Under-investment

[Taksin]

I didn't say you did - read... I am saying that it is funny how you stayed silent while certain players or even the manager get the hairdyer treatment - YET come out to play at the mere posting of the NET spend.

And if you believe that Klopp would not have wanted to bring in more quality in 2019 or this summer OR again this January then either you know him personally OR can read very different signals from his statements than I can manage.

There’s no hairdryer treatment on a forum, just people talking sense or nonsense.

Hairdryer treatment actually does occur at the game and it does make a difference to the attitude of all parties.

If someone wants to start a thread about how Firmino is the cause of our problems I won’t have to defend him because many others will,

I’m a big fan of Firmino by the way

And I didn’t ‘come out’ at the mere mention of net spend. The thread is called underinvestment. It’s an unambiguous theory.

I picked you up on your spinning of the Coutinho story to support your view. What you said wasn’t true. The club didn’t want to sell him.

What they wanted was to invest in a team that won trophies. They succeeded and no one is grateful.

[skyebo]

If Salah goes in the summer, i would expect that money to go on replacements. What i wouldn't expect is for them to spend another couple of hundred million just to prove a point. And as for selling to buy, all clubs do it, even City. When they paid £50m for Sterling, i bet they had some outgoings too.

[Steveo]

@Taksin

This is why I don’t engage with you. In the space of 2 posts you have completely missed what I have actually said. Most likely because you don’t like what it points to.

I didn’t say the club wanted to sell Coutinho ( none of us will likely know that ) I actually suggested that we be thankful that HE ( Coutinho forced the move through ) wanted to leave. Just have to actually read what was written.

The fact he did go was what led to the purse strings finally be opened. Virgil - Allison and Fab incoming - It’s not spin either - it is fact.

As you were

[miller0863]

Do you really believe that Skyebo?? Look at City’s net spend, that doesn’t point to a club selling players to fund incomings.

[CCTV]

Wasn’t saying that he has been forced to sell anyone, but what we all know is we have had to sell to buy. Without Coutinho going, VVD and Alisson don’t come in.

I'm not so sure that's true.

We were in for Virgil before barca were in for Phil.
They only came in for Phil when PSG unexpectedly signed Neymar.
Ours was a longer term target, whereas there's was a panic/shock replacement.
We were trying to sign Virgil before Phil became a target for Barca

With Alisson, I think you can make that case but I'd suggest we'd have signed Alisson anyway. Looking at that problem area and our finances I'd speculate we might well have signed Alisson had Phil stayed.

Keita might not have become a target if Phil stayed imo.

[miller0863]

No it was Fabinho if you want to add a midfielder

[skyebo]

Do you really believe that Skyebo?? Look at City’s net spend, that doesn’t point to a club selling players to fund incomings.

Word it whichever way you like, players get sold and players come in.

[ianlfc]

If Salah goes in the summer, i would expect that money to go on replacements. What i wouldn't expect is for them to spend another couple of hundred million just to prove a point. And as for selling to buy, all clubs do it, even City. When they paid £50m for Sterling, i bet they had some outgoings too.

I think the Sterling transfer was around the time they were getting crazy money for sponsorship deals with companies owned but the owners. Thats when FFP first came into play , iirc.

[Steveo]

I think the Sterling transfer was around the time they were getting crazy money for sponsorship deals with companies owned but the owners. Thats when FFP first came into play , iirc.

Yes the good old FFP...

I guess City could use the claim - “players get sold and players come in” as a defence.. or any similar wording... hahaa

[Taksin]

@Taksin

This is why I don’t engage with you. In the space of 2 posts you have completely missed what I have actually said. Most likely because you don’t like what it points to.

I didn’t say the club wanted to sell Coutinho ( none of us will likely know that ) I actually suggested that we be thankful that HE ( Coutinho forced the move through ) wanted to leave. Just have to actually read what was written.

The fact he did go was what led to the purse strings finally be opened. Virgil - Allison and Fab incoming - It’s not spin either - it is fact.

As you were

You do engage with me though

What you said was

“ We sold Coutinho to fund that Ian. That isn’t really investment. ”

This is a mythologising of what happened.

We sold Coutinho because he wouldn’t stay, no matter how hard we tried to convince him.

It is not correct or fair to say we sold him in order to invest. The rest is post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

We only invested because we sold him
We wouldn’t have invested without selling him
Look at the net spend!

The fact is, the owners, with the manager built a winning team. You do not give credit to the owners for that. Worse still, you insinuate that they sell our best players to fund the managers plans. But we know that almost certainly isn’t true.

You don’t know what they would have done about Van Djik or Alisson if Coutinho had stayed. You’re just speculating, but in a knowing way. That’s the reason I argue with you on this issue - you behave as is if you know they are letting the club down.