Local press 'blackout' on Duff escapade

[Guest sniffer]

The geordies are tapping our phones?

 

Yeh right. More likely the discreet phone call was followed by another 'discreet' call to Newcastle...

[Guest Cardie]

Is my feeling exactly - we have Gonzalez, Kewell, Aurelio, Riise and even Bellamy who can all do that role - why would we want an expensive sick-note?

 

I said that yesterday and all hell broke loose.

 

Suddenly it seems Rafa might not have wanted him (as a few suspected) and people are suddenly agreeing with the idea.

 

People are funny.

[Guz]

Rafa will probably be asked about it after we t*** Crewe and Speedy scores a hatrick

[David Hodgson]

I said that yesterday and all hell broke loose.

 

Suddenly it seems Rafa might not have wanted him (as a few suspected) and people are suddenly agreeing with the idea.

 

People are funny.

 

 

..are hypocrits.

 

I don't believe that sky made the Duff story from thin air, but equally I don't think we would have lost out to Newcastle on Duff we had matched their bid, as was being alleged. In no universe would Duff choose Newcastle over us.

 

I re-iterate that it could be telling that there has been statement from the club on this, and the local press are pretending it didn't even happen. For whatever reason, a deliberate policy of 'radio silence'.

[Knoxy]

Why on earth would we have wanted him?

 

Perhaps the silence is because there's nothing to report..

[Guest Cally77]

Exactly.

Edited July 22, 2006 by Cally77

[David Hodgson]

Why on earth would we have wanted him?

 

Perhaps the silence is because there's nothing to report..

 

Well, he can play on the right, and the left, and is very good.

 

The silence could be because the story wasn't interesting enough, but I don't think so. It got every red I know in Liverpool buzzing yesterday, and made the main news item on a national sports channel in a very specific way. Liverpool go on the record regularly to deny transfer speculation, and I don't see why they wouldn't comment on this. In fact virtually everyone yesterday seemed certain that they would.

 

Regardless it seems odd that whilst nearly every national paper covering the story today makes comment on Liverpool's 'late approach', that the two local ones don't don't think the Liverpool connection worthy of even the smallest comment, if only to belittle the reports.

[Guest Cally77]

Ok, we did make an approach, Newcastle outbid us (again) and we were that embarrased we forced a local media blackout to save face.

[David Hodgson]

Ok, we did make an approach, Newcastle outbid us (again) and we were that embarrased we forced a local media blackout to save face.

 

I wasn't even coming close to implying that.

[Knoxy]

Well, he can play on the right, and the left, and is very good.

 

The silence could be because the story wasn't interesting enough, but I don't think so. It got every red I know in Liverpool buzzing yesterday, and made the main news item on a national sports channel in a very specific way. Liverpool go on the record regularly to deny transfer speculation, and I don't see why they wouldn't comment on this. In fact virtually everyone yesterday seemed certain that they would.

 

Regardless it seems odd that whilst nearly every national paper covering the story today makes comment on Liverpool's 'late approach', that the two local ones don't don't think the Liverpool connection worthy of even the smallest comment, if only to belittle the reports.

 

He's far less effective on the right, and cuts inside too often. That's not what we need at all.

 

We do deny transfer rumours, but seem to pick and choose what we deny. It's not as if we deny every rumour. When I first heard the rumour I dismissed it out of hand, and have seen nothing that makes me change my mind. A move for Duff wouldn't make any sense.

 

The fact that the local press haven't bothered with it only adds to the theory that no move was made

[fyds]

Well, he can play on the right, and the left, and is very good.

 

The silence could be because the story wasn't interesting enough, but I don't think so. It got every red I know in Liverpool buzzing yesterday, and made the main news item on a national sports channel in a very specific way. Liverpool go on the record regularly to deny transfer speculation, and I don't see why they wouldn't comment on this. In fact virtually everyone yesterday seemed certain that they would.

 

Regardless it seems odd that whilst nearly every national paper covering the story today makes comment on Liverpool's 'late approach', that the two local ones don't don't think the Liverpool connection worthy of even the smallest comment, if only to belittle the reports.

 

David - there is no evidence anywhere other than a pit of press hearsay that we were interested in him - we have cover for akll his bits, so why would we be in for him when it's mor eclear we're looking at Kuyt and Alves?

[David Hodgson]

He's far less effective on the right, and cuts inside too often. That's not what we need at all.

 

We do deny transfer rumours, but seem to pick and choose what we deny. It's not as if we deny every rumour. When I first heard the rumour I dismissed it out of hand, and have seen nothing that makes me change my mind. A move for Duff wouldn't make any sense.

 

The fact that the local press haven't bothered with it only adds to the theory that no move was made

 

Duff was sensational in the Japan/Korea world cup on the right for Eire. Particularly against Spain, if I recall.

 

You may be right, but I think there is plenty of evidence that you are wrong. I trust Sky to have better sources than you, for instance. Not that they're infallible, but we have no evidence to suggest they got that story wrong.

[fyds]

Duff was sensational in the Japan/Korea world cup on the right for Eire. Particularly against Spain, if I recall.

 

You may be right, but I think there is plenty of evidence that you are wrong. I trust Sky to have better sources than you, for instance. Not that they're infallible, but we have no evidence to suggest they got that story wrong.

Sky recycle any old press hype - Alonso to madrid, Zambrotta to united etc...they're far worse than this site! You could equally say you have no evidence that they got the story right.

 

Duff has not said we were in for him, We haven't, The Echo and Post haven't , neither Elisha or any other reliable source herein has said we were in for him - that's evidence enough really.

 

Duff was sensational in the Japan/Korea world cup - but with a mix of injuries, lack of form and/or being selected he's been on a slippery slope a bit ever since.

Edited July 22, 2006 by fyds

[Knoxy]

Duff was sensational in the Japan/Korea world cup on the right for Eire. Particularly against Spain, if I recall.

 

You may be right, but I think there is plenty of evidence that you are wrong. I trust Sky to have better sources than you, for instance. Not that they're infallible, but we have no evidence to suggest they got that story wrong.

 

He's also been ineffective on the right playing for Chelsea. He's very left footed, and always looks to cut in. We need a player on the right who can stretch teams who defend in numbers.

 

I haven't got any sources. But given that a move for him would make absolutely no sense, and that no evidence has been put forward that we actually have made a move, I'm obviously going to continue to believe that we didn't.

 

There's rumours galore throughout the summer, there's rarely evidence to to suggest most of them are wrong - yet most of them are.

 

I like Duff as a player, and he'd have been a good signing at one time. Now is longer that time

[David Hodgson]

David - there is no evidence anywhere other than a pit of press hearsay that we were interested in him - we have cover for akll his bits, so why would we be in for him when it's mor eclear we're looking at Kuyt and Alves?

 

Let's not waste time debating why we'd need a good player who can play very well on either flank, because we don't know the manager's mind. We also have no real idea where the Alves and Kuyt deals are up to.

 

The only 'evidence' we have is the Sky report which is backed up, with variation, by a number of national newspapers. Now, I don't know the validity of the sources of all these journalists, but I have more faith in their credibility than I do in the completely unsusbstantiated denials of the story by nay-sayers on internet forums.

 

If the club or local press had denied the story you'd have some evidence for it not being true. In the absence of these things, you have none.

[Knoxy]

Why are you taking the fact that the local press aren't bothering to report the "move" as an indication that we did go for him?

 

Surely the opposite is in the case

[David Hodgson]

Why are you taking the fact that the local press aren't bothering to report the "move" as an indication that we did go for him?

 

Surely the opposite is in the case

 

Because, as local media one would expect them to be interested in a big story around Liverpool football club, and to comment on it, one way or another. It is very common practice for both Post and Echo to say things like 'national media reports about X, yesterday, are wide of the mark'. It is far more unusual for them to say nothing.

 

I'd take your point if it was just some passing obscure 'LFC might be interested in some average player' reference, but the Sky story was a big one, and was specific enough to say that we had given us permission to talk to Duff. It was also one corroborated by sections of the national media this morning.

[Kite]

Irish Press are reporting Duff chose to go to newcastle as they effectively guaranteed him first team football on the left - which to be fair is not something he's had in a while and certainly is not something he'd have here. Whether we did bid or not, I think that is a viable reason for his signing at Newcastle.

Edited July 22, 2006 by Lenin

[Andy @ Allerton]

Well, he can play on the right, and the left, and is very good.

 

The silence could be because the story wasn't interesting enough, but I don't think so. It got every red I know in Liverpool buzzing yesterday, and made the main news item on a national sports channel in a very specific way. Liverpool go on the record regularly to deny transfer speculation, and I don't see why they wouldn't comment on this. In fact virtually everyone yesterday seemed certain that they would.

 

Regardless it seems odd that whilst nearly every national paper covering the story today makes comment on Liverpool's 'late approach', that the two local ones don't don't think the Liverpool connection worthy of even the smallest comment, if only to belittle the reports.

 

 

If you take note of his physical problems and change 'is very good' to 'was very good' then that's probably nearer to the truth.

 

It didn't get me buzzing - and I know plenty of others in Liverpool that didn't want him.

 

National Sports channels aren't worth the static they are broadcast on - they usually nick most of their info from local channels anyway.

 

National Stories are so beyond not worth listening to (until anything is done) that they are hardly a credible source under any circumstances.

[Guest Cally77]

It didn't get me buzzing -

 

Nor me. My first impression was one of doubt and was it another ruse to push the Alves deal through.

[Knoxy]

Because, as local media one would expect them to be interested in a big story around Liverpool football club, and to comment on it, one way or another. It is very common practice for both Post and Echo to say things like 'national media reports about X, yesterday, are wide of the mark'. It is far more unusual for them to say nothing.

 

I'd take your point if it was just some passing obscure 'LFC might be interested in some average player' reference, but the Sky story was a big one, and was specific enough to say that we had given us permission to talk to Duff. It was also one corroborated by sections of the national media this morning.

 

What are you suggesting then? That we made a bid for a player that we don't need, failed because for whatever reason he chose Newcastle, and that either the local press didn't want to publish it, or that we somehow stopped them from doing so?

 

Is that more likely then us not actually trying to get him?

[fyds]

Let's not waste time debating why we'd need a good player who can play very well on either flank, because we don't know the manager's mind. We also have no real idea where the Alves and Kuyt deals are up to.

 

The only 'evidence' we have is the Sky report which is backed up, with variation, by a number of national newspapers. Now, I don't know the validity of the sources of all these journalists, but I have more faith in their credibility than I do in the completely unsusbstantiated denials of the story by nay-sayers on internet forums.

 

If the club or local press had denied the story you'd have some evidence for it not being true. In the absence of these things, you have none.

That doesn't make any sense. Does it not occur that the local media and club say nothing because there is nothing to say? Sky are affiliated to tribalfootball - are they reliable?

[David Hodgson]

That doesn't make any sense. Does it not occur that the local media and club say nothing because there is nothing to say? Sky are affiliated to tribalfootball - are they reliable?

 

What doesn't make any sense is saying 'I don't believe in a story' because it comes from the media, and having absolutely zero reason to disbelieve that story other than a broad cynicism or wishful thinking. It's getting more than a bit tiresome when people can't add anything more than 'it's in the press, must be bullsh*t'. Often it is, often it isn't, and often we don't get to find out either way.

 

You studiously ignore my point about how the local press tend to comment on virtually all transfer speculation, true or false. They are likelier to comment the higher the profile of the speculation, regardless of it's veracity.

 

 

 

What are you suggesting then? That we made a bid for a player that we don't need, failed because for whatever reason he chose Newcastle, and that either the local press didn't want to publish it, or that we somehow stopped them from doing so?

 

Is that more likely then us not actually trying to get him?

 

Not suggesting anything of the sort. I don't know why we might not want it reported. There could be many many reasons.

 

Maybe we made a tentative enquiry for Duff, knowing we're selling the likes of Kewell or Zenden, and have more money than we're letting on, and want to keep things on a 'need to know' basis. Maybe rafa thinks Duff is a brilliant option for left or right. Maybe we were on the brink of dumping the Alves deal, and saw Duff as an option, but have now resurrected the Alves move.

 

Heaven forbid I suggets that LFC operate a policy of secrecy, silence and deception, where the press are concerned. We'd never operate like that...would we ?

[Rimbeux]

Well Newcastle's local press are reporting that we matched them for fee and wages, but he chose them. What ot believe in it's impossible to say

[Gomez]

What doesn't make any sense is saying 'I don't believe in a story' because it comes from the media, and having absolutely zero reason to disbelieve that story other than a broad cynicism or wishful thinking. It's getting more than a bit tiresome when people can't add anything more than 'it's in the press, must be bullsh*t'. Often it is, often it isn't, and often we don't get to find out either way.

 

You studiously ignore my point about how the local press tend to comment on virtually all transfer speculation, true or false. They are likelier to comment the higher the profile of the speculation, regardless of it's veracity.

Not suggesting anything of the sort. I don't know why we might not want it reported. There could be many many reasons.

 

Maybe we made a tentative enquiry for Duff, knowing we're selling the likes of Kewell or Zenden, and have more money than we're letting on, and want to keep things on a 'need to know' basis. Maybe rafa thinks Duff is a brilliant option for left or right. Maybe we were on the brink of dumping the Alves deal, and saw Duff as an option, but have now resurrected the Alves move.

 

Heaven forbid I suggets that LFC operate a policy of secrecy, silence and deception, where the press are concerned. We'd never operate like that...would we ?

 

It wasn't that high profile. Sky said chelsea have given us permission to speak to him along with a number of other clubs. That was it.

 

Some people got worked up on here and other websites because he's Irish and they never really got over him not signing a few years ago whereas a large portion of us thought it was not credible.

 

It would not be the first time chelsea have spouted bollx, not would it be the first time that a player/agent/club have groundlessly lumped our name in in order to get a better deal. It is also important to note that giving us permission in no way means that we have asked for it. I am sure Rafa's network keeps a track of all potential bosman players coming to the end of their contracts, but I reckon that's as far it goes.

 

It is no news and therefore doesn't really need commenting on by local media, specially on a match day with two debutants. I notice even the times a telegraph are saying "it is thought that Liverpool matched the price" which translates as "we think Liverpool matched the price because it fills more space, but have zero evidence"

 

Logic, and the complete lack of whispers that prelude all our signings from English based teams point to the fact that this was no more than a ruse by the chavs to up the price.