Macedonian_Red

Personally, I can't see Rafa coming back before the summer of 2012 ... He has a 2-year contract at Inter, and he is very likely to honor that contract ... And, before he comes back to LFC, some things will need to get sorted out ... Realistically, Kenny is the best person to take us over at the moment ... He would stabilize the team (with an undivided support by the fans) and would put us back on the winning track ... Once Rafa is back in the summer of 2012, Kenny would be promoted to Director of Football, overseeing the whole footballing department at LFC ...

Coming from Bascombe, this report is most likely bulls***, but to be honest, Young is a better wide attacking player than any of current LFC players ... Huang's PR team was awesome ... He got all the publicity in the world ... Unfortunately, the whole Huang exercise was primarily about publicity ...

Whoever is running the NESV's PR campaign, is doing a damn good job ...

Than again, if you look at Commendatore's biography, you will see that he has managed Juventus on two occasions (1994-1999 and 2001-2004) and he has been very successful on both occasions ... By the way, between those two stints with Juve, he has managed Inter ...

Keith Edelman to be appointed as new LFC CEO ?

It is an article in the NOTW ... It is a complete and utter bulls*** by definition ... Unless you think that the Sunday S*n has miraculously gained some credibility ...

For me, this discussion is well and truly over ... Please, do not bother replying ...

Rooney ?

With an average net spending of £14 million per season, Rafa was 4 points away from winning the Premier League ... Imagine what he could do with some decent owners backing him ...

Man United under no pressure to sell players despite losses, insists Gill Published 15:10 08/10/10 Manchester United chief executive David Gill insists there is no pressure to sell star players such as Wayne Rooney despite the club making losses of £83.6million. Gill said the club would still prefer to have "Cristiano Ronaldo on the pitch than £80million in the bank" as proof of their desire to keep players. Although United's group operating profit topped £100.7million, after player-related costs, interest payments and a number of expensive one-off costs related to the bond issue, overall there was a record loss for the club. Gill said the accounts released today were "very good" with excellent revenues, and said there should be no concern about United going down the same road as Liverpool, whose American co-owners have struggled to finance their ownership. The United chief executive did admit the figures could be confusing to fans who saw a record turnover of £286million for the year ending June 2010 contrasting with the record losses of £83.6million. For the previous year the club had returned a net profit of £48.2million thanks to the sale of Ronaldo, but Gill said the Glazer family who own United had not pushed for that move, nor would they for any other player. He added that United's balance sheet includes £165million remaining in the bank if Sir Alex Ferguson wants to buy new players. In an interview with Press Association Sport, Gill said: "We are not a club that needs to sell. We have money in the bank so there is zero pressure on that, no pressure at all to sell any star player whether it is Wayne Rooney or X,Y or Z. I can categorically say that. "There was no desire at all from anyone at the club to sell Cristiano - he wanted to go and as a result we managed to extract a world record fee. "These philosophy is to retain and attract the best players. We have £165million in the bank but in some ways we would prefer to have £80million in the bank and Ronaldo on the pitch." Gill said part of the losses related to one-off payments after bank loans were turned into a bond, totalling £47million. He added that if 'goodwill' losses - an accounting practice relating to the original takeover - of £35.2million, and foreign exchange losses of £19million (which should be recovered next year) and depreciation are ignored, United would have an actual profit of about £25million. Gill added: "There are very good results for the club with records here, there and everywhere but they are complicated with non-cash items and exceptional one-off hits." Fans' group have raised concerns that there could be parallels with the Liverpool crisis, where the holding company may be forced into administration next week over unpaid debts following a leveraged takeover, and the Glazer ownership of United. Gill however insisted that was not the case. He added: "I can't speak for any other club but the United fans should not be concerned, we have a long-term financing structure in place, excellent revenues that are growing, we are controlling our costs - total wages are 46% of turnover - and we can afford the interest on our long-term finance. "In our opinion if something changed in the ownership this club will survive and continue - it is covering the financing cost more than adequately. "We still have cash to invest in players and to give good contracts to players and we are comfortable with the business model." The figures show that United's wage bill rose by 7% to £131.7million, while United's overall debt rose to £521.7million. It may also appease some critics that according to the figures, the Glazers have not taken any money out of the club to pay any of their £200million-worth of PIK notes that are now attracting interest at 16.25%. Gill added: "They have retained that money in the bank and it's there for Sir Alex if he needs it for players, and for investing in the training ground and the stadium." United are confident that they will meet UEFA's financial fair play rules despite the figures because not all the paper losses - such as depreciation - are included by UEFA when they calculate whether clubs are only spending what they earn. http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Manchester-United-under-no-pressure-to-sell-players-despite-losses-insists-David-Gill-article596443.html

Liverpool chairman fears administration 'catastrophe' New England Sports Ventures' proposed £300m takeover of the club is set to be opposed in court by Liverpool owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett on Friday. Liverpool owe £280m to Royal Bank of Scotland and must pay by 15 October. Broughton believes failure to sell, and thus raise funds to pay the bank, would be "catastrophic" for the club. Reds co-owners Hicks and Gillett oppose the sale as they value Liverpool at double NESV's bid, but they are out-voted by the rest of the board. BBC Sport understands that RBS is pushing to have the owners' opposition to the sale heard in the High Court on Monday, in order to leave as much time as possible before the deadline. If the American pair succeed in their opposition to the takeover, they would need to repay or refinance the debt or their holding company could face administration. If the latter occurs it would result in the Premier League handing the club a nine-point penalty. Any loss of points could prove perilous for Liverpool given the club currently lie in the relegation zone, having picked up only six points from seven games. And Broughton also has concerns that administration could make the club less attractive to prospective buyers. "Setting aside the nine-point deduction, it would have an impact on Liverpool's value and be wide open to predators, whereas we have what we believe is the right new owners to take the club forward," he told ESPN. "This is all part of why it is important that we made the decision on Tuesday to accept one or the other of two very acceptable bids. "Heading into administration was a very likely outcome if we didn't. Even now with the court case looming, administration cannot be ruled out." Whenever Hicks and Gillett's case is eventually heard, thousands of Liverpool fans are expected to make the journey to London to voice their protest over the duo's ownership of the club. Should the pair be unsuccessful in court and NESV go ahead with their bid to buy Liverpool - a proposal which has been approved by the Premier League - Reds boss Roy Hodgson could expect to face discussions on his future. Broughton says that is a situation Hodgson was aware of when he arrived at Anfield and that a break clause in his contract addresses the possibility that new owners may want to bring in their own man. "Provisions were made in Roy's contract to relate specifically to any change in ownership," Broughton said. The chairman said he expected Hodgson to continue as manager, but added: "He came to the club knowing full well the circumstances and the risks attached to it." Broughton added that he believed that in NESV, who own the Boston Red Sox, he had found the right buyers to take the club forward. But he also admitted to having searched the world looking for potential suitors with very large pockets such as those at Premier League rivals Chelsea, owned by Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich. "We hoped for someone who wanted a 'trophy asset', but having scoured the world without finding one, the conclusion is that there are no more Romans out there," he said. http://news.bbc.co.u...ool/9077048.stm

To be honest, he has had a couple of good seasons at Bayern Munich, but he is simply too injury prone ...

Gerrard is already 30 and Carragher is 32 ...If we don't win the Premier League in the next couple of seasons, they will be begging Rafa to come back ...

Hodgson won't be LFC manager at 1st of January ... Whoever we buy in January, it will be at the request of the new manager ...

Rafa will be back in the summer of 2012 ... Until then ...

Chelsea, Liverpool and Manchester City on alert as Kaka eyes January move from Real Madrid 8th October 2010 Inter Milan had looked the most likely destination for the Brazil playmaker, but the Italians are ready to ditch their interest for fears of intense competition from Barclays Premier League sides looking to make an impact signing when the transfer window reopens. Chelsea boss Carlo Ancelotti is a confirmed admirer of the 28-year-old, while Manchester City and Liverpool have also been identified as potential destinations. Inter are instead likely to battle Juventus and Manchester United for Karim Benzema - another out-of-favour Real Madrid striker - and believe they can win the race by offering Brazil right back Maicon in exchange. Kaka will have no shortage of suitors despite a poor first season at the Bernabeu following a £56million move from AC Milan. His former club are believed to be interested in taking him back to replace Ronaldinho - who is wanted for a lucrative move to the Los Angeles Galaxy - but they cannot compete financially with English interest after already splashing out on Robinho and Zlatan Ibrahimovic. Chelsea may be best placed to sign Kaka because of the close bond between the player and Ancelotti, who got the best out of the midfielder during their time together at the San Siro. However, it is unclear whether the Blues would be willing to splash out a hefty transfer fee after considerable belt-tightening at Stamford Bridge. City have the resources and boss Roberto Mancini has indicated he will re-enter the market in January. Relations between City, Milan and Kaka were damaged by a botched bid to take him to Eastlands in January 2009, but the landscape has changed. The player's standing has declined, while City's status has rocketed since then and a deal may now be attractive. Liverpool have also been mooted as a potential suitor by sources in Italy, with Kaka tipped as the kind of signing that would be a coup for the new Anfield owners. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1318794/Chelsea-Liverpool-Manchester-City-alert-Kaka-eyes-January-Real-Madrid.html

''Reds misfit is enjoying his football again but his future remains unclear'' Link

With Kenny in charge, armed with a significant transfer budget, there is very little chance that Torres will leave in the summer ...

One way or another, G&H are gone ... We should be patient for a couple of more days before it is made official, but we can already put the champagne on ice ...

I would be very satisfied with these three in January ...

Depends on the new manager and the investment into the squad ...

http://www.arsenal.com/assets/_files/documents/sep_10/gun__1285316230_ARSENAL_HOLDINGS_RESULTS_ANNOU.pdf

True ... ''George Gillett and Tom Hicks stand to lose £144m from Liverpool sale'' http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/oct/06/tom-hicks-george-gillett-144m-losses