Colos Short and Curlies

You can get to Goodison in 4 hours from Newcastle. Still time left!

He's like when you step in dog shit. You think you've got rid of it, but you just cant seem to shift that last bit of smell and residue

And they still will.....

Anyone got a link to the BBC 606 Transfer Gossip thingy. Had a quick look but must have missed it. Wanna start the Berbatov rumour over there and have some fun

All I can say is.... Unleash the Dragon!

Everyone seems to conveniently forget the run of games he had from Jan last season. Not many strikers would have had more consecutive games

Worse than Gary Glitter tbh

Here on loan I reckon

He made mistakes, he ultimately failed. But he held himself accountable for his failure and fell on his own sword. He deserves respect for his final act no matter what he deserves for his decisions whilst in charge

Month End, boss is off so double the work. Ah sod it, Online is staying open all day!

£3m for Smith eclipses the £12m for Milner imo

Martins, Viduka, Duff all injured. Look at ManU first weekend with Ronaldo, Tevez and Nani unavailable. a 17 year old played up front. Take Drogba, Anelka and Cole out of Chleseas team Van Persie, Adebayore and Nasri out of Arsenal Torres, Keane and Babbel out of Liverpool All better squads than ours, and proably better quality reserves to come in. But losing 3 key front men (and KK sees Duff as that) from any team would leave them toothless

Been out of Liverpool for a while now, but I'm sure when I was there the deal was that due to the expansion of the EU Liverpool would lose its status as one of the poorest cities in the EU and therefore its funding. Hence they won Cap of Culture

Did the same last year

Milner Replacement? Probably as quick

You certainly are. I'm guessing what he means is Milner is not worth 12m if we re-invest that 12m in another winger we can get a better standard of player thus moving the club on or another 2/3 of Milner's level of talent. point taken but in the space of 3 sentences keegan has said that he did'nt want to sell milner, but he had to to move the club forward so it wasnt his decision He didnt say he had to he said it would. Like I said before you can get a better player than James Milner for 12m. Edit: On a Similar note how many of you are from The Sun/Mirror trying to anger us with you posts of misquote. so if milner had of stayed the club could'nt move forward but now he's gone we can? I wouldn't have sold him unless I knew I could move the club forward kk is on ssn in the next hour straighten it all out roll on tuesday Scenario: Keegan didn't want to sell any of his wingers. Ashley therefore wouldn't saction another winger to be bought (4 good wingers who can play on either flank = more than adequate) Player x becomes available - Keegan wants him as he is better than most of what he has on the wings = Taking the club forward Ashley says - you have to sell a winger first, the money's yours to buy player x Milner is the player in demand and is sold. Player x is bought We have sold to take the club forward (Glass half emptiers would call this being a selling club, half fullers would call it team improvements). So here Keegan didn't want to sell Milner, but was willing to in order to get a better player in and take us forward

Ignore the Torres/Ronaldo bit as obviously Ronny didn't leave. The stadium bit though - there is no funds to push ahead with it

Hmmm maybe no funds have been available? Or maybe a better player has been made available but Ashley would only sanction another winger if one was sold?

We've got Jonas and Duff who can operate on both flanks. We've yet to see Zoggy on the right for any decent period, but his style of play would suggest that he could play on the right as well as the left. Therefore if we are going for a winger I'd like to see someone else who can play down both sides, gives the team flexibility and unpredictability - Man U and Chelsea are great for this, you never know which flank Ronaldo will play on with Nani, Giggs, Tevez all being able to fill in on t'other side. Turan would be my choice for based on players I have actually seen play and not just read about. More than anything though, we need someone with pace for the flanks. Having said that I would be just as happy if a creative CM was brought in and we made do with our current Trio and gave Lua Lua a chance to bed into the first team squad

He signed for some Greek side last week. Oh well, back to the drawing board

Gonna get slaughtered for this... I'm assuming that KK et al have someone in mind to replace Milner who they may not have moved for before the transfer went through (i.e. on top of their main targets). But assuming they can't get their man in before Monday (but they have secured their other targets) would anyone welcome Nobby back for his trilogy on a short term basis until Jan? He's without a club and despite wanting to move to London to be close to his kids I'm sure he would come back as a squad man for 3 months. Obviously I'm hoping for a younger signing who we can look to long term (as I'm sure the board are looking at), but if we need a stop gap until Jan we could do worse

Oh my god - "B I D S" . . . (or even more accurately - "reported bids"). How many times does THAT need to be pointed out? Fine then, lets look at facts. Coloccini for a reported 9m going up to 10.3m - also reported to have signed the 'contract of his life'. True, the Modric bid (I'll forget the Aimer & Inler ones because as Dave said, could be wrong) was made before any players were sold. In the end the deal didn't come off but it shows that the money is there for players of the right calibre. Gutierrez had an original asking price of 10m but we got around the via a loophole, but I imagine we still had to pay a few to get him in. There's a difference between 'selling to buy' and simply getting rid of players that are no good for us. How do you know (or 'imagine') that a Coloccini purchase would have been funded, if we had got (say) Modric? Also, I don't think Keegan would agree with any of you "Milner haters" on here ("no good for us" !!!!) I don't agree with you either. I also asked if you thought it would just be a 'mere coincidence' if Ashley actually spends some money RIGHT NOW? Well? Have you ever thought that we might not have budgeted to buy another RM, and therefore we need the money from his transfer before we can buy a replacement. er . . . is that not my point !!!!!!!!!! Eh? We had (in Keegans opinion) a strong pool of wingers and therefore wasn't looking to buy another one. Milner leaves so Keegan decides he does now need one. Ashley sanctions the move. This is not selling to buy. This is replacing a player who wanted to leave* *If you hand a transfer request in you want to leave, bollocks to the looking for a pay rise crap Buying when you have sold, when you probably (I said "probably") were not going to buy - irrespective of how the sale originated - is not the sign of a proactive club going forward. I am still STUPID enough to think we should be accumulating good players and moving forward - not taking one step forward and one step backward (in whatever order) . . . I don't think anyone would disagree with your second sentance there. But every club at some stage will have to buy a REPLACEMENT player due to one of their players wanting to leave the club. The point is that you can not say that if Ashley NOW gives Keegan cash to REPLACE James Milner (either a Right Winger or Attacking Midfielder depending on how Keegan sees Duff/Jonas/Zoggy/Geremi fitting in) then we are selling to buy. We are Buying because we have had to sell - slight difference. If however we are selling Milner and never had any plans to buy anyone else and Ashley sees this as a way to offset the Colo fee or to repay some of the deferred payments he has mentioned on past signings then I take your point about the direction the club is going in

That's the only thing that worries me. Though tbf he's been saying similar nice things about Smith and Ameobi that everyone was so keen to dismiss as fibs, so why not the same here? As always, it depends on who comes in. If we get someone like Arda (from what I've seen of him, anyway), KK won't give a flying f*** that Milner's gone. The only way I could see KK agreeing to such a move assuming he has a say which I think he will do is if the money was to be used to bring in someone much better. I still don't think he'd be happy though and to be honest, no manager likes losing players they want to keep even if they get a better player in as a replacement. I'm not blaming the club or anything here btw, if Milner wants to leave which may well be, there isn't much anyone can do. KK might not be happy but he's not stupid either. Someone would have had to pay Milner the extra money for a new contract, do you think KK would offer to give him a cut of his own wages? At the end of the day, whoever pays the bills is the one who makes the decisions and KK will understand that. He paid Terry Macs wages for his first part season

Oh my god - "B I D S" . . . (or even more accurately - "reported bids"). How many times does THAT need to be pointed out? Fine then, lets look at facts. Coloccini for a reported 9m going up to 10.3m - also reported to have signed the 'contract of his life'. True, the Modric bid (I'll forget the Aimer & Inler ones because as Dave said, could be wrong) was made before any players were sold. In the end the deal didn't come off but it shows that the money is there for players of the right calibre. Gutierrez had an original asking price of 10m but we got around the via a loophole, but I imagine we still had to pay a few to get him in. There's a difference between 'selling to buy' and simply getting rid of players that are no good for us. How do you know (or 'imagine') that a Coloccini purchase would have been funded, if we had got (say) Modric? Also, I don't think Keegan would agree with any of you "Milner haters" on here ("no good for us" !!!!) I don't agree with you either. I also asked if you thought it would just be a 'mere coincidence' if Ashley actually spends some money RIGHT NOW? Well? Have you ever thought that we might not have budgeted to buy another RM, and therefore we need the money from his transfer before we can buy a replacement. er . . . is that not my point !!!!!!!!!! Eh? We had (in Keegans opinion) a strong pool of wingers and therefore wasn't looking to buy another one. Milner leaves so Keegan decides he does now need one. Ashley sanctions the move. This is not selling to buy. This is replacing a player who wanted to leave* *If you hand a transfer request in you want to leave, bollocks to the looking for a pay rise crap

So - we may now have £12M to spend from the sale of Milner. The Oxford English Dictionary definition of a "Selling Club" - (Can only buy when they sell . . so NO PROGRESS ever to be made) Waddle / Beardsley / Gasgoigne - the good old days are BACK! (Don't have a go at me!) a selling club sells their best players milner woudn't even be me starting eleven with every1 fit The "need to sell first, to buy" is the main point being made here (not WHO the player we sell is). Like when we sold Andy Cole in order to get Les in? Or then we had to sell Les to part pay for Shearer?