Elm0

Huh? I assume people are against Blue because its what everton use. If we dont like rival colours then it should be none or all, no? Hate that argument that im just trying to annoy people. Maybe im just grown up enough not to be upset about having a blue on the kit, a blue that doesnt even look like the everton blue. its childish. its just a kit.

Im neither here nor there on the kit. I'm just not going to get a knickers in a twist because theres blue in it? What next? No red because Utd play in it? Baffling.

Its just a colour. Are you grown men or 5 year olds?

hes no worse than adam.

Short career tbf. They have to ready themselves for the rest of their lives as best as possible.

thats a fairly unnecessary personal attack. Im taking that as a sign of weakness on your behalf. Alternatively you can cut it out and we can all be pals eh? I dont see how having a footballer with pride and ethos, and a club that "doesnt let anyone come to the club" ( ) means theyre a no mark club. In fact, I quite respect them for how they go about their business. Very dignified, some people could learn a few things in fact. I dont think anyone from Liverpool would complain if we started churning out Scouse only players. Would be pretty good going. "No mark" indeed. Pfft.

many lols. bilbao one of the most patriotic clubs in the world. im sure hes had a say in staying.

haha. dont be silly, didnt say i knew nothing of kenny, just said there was more than i expected. oddly enough, that happens with different generations. aside from my holiday last summer was pretty poor though. sacked rafa needlessly, particularly with hindsight. with no hindsight however, i dont think i can claim to be upset with the signings. at the time poulsen looked reasonable, as did cole and meireles.

Quite enjoyed last summer, had a lovely 'oliday.

Carroll from the really expensive shop somewhere in Paris or Madrid or NYC where all the rich people specifically travel to hobnob with others of equal social standing, and where you can pay £40 for a mouthful of a marsbar. Yep. Thats the one.

lol wut

Bit of a waste playing like that with Carroll in the team though, and therein lies the dilemma.

Perhaps Im wrong, but if we arent allowed to discuss rumours, whats the point in the transfer thread?

conversely im pleased to hear that

Hes basically a Riera Mk II, and when Riera played we had the best balanced team I have witnessed in the last 10 years.

With respect (?), i was two when he left the club previously, so as I stated, Im not old enough to remember him first hand. Dont doubt how educated I am either. Thats one of the untouchables when youre having a go at someone. Intelligence and line of work. You just dont do it. I think youve confused CM for centre back there too. I was referring to centre midfield. Do agree with your points on centre back though. Probably, but Im a fan of efficiency, and Im just floating ideas to see what like minded fans of the club think.

Also, for all these questions about "market value" etc just assume its like the wind. Its there, noone can see it but they know its there because of its effect.

Im not old enough to remember him first hand, and im incredibly well educated, thanks. Paisley and Shankley do get more of a mention, particularly away from Liverpool fans, because of the european exploits and the fact they got things moving at the club again. I knew Kenny was important to the club and vice versa, but I actually didnt realise the extent to which Kenny was linked and possibly needed ( if thats not too dramatic) until he took over again. Hopefullly Ive got this across in my last few posts but its not about Henderson in isolation, its about the whole shebang. Like I said, if we want to sign a player for more than his market value, when compared to other players, then fine, thats all good. But thats under the proviso that other positions arent neglected or filled by bargains. Its early days at the minute, but out of the two positions (CM and LB) LB was in more dire need. The only thing I can think of as to why we'd spend big on CM and not LB, aside from something odd going on, is that there are no young LB's available out there. Perhaps true, but then I ask why didnt we do as we did for henderson and go in all guns blazing for Enrique? Why arent we trying for Cissokho, Sakho or Michel Bastos, for example?

I think its more to do with me not rating Clichy and would prefer us try and get some upcoming youngster in the vein of Henderson in terms of possible fee and talent. Id actually probably be happier to see Insua back than sign Clichy tbh. Sure, if we want to go buy Henderson for more than hes worth then its all good, on the condition that we still spend to bolster other areas of the team that are perhaps more in need, and not look for a quick fix. Which, imo at the very least, is what looks to be happening at left back. To word it better I think Id rather see £20M odd spent on left back rather than CM, because we need a LB more than a CM. Lots of variables in there of course, but I think thats why the rumour has upset me so much.

well, i understand those points, yes. But, that doesnt really deal with my question, which relates to why the board/club/commoli/kenny would somehow be interested in getting good monetary value out of Clichy but not so much from the likes of Carroll and Henderson, when the fee was more or less "we'll pay whatever you want within reason"? Similarly, (all hypothetically of course) I imagine the justification of Clichy or someone similar would be "its all fine, he was cheap" from the fans, but the whole idea that we overpaid for other players would be pushed under the carpet and justified by saying the fee shouldnt matter if we want them. Meh, its not important I guess, I just dont think its ideal to have one rule for some signings and some for another. We should either be breaking the bank for every position to buy an up and coming player or spending sensibly and logically throughout.

Ok, it seems we're getting crossed wires here. What I meant by that was this - the Henderson deal was justified by many on the grounds that the pot of money was fairly big and that it was fine to overpay because other areas of the squad could be enhanced regardless. Therefore, my concern with the Henderson transfer is that it has eaten up all the money and perhaps more than it should have in an absolute fashion, which is suggested (but not proven) by the small bids put in for clichy. Of course, that may or may not change by the time the window shuts. I can see where the confusion has arose. Theres also part of me that thinks that a young english player was brought in to appease the fans. answer me this then - why is it ok in hendersons case to disregard fee's and monetary value completely, but its ok in the case of other players to say its fine because its good value? I just cant get my head round that.

I think thats an absurd thing to say tbh. Im here to give my opinion - i dont speak on behalf of the club, i speak for my own thoughts on everything and I cant be held responsible if people decide to take what I say as gospel and froth at the mouth over it. What next? Do I need a disclaimer? "This post is the view of Elm0 only and may or may not have a factual basis, depending on the content of the post". I can understand why you want to keep things level headed, but thats a poor way of shame blaming - you only have to look at how my initial post was taken to see where the actual trouble is. Anyway, back to my original point. Of course its not set in stone yet, but I can only go on what I see. If things continue to transpire with more measley bids being put forward for players who are alright but arent necessarily what we should be after, then of course im going to draw conclusions about what ive seen before and how it all interacts. I hope thats clear thats my opinion, and it obviously depends on what exactly we do between now and the end of the window. In short, if Henderson is the biggest signing and is the "biggest" by a margin Ill be unhappy. EDIT: I think a little bit of me is upset this is Clichy. If there are bargains, take them obviously. But Clichy isnt great.

A lot of the justification for Hendersons fee was that it was fine as long as there was enough to cover other positions. If this Henderson transfer was a sizable whack of our budget and means we're after cheapies from here in (which is suggested by Clichy, but not proved) then Ill be most unhappy.

I think the pretty obvious implication was that the money pot wasnt as deep as some had suggested. Can you give it up with the personal sleights too? Thanks.