Adam Lallana
- Thread starter King Binny
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Oh sorry I forgot you'd told us all that was a total myth.
Our first XI was absolutely impossible to identify last season. Absolutely impossible.
It was much more like a first XII, or XIII.
You're being that dickhead again Peter.
Our 'first 11' changed dozens of times last season (I'll give you a clue as to why - BECAUSE FIRST 11'S AREN'T SET IN FUCKING STONE YOU MORON) and will change even more this year because we'll have a bigger, better squad.
Don't argue this Peter, it's a losing battle.
LOL I'm not going to worry about arguing with someone who only seems able to respond via the medium of witless abuse.
I don't doubt you know much much more about football than me btw. It's just that I think your capacity to process that information intelligently and logically is so inferior to mine that I can compete in terms of the overall argument.
Therefore: when people talk of a 'first XI' it's as a shorthand for that small group of 11-15 players that comprise 90+% of starting teams. Just because that doesn't embody the same precise 11 players in the same formation, doesn't mean it's not a meaningful concept as that group of players that is basically distinct from those that almost always sit on the bench or only start in unimportant cup games or whatever. The point is that there's a clear delineation between 'first choice' players and 'back up'.
You take the term too literally. 🙂
Yet Peter, your insistence that your superior capacity to process and articulate that information is quite at odds with your hapless assertion that... 'A best 11 isn't in fact 11 players, but a loose collection of up to 15 arbitrary players, who may get a game in that best 11, 90% of the time, or something'.
What the fuck Peter?
It's not much use having a thesaurus when you're talking complete shite.
Regardless, it isn't and wasn't my initial gripe. 5 years ago I declared the 'best 11' talk a myth, to much laughter at the time too. It's a credit to me and the learning powers of the masses that it's now accepted as a load of footballing bullshit. You can file it alongside 'world class players in attack, irrespective of position', 'defensive midfielders at home', and many others as footballing intellect that I had to continually promote, much to the reluctance of the great unwashed.
By bringing that fucking term up again, you're merely propagating the myth Peter. Fuck it off. It doesn't exist, however you wish to attempt to articulately pretty it up.
Girls girls, you're both pretty.
@bigadamsport: #saintsfc's reluctance to sell Lallana may have a lot to do with fact that actual guaranteed money offered by #lfc is well short of 25M
@bigadamsport: #saintsfc have to give 25% to #afcb when it completes - so if guaranteed is only say 15-20, #saintsfc end up well short of their valuation
He is the Sports editor for BBC Radio Solent. So it seems that the offer of 25M is quite heavily laden with incentives.
@bigadamsport: #saintsfc have to give 25% to #afcb when it completes - so if guaranteed is only say 15-20, #saintsfc end up well short of their valuation
He is the Sports editor for BBC Radio Solent. So it seems that the offer of 25M is quite heavily laden with incentives.
You should have bought back the 25% last season if it was such a fucking problem. You know what, when selling players in future we should demand the transfer fee we originally paid on top of his current valuation, because you know, Southampton logic.
Wow!
I think what Peter said is fair enough, it's not about XI's or whatever, I think it's obvious the point he was making and I don't think he needed a condescending answer to teach him to suck eggs. Most of the team picks itself (as most teams do), we do alternate in a couple of positions and we'll need to more next season, but the point was obvious.
We might need depth, but it's daft paying £30m for depth when we've got gaping holes in certain positions. Essentially we could be paying £30m for an alternative Coutinho while we've got one decent fullback and a defense that's pissing goals away... I'm not saying these positions won't be addressed, but these are clearly more priority positions that need sorting. If £30m has a knock on effect on that, I'd certainly reassess.
I do agree we need another top attacking player to ease the burden across all competitions, but price wise, within reason.
We might need depth, but it's daft paying £30m for depth when we've got gaping holes in certain positions. Essentially we could be paying £30m for an alternative Coutinho while we've got one decent fullback and a defense that's pissing goals away... I'm not saying these positions won't be addressed, but these are clearly more priority positions that need sorting. If £30m has a knock on effect on that, I'd certainly reassess.
I do agree we need another top attacking player to ease the burden across all competitions, but price wise, within reason.
Yep, I just hope we're assessing what we need and budgeting our resources for it reasonably. I hope we're not putting all our eggs in one basket, s'all.
If you take into account all the rumours it feels like we have enough money to make a couple big purchases. Lallana is obviously the prime target, which leaves me wondering if Moreno at near enough 20M is the only other big one.
I don't understand this logic. They don't have to sell at all. They can ask for one billion pounds if they want, as he is their player to sell (or keep).
Did we have that last season ?
So we've not offered them cash upfront, 25mill then. We've offered them some, in instalments, and a few performance addons. You can't blame them for telling us to fuck off then, fair play to them. He's their captain and 26.
Imagine someone coming to us (like the arse) and saying 'we'll give to 15mill for suarez, in instalments, and another 25mill if he gets the golden boot and world player of the year'. We'd tell the cheeky cunts to fuck right off.
Imagine someone coming to us (like the arse) and saying 'we'll give to 15mill for suarez, in instalments, and another 25mill if he gets the golden boot and world player of the year'. We'd tell the cheeky cunts to fuck right off.
Of course they can, but I wish they'd stop going on about the sell on fee as if it's our problem.
It is our problem.
They don't have to sell.
We want them to sell.
Therefore we have to give them enough money / incentive to make them want to sell.
Exactly, they can ask what they want, but there excuse of "but a clause" is pathetic. They can't argue the bid is undervalued because of their naivety, we should only offer the valuation of the player regardless of external factors.
The reason this is important is from the perspective of Lallana, Southampton are refusing a perfectly acceptable bid, and are being unreasonable in asking for more, which hopefully means he'll put more pressure on them to accept.
Who decides what's reasonable or not?
Southampton isn't rolling in cash. If the bid is big enough they will sell.
Until then he's their player. Their best player. If they value him more than us, he stays. If our valuation exceeds theirs he's ours. It's quite simple.
Southampton isn't rolling in cash. If the bid is big enough they will sell.
Until then he's their player. Their best player. If they value him more than us, he stays. If our valuation exceeds theirs he's ours. It's quite simple.
He is Southampton's player.
They have no obligation to sell.
They can use whatever excuse they want to reject the bid, as ultimately it is their right to reject or accept the bid for any reason they want.
If they want to turn down a £100 million bid because they value him at £300 million then they are perfectly entitled to do that. If they want to claim that Matthew Le Tissier appeared to the Southampton owner in a dream and told them to reject the bid, then they are perfectly entitled to do that. If turn down the bid because there is a clause in the contract saying they have to give the Bournemouth manager a rim job, then they are perfectly entitled to do that.
They can do this because he's Southampton's player, and they have no obligation to sell.
If we want the player, then this is quite plainly our problem. Whether we increase our bid, try to get the player to force a sale, or seek an alternative player, it's our problem to deal with.
At the moment Southampton don't have a problem. They have a player.
They have no obligation to sell.
They can use whatever excuse they want to reject the bid, as ultimately it is their right to reject or accept the bid for any reason they want.
If they want to turn down a £100 million bid because they value him at £300 million then they are perfectly entitled to do that. If they want to claim that Matthew Le Tissier appeared to the Southampton owner in a dream and told them to reject the bid, then they are perfectly entitled to do that. If turn down the bid because there is a clause in the contract saying they have to give the Bournemouth manager a rim job, then they are perfectly entitled to do that.
They can do this because he's Southampton's player, and they have no obligation to sell.
If we want the player, then this is quite plainly our problem. Whether we increase our bid, try to get the player to force a sale, or seek an alternative player, it's our problem to deal with.
At the moment Southampton don't have a problem. They have a player.
Their owner is worth about 3billion mate. Considerably more than ours. They dont need the money.
- Status
Similar threads
