\n \n \n “. concat(self. i18n. t(‘search. voice. recognition_retry’), “\n
Darwin Nunez and Liverpool dominate the box, with the Reds taking a massive lookout for Manchester City.
Email us at theeditor@football365. com
Darwin is a bigger bet than we see in Liverpool. Nunez is, in fact, a bigger bet than he would expect from Liverpool, given his record in signings for the past five years.
Darwin Núñez is not Van Dijk or Allison, a success and consistent artists who obviously value proportional remuneration. Núñez had one season in Portugal, far surpassing his XG, a below-average season in Portugal and a decent season in the Spanish division at the moment. .
Perhaps he will continue to outperform his XG now that he plays with a much bigger team in a much bigger league as opposed to much bigger defenses, but he is more likely to return to his statistical standard. At the time, Liverpool paid a world-class payout for a decent player.
He is young and obviously a smart footballer, however, a hundred million is not a payment that I think is a fair measure of him as a player in the same way that the maximum payments for Allisson and Van Dijk, the average payments for Dias and the decrease in Minamino payments were.
It’s not like Liverpool who have done things before, and it makes me wonder if Edwards looked to end up with a big stir. Tim Sutton (props)
Inevitable response to Rob I guess it was inevitable, enthusiastic rivals would soon start attracting Liverpool because they dared to spend their own money, earned through an almost excellent season, in a mandatory position for the club.
Original quote from Klopp: “If you bring in a player for £100 million and he gets injured, it all goes down the chimney. “
As is the case, everything was misrepresented through the tabloid press and everyone remembers the headlines and not the argument I was giving at the time.
Paul Pogba charges £89 million. Since then, Lukaku has charged Chelsea £97. 5 million (apparently) and Grealish has charged City £100 million (apparently) but has not gained any virulence as no one is a “hypocrite”.
£ is €.
It does not compare consistent miles with one hour with consistent miles with one hour. It does not compare consistent miles with gallons with L/100 km (Australian measures) because they are meaningless and are other sets of measurements.
Although Nunez, and this is a yes, controlled to meet all requirements in full (speculated charges), the total transaction is worth £85 million. This bought him 1x Harry Maguire. For the record, based on existing exchange rates, Núñez is expected to charge more than 115 million euros, which is obviously not the case. It’s not a deal valued at £100 million, that’s for sure.
Also, if Benfica itself on its online page is true, the initial charge is £64 million, which of course is neither £100 million nor €115 million, but where are the “bants” there?
By the way, the last time Liverpool spent over £50 million was on Allison in July 2018, over 4 years ago. or cash obtained through dubious Russian means (also allegedly).
Klopp is not very good, but neither he nor the club are hypocrites in this situation. I look ahead to Mediawatch’s policy that provides the same remedy as those who say something about the Haaland deal, which costs almost £250 million so far. everything, adding your cash for lunch. . . Barry (Perth)
. . . Rob in Dorset fishing and here I’m bored enough of the paintings to bite. First of all, the asterisk obviously considers the penultimate season, with games postponed from left to right and center, empty stadiums and groups with vaccinated players well punished because their entire team did have to isolate themselves if some stars fell with covid. But of course, the season we finished before everything stopped is the one in which you have to hang an asterisk.
As for the expenditure of coins, it is fair to mention VVD and Allison, the club’s record signing and ultimately the world’s most beloved goalkeeper. We’ve spent the coins on two major improvements that are still first-team games, but to mention that Ox and Keita cost less than some of City’s full-backs is a bit of an exaggeration. As for Darwin, yes, many years ago, Klopp said something about dumb coins and now we’re spending dumb coins, but that’s the economics of football and we can settle for that and try to stick around or settle for a few years without any opposition. . domain of the blue part of Manchester.
We probably wouldn’t even pay part of Halaand’s salary to Nunez, in fact, we didn’t pay his father or agent to facilitate the deal. If you send us back to one or two more cup finals, or some other final of more than 90 problems that probably aren’t enough to win the league, it will seem like a smart deal. Manjo, LFC (already excited for next season, pity for the winter break they have planned)
. . . Ah, it looks like old Rob, the Dorset button, is back. It’s hard to know if he’s serious or if he’s just hanging out in the mailbox, feeding on the hatred that will inevitably cross his path.
The first thing we realize is that Rob is very careful not to nail his loyalty to a mast, however, if I were a gambler, I would say I’m probably a United fan, under the age of 25, too young for the glory days and has been nurtured by a regime of united groups throughout his adult life.
He misses the point on Liverpool’s movement expense. Yes, they are willing to drop a big coin when the right player is available, but they can’t and possibly won’t get involved in bidding wars against other wealthier teams.
Let’s not pretend that Liverpool are poor, because they are not, but they don’t work with the same monetary strength as City, United, PSG, Newcastle and Chelsea. This means that they cannot make the same mistakes in the movement market: any mistake will be much more expensive than it will be for the aforementioned clubs. If Grealish turns out to be a failure, it wouldn’t affect City much, but if Darwin Nunez fails, he will have a big impact on Liverpool.
Cleary Rob the button believes that Liverpool spending cash means they are frauds and the fact that he claims that winning the 2019/20 name “doesn’t count” smells like someone who obviously doesn’t watch much football and probably walks around with a giant chip on his shoulder.
Grow Rob and prevent a pimple from coming out. Pierre, Auckland, New Zealand
“I’m sure some Liverpool enthusiasts will use net spending as something that will allow them to sleep at night. “
Yes, it’s surely what I’m focusing on personally because that’s what matters. You take 140 million for Coutinho and spend it on the most productive CB Keeper couple in the world and it’s a smart deal and you keep around a million. miles within the limits of FIFA’s monetary fair play rules. Here’s the net spending “chart” from the past 10 years, and you’d like to take a look at who is the most productive. And all this for the privilege of completing with 57 problems and a difference of purpose of 0. More than 3 times what Liverpool spent (who spent less than Aston Villa along the way).
I can only assume that you are a fan of Utd, Rob. I feel sorry for you, sincerely. I sense that you have to find holes in Liverpool’s achievements, because they’ve been very impressive for a while and Utd is back to being the cup team it was before Ferguson was delivered there. I had to watch Liverpool move slowly in the shadows long enough, buddy. Now I can watch them fight for quadruples and hear Utd enthusiasts distort the facts to downplay the superiority of their biggest rival. It’s pretty impressive. P awesome
Liverpool’s spending has been higher than Man City’s since 2020, but suppose they invented the sale.
. . . I will transfer Rob from the Dorset email.
What he (I suspect by the way, because no one can be that stupid) forgets is that Liverpool are making a cash investment in the team he himself has generated. FSG is not a Sugar Daddy (as Chelsea was) and he doesn’t like them. financially (as Man City). They don’t withdraw cash (like Glazers/interest payments), but they also don’t inject cash. This means that it is a sustainable business model.
Yes, it’s a lot of money to spend on a player, however, throughout history, big clubs (well supported and therefore with a lot of profits to spend) have bought the most productive players. Liverpool have done it in the past, man U obv when they were the most productive dogs and so on. Investing to improve the workforce is not cheating; moreover, it is not negligible. If a club has money to spend, its most productive strategy is to spend it; if there is no cash, advertise other youngsters or coach bigger players. Liverpool try to do all three and, above all, do not dope financially and do not spend beyond their means, which distorts the game (Everton). That’s why some enthusiasts boast of doing things the “right way. “I agree with FWIW’s sentiment: making a song is obviously boring.
Re Núñez – exciting. A threat clearly, and Mane will be a loss. . . but a Diaz-Nunez-Salah 6-front, with Jota, Bobby, Carvalho as reinforcements, is very good. If we can point to an RCM (Gavi or Bellingham, please), then they are, in fact, a fantastic team.
As for Rob, I would prepare to get even angrier, as the fact that Liverpool have been so concerned about the search for Chuameni suggests to me that Liverpool have the budget for a primary midfield purchase. I look forward with more false indignation. in sensations and not in facts. Russel, CFL
. . . “It’s been a few weeks since ‘Lucky Liverpool’ left the realm of myth and became reality,” rob says, passing off his own opinion as a definition of facts. Liverpool have just recorded a total of more than 90 problems for the third time in four years. Prior to the 2017-18 season, when Man City had reached one hundred problems, it had only been reached five times in a 38-game season through Man Utd (99-00, 08-09), Chelsea (04/05, 05-06) and Arsenal. invincible (03/04). They all won the league. The fact that Liverpool have not won the league in two of those 3 seasons is no coincidence.
In those three 90-point sessions, Liverpool have not lost a single league game at Anfield. Yes, it might have included a lucky moment, but it’s not because we’re lucky.
Let’s move on to their next attempt to urinate on all our chips, Liverpool are splurging again!You used 4 examples at least 4 years ago or more as the most productive examples imaginable. How many windows of movement have there been since we signed Keita?Seven? Also, out of curiosity, did you have to tour the Liverpool team to look for the most productive examples of mediocre shopping?It’s true that none of them have had great success, but we have a whole team of players who have been and I think you’ll find that most people will agree that our movement rate is pretty smart compared to most clubs.
I think Rob, you cancel your daily Alexa reminders to write to F365 about Liverpool and get lost. Your time and power can be used in a much more constructive way. You have the most productive beaches, so stop by and enjoy the summer. Chris ( back house from download)
. . . Interested in who Robs, Dorset believes Liverpool can buy according to their strict code of ethics. Ste, CFB
You can’t liquidate this guy. This is the end of the season, and back Dickwolf and Knob, Dorset makes their fury explicit in Liverpool’s mailbox.
At first, it bothered me to read what you were doing. Now it amuses me, and I mean, it amuses me.
How unhappy their two lives will have to be to want to troll Liverpool in this mailbox regularly. I can believe their two overweight red faces spitting feathers while angrily hitting their keyboards. Hilarious!
KIDS RENT FREE! FREE RENT! Gronk (LFC)
The League of Nations is taking a stand, but it turns out there’s little discussion about it in The Mailbox, so here’s a contribution about the League of Nations.
First of all, I like the concept of the League of Nations. UEFA has 55 nations with massive diversifications in capacity, a wider diversity than any other continent in the world. Creating competitive matches opposed to well-matched war matches with promotion and relegation is greater for the football progression of all nations.
It’s for this very reason that I don’t like the same old format of qualifying for the World Cup and the European Championship. Groups of five or six groups with massive diversifications in functions make the procedure tedious and boring with a predictable outcome. It is this qualification format used through UEFA that has led to apathy towards foreign football. In Qatar’s qualification procedure, football enthusiasts had to put aside the club’s interests to see England take on San Marino and Andorra. Can you blame them for their apathy towards foreign football?The only defense UEFA has for this procedure is that “all teams deserve the opportunity to qualify for a primary tournament,” which is fair enough. So, here’s a concept that allows this to happen, but improves foreign football:
Expand the League of Nations and get rid of the existing, historical and insufficient qualification process, which obviously wants to be modernized. Here is a suggestion to qualify for Euro 2024 the existing format of the Nations League of 3 departments of 16 groups (in 4 groups of 4) and a department of 7 groups (in groups of 3 and 4):
The two most sensible organizations of the A-League organization (8 organizations) automatically qualify for Euro 2024. They will then participate in the Nations League final competing for the trophy. We now have 16 places left to qualify for Euro 2024. the remaining 8 organisations in League A, the 3 most sensitive organisations of the organisation in League B (another 12 organisations), the 3 most sensitive organisations of the organisation in League C (another 12 organisations) and the two most sensitive organisations of League D (4 other organisations) are qualified for the play-offs. This play-off procedure would see 36 organisations reduced to 16 and their Euro qualification process is over. The 11 organisations that do not qualify for the Nations League final or the Nations League qualifiers are loose to hold friendly matches with others while the other matches are played. This would create the following:
A tournament for the Nations League Trophy, with all participants for the European Championship.
A separate tournament/play-off procedure for euro qualification.
An opportunity for each and every UEFA country to qualify for the primary tournaments.
Competitive and well-balanced matches that mark the progression of all UEFA nations.
Obviously, the design of the “play off” of the secondary tournament would have to be replaced with respect to qualification for the World Cup, because the number of groups to advance would be less than that of the Euro, but this can be done without problems.
I inspire Mailboxers to approve or criticize, but especially to argue. Naz, Gooner
. . . Yes, this incarnation of the Nations League has been boring and literally knows that one feels disturbed, but for me it is only because of FIFA’s resolution to hold a World Cup in a country that needed it to get through the winter. .
The Nations League has really been a lot of fun when played in the general foreign breaks with a mini final in a strange summer. With the World Cup moved to November and necessarily cutting off foreign autumn/winter breaks, UEFA was left with two options, either to can this cycle or to tighten matches on the summer hole foreseen by the absence of a World Cup. They opted for the latter and the result is the mess we see now, with stunned players making the moves or teenagers making their debuts earlier than expected. As coaches don’t have friendlies before the World Cup, it has necessarily become a series of meaningless matches for most. It deserves to become a laugh next time.
Unfortunately, from England’s point of view, they can be in Division B if they don’t win a games or two and possible competitive matches against the strength of Albania, Kazakhstan and Finland. Paul (What about not playing football for a while?) Frankfurt
. . . I know the timing of those Nations League matches doesn’t make them look important, but I think a major update has happened that has made a huge difference.
In the first edition, the most sensible league had only 3 consistent groups per group. The matches were therefore very important, because the risk of relegation was very real.
There was an impressive organization from France, Germany and the Netherlands (Germany came down!), and the organization from England was also very strong. The fantastic victory in Spain created a real all-or-nothing match at Wembley against Croatia. It was conceivable that England would finish in all 3 positions before kick-off, and when Croatia scored, they were cut down to win the organisation or be relegated.
But then UEFA suppressed it and replaced the more sensible league in 4 teams. They cancelled the descents (Germany did not go down!) And since then, the threat has been particularly reduced. The addition of a fourth team diluted the quality in many cases: for example, in the last edition, Iceland in the group of England, but ended up wasting all six matches.
Bringing back groups of 3 groups for League A would be a start to making the festival attractive again. Because the big groups that descend will never be fun!Michael
Liverpool enthusiasts protect spending, but it’s a threat to a season. Darwin Núñez made his first impression in Football365. com.