• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Ben Davies

Forums Unread posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Liverpool and Tottenham battle to sign Swansea City defender Ben Davies as Spurs agree £10 million fee Tottenham agree

Brendan Rodgers is weighing up improved offer for Wales international Swansea rejected Liverpool's bid for Ben Davies in favour of an offer from

Brendan Rodgers is ready to make a second bid for Ben Davies after it emerged Tottenham Hotspur have agreed a £10 million fee with Swansea City. Rodgers is weighing up an improved offer for the Wales international after his opening £8m bid was rejected in what appears a straight battle between Liverpool and Spurs.

Swansea are understood to have agreed a deal in principle with Spurs for the left-back, who is set to be pulled out of Garry Monk’s squad for the friendly against Chivas Guadalajara in Milwaukee on Wednesday night. But Davies is aware of Liverpool’s interest and would welcome the opportunity to speak with Rodgers if they match the Spurs bid. Rodgers has turned to the 21-year-old after experiencing further difficulties in his protracted pursuit of Sevilla’s Alberto Moreno.
 
Glen C said:
The thing is though its the not the fee that many on here seem to question about moreno, its the fact he doesn't actually look any good. The fact he stank out the Europa cup final didn't help his case either.
Click to expand...

But it's irrelevant what we think of him. It seems the club rated him as their first choice, and wouldn't go the extra yard to make it happen. To me that's a lack of ambition. Or worse, just stupidity.

Here's a good question to ponder: how many players can you think of who were clear successes at their clubs but who are also considered bad signings because clubs overpaid for them? Its not as easy as you might think.
 
peterhague said:
But it's irrelevant what we think of him. It seems the club rated him as their first choice, and wouldn't go the extra yard to make it happen. To me that's a lack of ambition. Or worse, just stupidity.

Here's a good question to ponder: how many players can you think of who were clear successes at their clubs but who are also considered bad signings because clubs overpaid for them? Its not as easy as you might think.
Click to expand...

It depends on how much they were originally willing to pay. If they though he was a 12m player you can't expect them to go 8m over their original valuation.
 
Also, given both Rodgers (who has worked with him) and Pochettino (who knows a good young fullback when he sees one) are in for him, I'd go with that.
 
Ouch...

Retweeted by TalkLiverpoolFC WhoScored.com ‏@WhoScored 1h
Ben Davies: Was dribbled past more times (54) than any other defender in the Premier League last season #swans
 
Glen C said:
It depends on how much they were originally willing to pay. If they though he was a 12m player you can't expect them to go 8m over their original valuation.
Click to expand...

I've said that twice but Peter doesn't want to consider that option. No ambition sounds far better.
 
Buddha said:
Ouch...

Retweeted by TalkLiverpoolFC WhoScored.com ‏@WhoScored 1h
Ben Davies: Was dribbled past more times (54) than any other defender in the Premier League last season #swans
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how correct that is. An article in April in Sky sports gave that dubious honour to Flanagan...
 
Frogfish said:
Anybody have a Squawka account ?
Click to expand...

Okay I found the whoscored.com data... the info below under the "Drb" column is for average no. of times dribbled past per game. Davies is at 1.6; he played 34 games so that's 54 times (Flanagan has a slightly higher average per game but played fewer games so has a lower total).

But look at Steve Sidwell with 1.6 and 38 games, which puts him at about 60. Davies can breathe easy now.

It's actually quite amazing how close Davies' stats are to Flanagan's (games played aside).

1zQhFvS.png
 
Frogfish said:
I've said that twice but Peter doesn't want to consider that option. No ambition sounds far better.
Click to expand...


LOL yeah that's the reason. You got me!!

Firstly, anyone can see that a highly rated, in international terms, left back, is going to cost more than £12m. Shaw went for £30m odd, Rodriguez is being touted at the same. Moreno for a long time was considered nailed on for Real Madrid. He is a fairly big prospect. You might be lucky and get a desperate club and nick him for £12m, but generally you're going to have to pay at least £15m in this market. £18m would perhaps be par. £20m pricey but just about acceptable.

The lack of ambition comes in because the next two alternative look like significant downgrades in terms of reputation and potential. It would be different if they were equivalents, but they're not.

Finally, talking of people ignoring a point: I notice Glen didn't try to answer my question about expensive but successful players ultimately looking like bad signings. Maybe you could have a go?
 
Jack D Rips said:
It may be an old-fashioned view but I like defenders who first and foremost can defend.
Click to expand...

tbh it is a bit old fashioned. putting aside comments about this target (doubts I have) over the last few years the best full backs in the world have been able to have an attacking element to them. it's no good just being being good at defending and having little going forward. you might as well play a CB in there. Of course they should be able to defend, but nowadays having an attacking edge is what makes fbs great.
 
He is a good solid player.

He does look like a CB playing at LB than a marauding modern attacking fullback though.
 
peterhague said:
LOL yeah that's the reason. You got me!!

Firstly, anyone can see that a highly rated, in international terms, left back, is going to cost more than £12m. Shaw went for £30m odd, Rodriguez is being touted at the same. Moreno for a long time was considered nailed on for Real Madrid. He is a fairly big prospect. You might be lucky and get a desperate club and nick him for £12m, but generally you're going to have to pay at least £15m in this market. £18m would perhaps be par. £20m pricey but just about acceptable.

The lack of ambition comes in because the next two alternative look like significant downgrades in terms of reputation and potential. It would be different if they were equivalents, but they're not.

Finally, talking of people ignoring a point: I notice Glen didn't try to answer my question about expensive but successful players ultimately looking like bad signings. Maybe you could have a go?
Click to expand...


1. Yep. Spending £135m (or it will be something close to that) constitutes a lack of ambition, LoL !
2. We seem to be taking a holistic approach to transfers this Summer. We needed to strengthen the squad depth whatever happened with Suarez and that would seem to be the best way to cover his loss. Less goals conceded together with additional threat from all across the front line. A better, organisational, CB and strengthen LB.
3. Why should I 'have a go' at a question you posed to someone else ? However your 'bad signings' poser is simply an impossible one to answer because people will usually have different opinions on what constitutes 'successful'. However do you mean successful before they arrived or after ? Your question isn't well phrased. Why do you not consider the obvious question ? List players who failed despite having a high transfer value - that ones too easy isn't it.
4. How about you address the 'It depends on how much they were originally willing to pay' instead of deflecting ?
5. I'm still not sure why you consider Moreno to be the answer to the LB issue. Almost without exception (from what we has seen) his own fans were more than happy to take the cash - that should be ringing alarm bells all over. That wasn't the case with Coutinho. Sturridge or Suarez to list some recent acquisitions where there may be parralels.
 
Frogfish said:
1. Yep. Spending £135m (or it will be something close to that) constitutes a lack of ambition, LoL !
2. We seem to be taking a holistic approach to transfers this Summer. We needed to strengthen the squad depth whatever happened with Suarez and that would seem to be the best way to cover his loss. Less goals conceded together with additional threat from all across the front line. A better, organisational, CB and strengthen LB.
3. Why should I 'have a go' at a question you posed to someone else ? However your 'bad signings' poser is simply an impossible one to answer because people will usually have different opinions on what constitutes 'successful'. However do you mean successful before they arrived or after ? Your question isn't well phrased. Why do you not consider the obvious question ? List players who failed despite having a high transfer value - that ones too easy isn't it.
4. How about you address the 'It depends on how much they were originally willing to pay' instead of deflecting ?
5. I'm still not sure why you consider Moreno to be the answer to the LB issue. Almost without exception (from what we has seen) his own fans were more than happy to take the cash - that should be ringing alarm bells all over. That wasn't the case with Coutinho. Sturridge or Suarez to list some recent acquisitions where there may be parralels.
Click to expand...


You're very thick.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

rurikbird
    • Like
Different Gravy
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Replies
494
Views
14K
King Binny
King Binny
rurikbird
    • Like
  • Locked
Curtinho Wijnaldum
2
Replies
44
Views
3K
Woland
Woland
Farkmaster
    • Like
  • Locked
Narrowminded.
Replies
23
Views
1K
Hansern
Hansern
My_Blood_Bleeds_Red
    • Like
  • Locked
Moneyball v2.0
Replies
1
Views
364
darkstarexodus
darkstarexodus
Beamrider
    • Like
  • Locked
But what about City? WHAT ABOUT CITY!!!!!
2 3
Replies
76
Views
3K
dee
dee
Back
Top Bottom