Dokko

Either a straight swap for Lennon or Tevez, anything less and we make him suffer up here for the next two years. I have no problem seeing the club break dyer down into little bits.

hm.. you don't usually see left footed defenders on the right side I think the journo has got it wrong.

Dyer? Troisi set up Owen... Trosi had a hand in two of the goals didn't he? Anyway, glad this cunt is off. Everything that's been wrong with the club over the last few years seems to be getting flushed down the toilet. Dyer, Carr & Babayaro, with Terry Mac & Anal are the only real issues i have left at the club, once they've gone it truly will be a new era.

Can't even get his arse licking right these days.

?? You got "greedy money grabbing c**t" from "family issues"? I love it when people are rational and don't jump to conclusions! Na, my point was if he wants to go for "family issues", then why has he not handed in a transfer request? That is, if it's not just about the money for him and his agent. Am with you on that. Expects us to let him go at his request but to pay him to do so. Utter cunt of the highest order.

You know this as fact (ITK) or just a your opinion? I personally hope we do. Were sorted in CB for the next 10 years.

I'm sure we thought Bramble would hold his price and eventually grow when we bought him. He's not the experienced defender I was hoping for. Did we? We thought he could possibly be a star but suffered humiliation a fair few times in his Ipswich career to suggest there were problems there. Also SBR was about the only man in the Country rating him at £5m. Wenger is a keen admirer of Davies, and he isn't even French, says it all. Well if we pay £8 million for him then it's fair to say Allardyce is the only one rating him at that price, he's not a bad player but he's not worth anywhere near the price being mentioned and he'll have to do something spectacular for that value to rise, I watched him play next to Taylor in an England u21 game last season and he was all over the place, Taylor had to bail him out more than once. As for Wenger rating him, he rated Jenas as well but wouldn't go near him for the fee mentioned. What's £2m in the current climate though? £6m he's worth it, £8m he's not? Will that matter in a couple of seasons? It cost us twice that amount to sack our last two managers, 3 times to get rid of Souness, GR, FS & SBR. £9.5m on Luque, £17m on Owen, £8m on Boumsong and were bothered about £2m more than what Davies is probably worth. I can't see the logic in it myself, there is a talent there, one U21 game where he was all over the place doesn't make a player, or is that it for Davies now, utter shite and he should retire before embarrassing himself any further?

£5m for Chropa, or £17m for Bent is ridiculous, i think £8m is over-priced, but not by much for a highly rated young English footballer after the hike in TV money.

I'm sure we thought Bramble would hold his price and eventually grow when we bought him. He's not the experienced defender I was hoping for. Did we? We thought he could possibly be a star but suffered humiliation a fair few times in his Ipswich career to suggest there were problems there. Also SBR was about the only man in the Country rating him at £5m. Wenger is a keen admirer of Davies, and he isn't even French, says it all.

Honestly, i've just been reading the Wigan forums and the utter cheek of the mackem cunts on there calling Wigan a small club, shite fans, destined to go back down and that they were taking their best player because they can and they can offer a top player everything he wants! mackems.gif Fuking scumbag written through them like a stick of rock. Simply superb another player turns them cunts down.

Most clubs need 22 players to see them through a season, we need 44 just to make it till xmas.

Dein turned us down? Did he tell you that? Dein did turn us down.. Am i the ONLY person he didn't tell?? Nope, he failed to mention it to me over morning coffee. you're so not-in-the-loop. Slanderous comment!

Then you don't know as much about the planning process as you think you do. They can't. If a plan confirms to local and national policy contained in Planning Policy Guidelines and Planning Policy Statements as well as Liverpool's Local Development Framework and any adopted local plans then the planners can't just decline the application because it is ugly. Well they could but the developer would win on appeal. Even when its on listed ground surrounded by listed buildings? The architect seemed to think that could be a problem, am no expert, but he is. Then it would be subject to PPG15 and other government guidelines and policy. So what does that mean for them, could the ground be changed to fit the surroundings better? It would make things very complicated, without looking into it I do not know what exactly is listed in the area of the proposed stadium but there will be guidelines and policy that must be adhered to in order to have a chance of getting planning permission. You would think any developer would look into this before submitting any plans. If the proposal would have a serious impact on certain listed buildings then I would be surprised that they have even submitted plans, it would be like us submitted plans for a massive East Stand knowing that planning permission is very unlikely due to the listed buildings behind. Should get interesting in the next few weeks. Like i said before i'm happy for them to be getting a new stadium and to be doing something different, i'm not being bitter about this just a lot more vocal than usual as there's fuk all else to talk about right now. Good luck to Liverpool, lets just hope our own expansion past 60k goes ahead within the same timescale and it really wont effect us in the long term.

Have you not read his final swansong for his dear friend? Kissing goodbye to his job. mackems.gif

Lets see them then. About fuking time something positive is coming out of the new setup. Id the review complete now then? Only released since SA forced his hand in that interview yesterday, lets hope he's right a new beginning, and new players for the start of the season. Also very glad to hear the stadium expansion is still in their plans, even if its been put on the back burner, in fact, thats exactly the right thing to do right now.

Keeps people in jobs though. Doesn't bother me, a legal dispute& a want away player that doesn't involve me club, magic.

Maybe it will pass through without a problem then! I wonder what the memorial area's like? For the chicken?

http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/chroniclesport/tm_headline=bosses-got-my-backing%26method=full%26objectid=19516843%26siteid=50081-name_page.html Bosses got my backing Jul 25 2007 by Alan Oliver, Evening Chronicle FREDDY SHEPHERD is proud that he never failed to back his managers in the transfer market. But he confessed today: “I always backed my managers, but perhaps I backed them too much.” United spent around £250m on players after the Hall-Shepherd regime took over the club in 1992. It was Shepherd and Douglas Hall who brought Alan Shearer to the club in the summer of 1996 in a transfer which reverberated around the whole of football. And Shepherd was cheered to the rafters when he presented Michael Owen to the 20,000 supporters who had turned up to see United’s new £17m man. That was in August 2005, but last season some of those supporters turned against Shepherd after the UEFA Cup defeat in Holland when, to be fair, the aftermath was that some United players seemed to throw in the towel for the rest of the campaign. Shepherd did not only throw cash at his managers, but I always felt that he was far too generous with some of the contracts he handed out to some players who could only be described as mediocre. But perhaps this was because it was difficult to persuade some players to come so far north. One player who jumped at the chance was Marcelino in a £5m switch from Real Mallorca. Shepherd joked after Marcelino flopped: “Mallorca have named their new stadium after me.” But he knew the fans weren’t laughing, and when I asked why United had paid out £5m for such a poor and injury-prone player, he replied: “Because that’s what the manager wanted me to do.” Then there was the case of Jean Alain Boumsong, United’s £8.5m buy from Rangers who, ironically, will be back at St James’ Park with Juventus on Sunday. United needed a central defender and Shepherd’s preference was for Bobo Balde at Celtic, but once again he was advised by his manager. But afterwards I heard that Graeme Souness had told Shepherd that United were getting one of the best central defenders in Europe and the money was paid into the Ibrox coffers. --------------------------------------- honestly what a jiz fest by leatherface as his pal departs and probably takes his job along with him.

Maybe it will pass through without a problem then!

Then you don't know as much about the planning process as you think you do. They can't. If a plan confirms to local and national policy contained in Planning Policy Guidelines and Planning Policy Statements as well as Liverpool's Local Development Framework and any adopted local plans then the planners can't just decline the application because it is ugly. Well they could but the developer would win on appeal. Even when its on listed ground surrounded by listed buildings? The architect seemed to think that could be a problem, am no expert, but he is. Then it would be subject to PPG15 and other government guidelines and policy. So what does that mean for them, could the ground be changed to fit the surroundings better?

More like John Major.

Then you don't know as much about the planning process as you think you do. They can't. If a plan confirms to local and national policy contained in Planning Policy Guidelines and Planning Policy Statements as well as Liverpool's Local Development Framework and any adopted local plans then the planners can't just decline the application because it is ugly. Well they could but the developer would win on appeal. Even when its on listed ground surrounded by listed buildings? The architect seemed to think that could be a problem, am no expert, but he is.

I completely agree. What a mess! Apparently it was re-designed by American architects and like most U.S. sports stadiums, it's just functional and incredibly ugly. Personally i'd be suprised if it gets planning permission in it's current format, since it's in the middle of Stanley Park. I'd be interested to hear what the Liverpool supporters think of it, especially since the original designs were completely different to this. What exactly makes you think it will not get planning permission in it's current format? Buildings which that kind of impact very rarely do. No building goes from the design stage to actually built without undergoing changes enforced by authorities, complications, time or money. But with a building placed in such a controversial location its even harder. Nevermind what the local council have to say on the matter, you've also got the residents surrounding the grade 2 victorian park living in their listed victorian buildings who if enough object will delay it for years. I know all about the planning process, thank you. I just wanted why exactly he thought it would not get planning permission. They had already received planning permission for a 60,000 capacity stadium in the same location and if Liverpool FC were to move away from the area, which they will do if they don't receive planning permission, it would be a absolute disaster for the local area and local economy. There may well be a few tweaks to the plans before permission is granted, but I'm pretty sure the stadium will get planning permission. Planners can't decline an application because the proposal is ugly. It could then go to a public enquiry though. Good for you.