we should be going for nor am I convinced that we should be spending money on 2 players who turn 30 and 31 this season respectively. I would have much preferred to spend those amounts on some younger players upon which we can build.

I assume these two transfers arent being funded by the Mascherano money? In which case I would rather we spent the £12 million and bought Remy as our second striker, or alternatively spent the 12mil and gone for Steven Defour or have a phone and see what price Keisuke Honda would be.
Click to expand...

Firstly nothing is confirmed and the reports regarding the fees are shady at best.

Regarding Poulsen; I don't really rate him but I'd assume he'll come in as a 4th CM behind Lucas, Gerrard and Aquilani. As for Crouch; as above, I don't think we can do much better than Crouch. Proven EPL player and proven to be a hand 2nd choice at Liverpool specifically. He can play up front on his own, in the system we play or he can play alongside Torres. Oh and Crouch isn't likely to have to worry about 'losing his legs' as he gets older :)

As for Defour and Remy; Defour could become a top player and would be a great signing and if we could afford him then I'd much prefer we signed him over Poulsen. Remy however is more of an unknown quantity and I don't think we are in a position where we can gamble on signings.

Also I think you're missing something quite obvious (going by the reported figures); Poulsen and Crouch will cost a combined fee of ~£13m, Defour and Remy will cost nearly double. Maybe we simply can't afford them.
 
BaZ87 said:
Who exactly were you hoping for us to sign? Given the situation we're in, a Crouch type signing is the best we could hope for imo.
Click to expand...

Might as well sign heskey up and see if hes any better the 2nd time around as well. Poor signing that.

Thanks for pledging allegiance Fernando, after all the promises we gave, to get you to give one more year meet your new strike partner. Crouch, comes with free algerian hooker!
 
If Crouch was foreign then people would be far more enthusiastic.

A club with no money and no CL football signing a player striker in the EPL and proven he's capable at playing at a higher level (CL), isn't a bad signing imo.

edit: nothing is confirmed anyway so lets just wait and see.
 
Last edited:
I think Crouch has always been a good second option if things are going wrong. He gets the goals so I dont see this as a bad signing. If they sold Torres and got Crouch then I think you could complain.
 
BaZ87 said:
Also I think you're missing something quite obvious (going by the reported figures); Poulsen and Crouch will cost a combined fee of ~£13m, Defour and Remy will cost nearly double. Maybe we simply can't afford them.
Click to expand...

No I hadn't missed that , I was assuming that the 13million wasn't coming from the possible sale of masch, so my idea was to spend the 13m on one of the players. Then use the masch funds to fill another position. I think we can do better than poulsen and crouch. I'm not big on signing older players , would still much rather we spent 13 million on players with more of a future.
 
As much as I want Reina at Arsenal (seem to remember suggesting we should make a cheeky bid a while back) I'm fairly sure he signed a new long term deal recently and kept banging on about how much he loves Liverpool and how proud he is of his kids' scouse accents etc...
 
HangTime said:
As much as I want Reina at Arsenal (seem to remember suggesting we should make a cheeky bid a while back) I'm fairly sure he signed a new long term deal recently and kept banging on about how much he loves Liverpool and how proud he is of his kids' scouse accents etc...
Click to expand...

That's correct. ;)
 
Tombstone said:
No I hadn't missed that , I was assuming that the 13million wasn't coming from the possible sale of masch, so my idea was to spend the 13m on one of the players. Then use the masch funds to fill another position. I think we can do better than poulsen and crouch. I'm not big on signing older players , would still much rather we spent 13 million on players with more of a future.
Click to expand...

Sorry I only skimmed over your post. I thought you said you assume they are being funded by Masch's sale.

I would be shocked if we've got ~£13m to spend before Masch goes. I think it's very likely that these deals are with Masch's departure in mind.

All the talk is that we're only going to sign a LB to replace Insua, a replacement for Masch and a striker. So assuming that Poulsen and Crouch are 2 of those players then unless a LB costs us whatever we receive for Masch then we're likely to be making a substantial profit in the transfer market again.

A quick tally of our transfers so far:
Riera, Benayoun and San Jose out = ~£13m (plus Masch and Insua)
Shelvey, Wilson, Cole and Jovanovic in = ~£4m
 
That's a big shame then as I don't see poulsen as a sufficient replacement for masch and I don't see crouch as much for a second striker. Seems a lot like scraping the bottom of the barrel and I'm sure there are better options out there if we were a little bit more ambitious about who we looked at.
 
Tombstone said:
That's a big shame then as I don't see poulsen as a sufficient replacement for masch and I don't see crouch as much for a second striker. Seems a lot like scraping the bottom of the barrel and I'm sure there are better options out there if we were a little bit more ambitious about who we looked at.
Click to expand...

I completely agree about Poulsen but it looks to me as if we're not directly replacing Masch. Poulsen is being brought in to make up the numbers and Gerrard is dropping back into midfield.

I don't agree about Crouch. We can't afford to sign a young, proven, top class striker which leaves us with a choice of somebody like Crouch who isn't top class but more than capable or gambling on an unproven youngster. If we didn't have doubts over Torres' fitness then I'd be more inclined to go for a prospect but given the question marks over his fitness we need to be able to call on somebody who you know will perform.
 
If we really must buy an ex-liverpool old striker rather than a young prospect (i would still prefer a young striker myself) then I would rather we went for bellamy than crouch. As I say though I still find it hard to believe that the only viable option in global football is crouch, just all smacks more of a panic buy before the season starts than a well thought out decision.
 
Bellamy's knees have gone and he can't play up front on his own if Torres got injured.

Is Crouch a great signing? No, but he's a decent addition to the squad imo. I can't think of another player that we could realistically sign that would suit our needs or be as reliable as Crouch.

Anyway, lets not get ahead of ourselves, there's nothing official yet.
 
Loki said:
Hypothetical question for you and ATPBX

Would you buy Ozil if harmed the development of one of the youngsters who potentially could be just as good in a year to 18 months time ?
Click to expand...

well that depends if we have someone to step in right now, or if we have someone who will be good enough in 18 months?

gibson is good, anderson is good but neither can step in and say replace carrick that well at the moment id say. whereas ozil would give us an option.

when you look at chelseas first 11 today and their subs compared to ours, they all seemed good and experienced in all their team. yes you have to blend some youth but when there is a player who is good and of a reasonable price then why not?

personally i think anderson can be as good as ozil is in a season or so. but i know fergie doesnt like him either so he probably wont play him.

what utd are missing is a central midfielder with pace who can run past a man, like fabregas, or ozil - at the moment carrick, scholes etc plus fletcher are never going to have that pace or skill to run past people. yes scholes can work his man but not burst through like others can do. and having watched carrick continually slowing the play down again today in the Community cup:/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom