Jump to content

Hugo Ekitike (not playing for Liverpool for a while)


Recommended Posts

Just now, TRon said:

 

 

Because he was responsible for bringing in Mitchell who was unable to do any deals for a year, then left at the beginning of a window where he should have had everything set up to earn his money. It's been a year of twiddling our thumbs effectively and left us with a shoestring team to conclude business at the most important time of the year. 

What about the guys on the top? The man has been ill for a year. I dont think you can blame Eales for Mitchells exit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Prophet said:

Shows what we're competing with.

Thats a joke account mate. Not to be believed at all. Also no way he earns that much at liverpool.  More like 120k. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nufc123 said:

What about the guys on the top? The man has been ill for a year. I dont think you can blame Eales for Mitchells exit.

 

 

Well that was my original point, once he was deemed unfit to do the job someone else should have taken charge. But clearly he's been considered in good enough health to carry on so he has. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kanj said:

We allegedly agreed terms with him but Liverpool came in with a better offer and paid the fee the selling club wanted. 


Not sure if technically true but FWIW…

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we'd been smart we'd have flogged them Gordon then moved for Ekitike before they'd managed to free up more funds through the expected sales of Diaz and Nunez. Then with a gleam in our eyes and our double-pronged attack we could have turned to them and issued a hearty 'checkmate'. Yes we could have strung them along any old how, but whatever we've actually done has amounted to diddly squat.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, duo said:

What they should say is total package is £20 mil more than Newcastle offered 

 

Add ons plus wages but I'm glad they didn't let facts get in the way of a headline.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LFEE said:


Not sure if technically true but FWIW…

 

Reading the article it seems intellectually dishonest, and seeing Ben Jacobs as a byline doesn't surprise me. 

 

In short, we offered £1m more up front, but they offered more on the back end. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Ekitike you and I knowwwww

That you are nothing but a greedy fkn arsehole 

You are such a prick and we'll give you so much stick

So just piss off Ekitikeeeee"

An ABBA classic. If you know, you know. 😆

Yep, started early.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Christ almighty, that's crazy. Except for maybe Spurs, the breakaway clubs are operating in a different universe to the rest of us.

 

Top 4 could be a closed shop of Pool, City, Arse and Chelsea. Just got to hope Man U, Spurs and Villa have a poor summer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, relámpago blanco said:

79M seems a lot for a player sold for 16.5M last summer.  Sort of hope he fails but he wont as we were in for him and we dont seem to make mistakes with signings.

A lot of the work to make them that is after they get here. It's why we have a great hit rate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...