The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Liverpool captain Steven Gerrard has indicated a desire to leave Anfield following the European champions' decision to reject a bid from Chelsea.
Gerrard has declared his intention to quit his only club after rejecting Liverpool's offer of a new contract.
The two parties have been engaged in talks in a bid to end 12 months of uncertainty regarding his future on Merseyside.
Chelsea were keen to sign the midfielder last summer but Gerrard opted to reject the club's overtures to stay with his boyhood heroes.
The Reds' recent success in the UEFA Champions League final against Milan appeared to sway Gerrard into committing his long-term future to Rafa Benitez's side.
But discussions regarding a new deal have broken down in recent days and Gerrard's relationship with Liverpool's top brass is now beyond repair.
Liverpool have confirmed that talks to extend Gerrard's deal, which currently runs until 2007, are now over after the skipper expressed his determination to leave.
"The club has made it crystal clear we want to keep Steven at Anfield," read a club statement.
"Sadly, he has told us this afternoon that he will not accept our offer of an improved and extended contract because he wants to leave Liverpool.
"We very much regret the decision he has taken."
Gerrard's decision to publicly confirm his eagerness to quit Liverpool will now spark a transfer scramble for his services.
Chelsea have already confirmed their initial offer for the 25-year-old, believed to be in the region of £32 million, has been rejected and they are likely to come in with a revised bid.
Real Madrid are also interested but lack the financial muscle to compete with the Premiership champions and that could leave Chelsea as the sole realistic bidders for Gerrard.
The Reds will now be left in the position of trying to negotiate the best price for their midfield powerhouse and it is likely a British transfer record fee will be required to secure Gerrard's signature.
[URL]http://skysports.planetfootball.com/LIST.ASP?HLID=289598[/URL]
Gerrard has declared his intention to quit his only club after rejecting Liverpool's offer of a new contract.
The two parties have been engaged in talks in a bid to end 12 months of uncertainty regarding his future on Merseyside.
Chelsea were keen to sign the midfielder last summer but Gerrard opted to reject the club's overtures to stay with his boyhood heroes.
The Reds' recent success in the UEFA Champions League final against Milan appeared to sway Gerrard into committing his long-term future to Rafa Benitez's side.
But discussions regarding a new deal have broken down in recent days and Gerrard's relationship with Liverpool's top brass is now beyond repair.
Liverpool have confirmed that talks to extend Gerrard's deal, which currently runs until 2007, are now over after the skipper expressed his determination to leave.
"The club has made it crystal clear we want to keep Steven at Anfield," read a club statement.
"Sadly, he has told us this afternoon that he will not accept our offer of an improved and extended contract because he wants to leave Liverpool.
"We very much regret the decision he has taken."
Gerrard's decision to publicly confirm his eagerness to quit Liverpool will now spark a transfer scramble for his services.
Chelsea have already confirmed their initial offer for the 25-year-old, believed to be in the region of £32 million, has been rejected and they are likely to come in with a revised bid.
Real Madrid are also interested but lack the financial muscle to compete with the Premiership champions and that could leave Chelsea as the sole realistic bidders for Gerrard.
The Reds will now be left in the position of trying to negotiate the best price for their midfield powerhouse and it is likely a British transfer record fee will be required to secure Gerrard's signature.
[URL]http://skysports.planetfootball.com/LIST.ASP?HLID=289598[/URL]
Page:
I'd settle for a Shaun Wright-Phillips bit. That'd be nice. He'd cost £20 million (based on Chelsea's £18 mill offer being 2 mill short, that's math) and then we can buy Hargreaves as well, he's the man. Plus Joe Cole/Figo as part of the Stevie deal, respective of club. Then buy a defender, say....Daniele Bonera.
Reina
Finnan-Carra-Bonera-Riise
Figo/SWP-Alonso-Hargreaves-Figo/Garcia
Cisse/Baros-Morientes
My fantasy deal with the Stevie money?
Joaquin.
Reina
Finnan-Carra-Bonera-Riise
Figo/SWP-Alonso-Hargreaves-Figo/Garcia
Cisse/Baros-Morientes
My fantasy deal with the Stevie money?
Joaquin.
Colourless wrote:
> What if a team beat them twice in the league and once in the FA Cup?
> And finished higher in the league? Can they then claim to be better
> than them?
They can, yes. My main point, however, was that whether or not it was deserved, Liverpool have the evidence which allows them to claim to be the best side in Europe. Just like Chelsea happen to have in England. Just like Greece happen to have as a European nation. Now I don't think that they were the best side in Euro 2004 (and I don't think Liverpool were, football-wise, in the Champions League) but my point was they have the trophy to prove that they beat the best on their way to the top.
> What if a team beat them twice in the league and once in the FA Cup?
> And finished higher in the league? Can they then claim to be better
> than them?
They can, yes. My main point, however, was that whether or not it was deserved, Liverpool have the evidence which allows them to claim to be the best side in Europe. Just like Chelsea happen to have in England. Just like Greece happen to have as a European nation. Now I don't think that they were the best side in Euro 2004 (and I don't think Liverpool were, football-wise, in the Champions League) but my point was they have the trophy to prove that they beat the best on their way to the top.
So basically what you're saying is that Liverpool have the right to claim that they are the best. But everyone else can and will laugh as they clearly aren't.
Not really. Because not "everyone else" will say that.
And if they "clearly aren't", how did they overcome Juventus, Chelsea and Milan? Yeah, they flopped in the Premiership, and maybe they did get lucky in the Champions League, but they have earned the right to use the term "best team in Europe", seeing as they won a tournament which aims to crown the best team in Europe.
Sorry, but your team are technically only best in England. :-)
And if they "clearly aren't", how did they overcome Juventus, Chelsea and Milan? Yeah, they flopped in the Premiership, and maybe they did get lucky in the Champions League, but they have earned the right to use the term "best team in Europe", seeing as they won a tournament which aims to crown the best team in Europe.
Sorry, but your team are technically only best in England. :-)
AfroJoe wrote:
> Sorry, but your team are technically only best in England. :-)
My team are only best in England anyway. I still think Barcelona are a better side than us, even though we beat them. Milan are also better. I'm sure I could make a list.....
But Liverpool, aren't even in the best 3 teams in England. Let alone Europe....
> Sorry, but your team are technically only best in England. :-)
My team are only best in England anyway. I still think Barcelona are a better side than us, even though we beat them. Milan are also better. I'm sure I could make a list.....
But Liverpool, aren't even in the best 3 teams in England. Let alone Europe....
That's like saying Team A has beat Team B ten times and Team B has only beat Team A twice, however Team B are the better team as they won the last encounter.
No. It's. Not.
AfroJoe wrote:
> they have earned the right to use the term "best team in Europe",
> seeing as they won a tournament which aims to crown the best team in
> Europe.
AfroJoe wrote:
> they have earned the right to use the term "best team in Europe",
> seeing as they won a tournament which aims to crown the best team in
> Europe.
Damarus wrote:
> That's like saying Team A has beat Team B ten times and Team B has
> only beat Team A twice, however Team B are the better team as they
> won the last encounter.
That could be true in some circumstances, but that wasn't what AJ was saying.
> That's like saying Team A has beat Team B ten times and Team B has
> only beat Team A twice, however Team B are the better team as they
> won the last encounter.
That could be true in some circumstances, but that wasn't what AJ was saying.
My Bad. I should learn to do a little less skim skim reading =D
AJ is right.
People supporting other clubs like AC or Chelsea can claim all they want to be better than Liverpool.
But at the end of the day, they won the Champions League. They're the Champions of Europe. And, hence, they can always throw that back in the faces of fans claiming they aren't the best European Cup. It doesn't matter what happened in other competitions, there is only one competition that has the top European teams, and playing by the rules of that competition, Liverpool came out on top.
People supporting other clubs like AC or Chelsea can claim all they want to be better than Liverpool.
But at the end of the day, they won the Champions League. They're the Champions of Europe. And, hence, they can always throw that back in the faces of fans claiming they aren't the best European Cup. It doesn't matter what happened in other competitions, there is only one competition that has the top European teams, and playing by the rules of that competition, Liverpool came out on top.
Page: