I think if you acknowledge that its mindless entertainment for an hour its fine.
If, as an adult,you live and die by what happens to Wrestler X over the course of an episode you should probably be euthanised.
Virgiling on the vandijkulous
- Thread starter Skullflower
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
I think if you acknowledge that its mindless entertainment for an hour its fine.
If, as an adult,you live and die by what happens to Wrestler X over the course of an episode you should probably be euthanised.
I don't believe Star Wars is a film-based documentary of actual events that happened a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.
So no. It isn't.
Wrestling is fucking shite, though. That's one I simply cannot understand.
I did believe Fargo was based on true events for a while
I'm sure lots of people who watched that film - without knowing anything at all about the Coen Brothers - did.
Out of curiosity, now that we all agree that this Don Kopleone prob doesn't know anything that we didn't already knew ourselves, how do we know that we are actually interested in Keita and/or Virgil?
Has this simply become the general assumption because of the stubborn rumours - and the Soton link in Virgil's case - as we then tend to 'accept' them as true or has Klopp actually said we were indeed interested in these players specifically at some point?
The reason why I reckon Dolberg is even being mentioned in the same breath as us are 1) that we obviously lack a potent striker and 2) Klopp praised the living daylight out of him Mid-Season which I guess was great fuel for anyone wanting to make up a juicy rumour.
Whether there is more to it than that, who knows, I truly doubt Don Kop do either, but whether it's more or less likely than say Virgil or Keita I don't know, and unless you got some bulletproof quotes from the gaffer himself how do you? Is there something I have missed?
Has this simply become the general assumption because of the stubborn rumours - and the Soton link in Virgil's case - as we then tend to 'accept' them as true or has Klopp actually said we were indeed interested in these players specifically at some point?
The reason why I reckon Dolberg is even being mentioned in the same breath as us are 1) that we obviously lack a potent striker and 2) Klopp praised the living daylight out of him Mid-Season which I guess was great fuel for anyone wanting to make up a juicy rumour.
Whether there is more to it than that, who knows, I truly doubt Don Kop do either, but whether it's more or less likely than say Virgil or Keita I don't know, and unless you got some bulletproof quotes from the gaffer himself how do you? Is there something I have missed?
The Van Dijk-Liverpool link has got fuck all to do with where he plays. Every top club has been heavily linked with him, and Klopp is obviously after a top CB this summer, so that interest is as "real" as anyone else linked to him.
As for Keita, that's "real" in as much as there's a massive swell of reports and quotes and links across multiple media outlets, and has been for weeks. That's nothing official as such, but I'd be astonished if the interest wasn't real, and of all the links so far, that's the one I'd be most confident of happening. We will certainly try.
So you assume that the Virgil link is legit because all top clubs are interested, right? That may be right, and I would like to think that we are in the mix as well (even though I don't like the fact he's been injured for so long).
Dolberg's agent has recently commented, and I quote; "All the top clubs in England have been in contact over Dolberg."
I don't know which you find more reliable, but I don't think it's completely far fetched to actually believe we are at the very least interested in the latter as well.
Dolberg's agent has recently commented, and I quote; "All the top clubs in England have been in contact over Dolberg."
I don't know which you find more reliable, but I don't think it's completely far fetched to actually believe we are at the very least interested in the latter as well.
There's a footy account on Twitter with +250k followers that claims that Everton have submitted a £40M bid for Virgil btw.
i.e. 25 click farmers
They do indeed. Perhaps it's some kind of pathetic attempt to pacify their fans by posing as a club which is actually in with a chance of making that level of signing.
Let them have him. He's good but not THAT good. That's just ridiculous money. Apparently Chelski are offering him big wages as well.
Chelsea offer VVD 2.5m more per year and have set aside the £50m.
It's from the Metro, take it with a pinch of salt
It's from the Metro, take it with a pinch of salt
These are clubs that spend 50m on a Luiz buyback, 50m on Stones, 40m on Mangala... they're not under pressure if they take a little bit more risk.
UNLIKELY
Southampton set to fight to hold on to Virgil van Dijk in the face of interest from Liverpool, Chelsea and Manchester City
Virgil van Dijk
5 hrs ago / Adam Leitch, Chief Sports Writer / adamleitchsport
Saints will fight to hold on to Virgil van Dijk as Liverpool prepare to start the race for his signature.
The Reds are expected to test Saints’ resolve with an opening offer for the Dutch centre half, but with Chelsea and Manchester City among those also keen on landing him this summer they face stiff competition.
However, Saints are far from resigned to losing van Dijk during this transfer window.
It is believed that only an eye watering offer would even tempt Saints to consider selling van Dijk, and that would certainly have to be far in excess of the £50m currently quoted.
The thinking at St Mary’s is that if van Dijk is worth £50m this summer, then he will be worth at least that in a year’s time.
With the 25-year-old having five years left on his contract after signing a mega deal in May 2016, his value is protected for Saints.
They would like van Dijk to stay for the long term, but certainly for at least another season.
There could be potential parallels with the Morgan Schneiderlin situation, where he gave Saints another big season before being allowed to move on when a fair offer came in the following year. Schneiderlin eventually went to Manchester United.
Key to the situation will be the attitude of van Dijk and whether he is happy to stay or if he agitates for a move.
He has been a very stable character during his time at Saints, and there is plenty of optimism that he will settle straight back into next season at St Mary’s if that is to be the case.
Should he kick up a fuss behind the scenes it would make things harder for Saints.
Likewise, if a bidding war erupts for his services and the potential fee rockets then Saints may have to make a cold business decision and cash in.
However, there is a definite sense of a steely determination at Saints not to be pushed around in this transfer window by bigger clubs trying to pick off star players.
With the club’s finances getting back in order, and a fairly big squad already in place, chairman Ralph Krueger insisted in a recent interview that Saints will be in the driving seat regarding all players sales, no matter whether a takeover occurs or not.
He said: “We do not need to sell any players.
“Whether the ownership changes or not it is not going to change our strategic position.
“We have the backing of Katharina and/or any potential change which we as a management team feel extremely comfortable with.
“We have a strategy which is being fine-tuned but the base is in place.
“We are pre-positioned for the transfer window and we do not have to sell any player. That will be our decision and whether it is in the best interests of the club or not.”
Virgil van Dijk
5 hrs ago / Adam Leitch, Chief Sports Writer / adamleitchsport
Saints will fight to hold on to Virgil van Dijk as Liverpool prepare to start the race for his signature.
The Reds are expected to test Saints’ resolve with an opening offer for the Dutch centre half, but with Chelsea and Manchester City among those also keen on landing him this summer they face stiff competition.
However, Saints are far from resigned to losing van Dijk during this transfer window.
It is believed that only an eye watering offer would even tempt Saints to consider selling van Dijk, and that would certainly have to be far in excess of the £50m currently quoted.
The thinking at St Mary’s is that if van Dijk is worth £50m this summer, then he will be worth at least that in a year’s time.
With the 25-year-old having five years left on his contract after signing a mega deal in May 2016, his value is protected for Saints.
They would like van Dijk to stay for the long term, but certainly for at least another season.
There could be potential parallels with the Morgan Schneiderlin situation, where he gave Saints another big season before being allowed to move on when a fair offer came in the following year. Schneiderlin eventually went to Manchester United.
Key to the situation will be the attitude of van Dijk and whether he is happy to stay or if he agitates for a move.
He has been a very stable character during his time at Saints, and there is plenty of optimism that he will settle straight back into next season at St Mary’s if that is to be the case.
Should he kick up a fuss behind the scenes it would make things harder for Saints.
Likewise, if a bidding war erupts for his services and the potential fee rockets then Saints may have to make a cold business decision and cash in.
However, there is a definite sense of a steely determination at Saints not to be pushed around in this transfer window by bigger clubs trying to pick off star players.
With the club’s finances getting back in order, and a fairly big squad already in place, chairman Ralph Krueger insisted in a recent interview that Saints will be in the driving seat regarding all players sales, no matter whether a takeover occurs or not.
He said: “We do not need to sell any players.
“Whether the ownership changes or not it is not going to change our strategic position.
“We have the backing of Katharina and/or any potential change which we as a management team feel extremely comfortable with.
“We have a strategy which is being fine-tuned but the base is in place.
“We are pre-positioned for the transfer window and we do not have to sell any player. That will be our decision and whether it is in the best interests of the club or not.”
It's bit unfair this transfer malarkey.
City can offer ridiculous money and wages.
Chelsea can do the same. As can United.
And we're out here just counting our pennies. I can't see us signing the man unless he digs his heels in, and why would he? He's got more chance of winning trophies elsewhere.
City can offer ridiculous money and wages.
Chelsea can do the same. As can United.
And we're out here just counting our pennies. I can't see us signing the man unless he digs his heels in, and why would he? He's got more chance of winning trophies elsewhere.
That argument falls away when you realise we pay Lovren 100k a week.
Which is more than 95% of Premiership defenders get paid.
100k is a lot for a defender. Clearly he's being overpaid (but not ridiculously overpaid).
But what we can't afford to do (seemingly) is go out and pay an Ibrahimovic 300k a week even if he was a free transfers. We don't compete well on wages with our rivals, but we can't afford to overpay just for the sake of securing their sigining.
It just feels wrong and unfair that City can just throw ridiculous amounts of money around, not having earned it.
I hope somebody says "Southampton don't have to sell".
Oh.
Oh.
That always disappoints me. Not surprises, but disappoints. Really top players should have egos the size of planets and assume that THEY will make the difference to a team - not the team makes a difference to them. It's really an admission that they won't make that much difference if their decision hinges on which team ALREADY has the best chance of winning things. It's lazy rather than ambitious, in spite of the spin.
And there's a strange logic to it, too - why would the teams that already have the best chance of winning stuff, without adding the player, be the ones to pay the most to get them? That team should be the one on the next rung down. But somehow, in their warped world of football these days, it makes sense to those involved.
Our wage bill could cope with a big earner like that - but we'd have to look at what we pay the shite players.
I often think Suarez moving to Barcelona instead of staying at Liverpool was a clear sign of his laziness and lack of ambition
VvD Can earn more money by going to shitty or the chavs and will probably win more honours by choosing one of those teams. He would surely get regular 1st team footy for either of them, so that leaves the romance of playing at Anfield or playing for Klopp as our only attractions. If we pull this off without taking a dry bumming in the financial department, it would be impressive indeed.
Similar threads
-
- Locked
