Liverpool FC Official Thread

Liverpool v Manchester City: This will now be played on Sunday, August 26 with a 4pm kick off. It will be televised live on Sky Sports.

Liverpool v Arsenal: This will now be played on Sunday, September 2 with a 1.30pm kick off. It will be televised live on Sky Sports.

Sunderland v Liverpool: This will still be played on Saturday, September 15, but will now kick off at 5.30pm and be televised live on ESPN.

Liverpool v Manchester United: This will now be played on Sunday, September 23 and kick off at 1.30pm. It will be televised live on Sky Sports.

Everton v Liverpool: This will still be played on Saturday, October 27, but will now kick off at 12.45pm and be televised live by Sky Sports.

Liverpool v Newcastle: This will now be played on Sunday, November 4 and kick off at 4pm. It will be televised live on Sky Sports.

Chelsea v Liverpool: This will now be played on Sunday, November 11 and kick off at 4pm. It will be televised live by Sky Sports.

Swansea City v Liverpool: This game will still be played on Saturday, November 24, but will now kick off at 12.45pm. It will be televised live by Sky Sports.

Tottenham v Liverpool: This game will now be played on Wednesday, November 28 and kick off at 8pm.

Arsenal v Liverpool: This game will now be played on Wednesday, January 30 and kick off at 7.45pm.

Please note the following additional fixture changes will occur ONLY if Liverpool qualify for the Europa League group stage:


Liverpool v Stoke City: Will move to Sunday, October 7.

Everton v Liverpool: Will move to Sunday, October 28 and kick off at 1.30pm.

Swansea City v Liverpool: Will move to Sunday, November 25 and kick off at 1.30pm.

West Ham v Liverpool: Will move to Sunday, December 9

Too many Sunday games.

Theo Filippo wrote:Too many Sunday games.

Thats what we get for not being good enough for the top 4.

Yeah I know, Europa league fucks me off like that.

Logic wrote:

Glen Damon wrote:If we are intent on keeping, say, Skrtel or Agger, surely this responsibility could convince them to stay loyal to the club?

Worked for fabregas.

Van Persie too, it seems.

Not having SG as captain makes no sense unless we were prepared to bench him, and we have no-one ready to push him out of the team.

Great, I will have to video all of the matches during church.

He looks scrawny.

What a babe.

Jordo wrote:

I haven't seen Lucas in so long that I looked at the picture and said to myself "Who the fuck's that?"

Pisses me off so much that he got injured. He was just starting to do shit like stepovers and zidane spins. He pulled them off too....

"Gylfi did fantastic for me at Swansea. He and I spoke, and I believed that playing football was going to be the most important aspect for him, but obviously, it was important financially."

Disappointing from Brendan.

He's talking like Sigurdsson went to United or Chelsea or something

Glen Damon wrote:"Gylfi did fantastic for me at Swansea. He and I spoke, and I believed that playing football was going to be the most important aspect for him, but obviously, it was important financially."

Disappointing from Brendan.

More disappointing from Sigurdsson. He obviously wanted a bit more dosh.

Jord wrote:

Glen Damon wrote:"Gylfi did fantastic for me at Swansea. He and I spoke, and I believed that playing football was going to be the most important aspect for him, but obviously, it was important financially."

Disappointing from Brendan.

More disappointing from Sigurdsson. He obviously wanted a bit more dosh.

He went to the better team who was offering more money? The fiend!

Jord wrote:

Glen Damon wrote:"Gylfi did fantastic for me at Swansea. He and I spoke, and I believed that playing football was going to be the most important aspect for him, but obviously, it was important financially."

Disappointing from Brendan.

More disappointing from Sigurdsson. He obviously wanted a bit more dosh.

And the potential to be in the Champions League within 2 years.

Call this bitterness, but I never saw the sense in buying someone who's been good for a fairly short period of time like him.

Bit like the purchase of Mereiles of Chelsea, while still a good player, I'm not sure what specific role he would fill in the team apart from just being a good player.

How much more do you think Spurs offered than Liverpool?

ricky//habana wrote:Call this bitterness, but I never saw the sense in buying someone who's been good for a fairly short period of time like him.

Bit like the purchase of Mereiles of Chelsea, while still a good player, I'm not sure what specific role he would fill in the team apart from just being a good player.

I think that's fair enough, it could have just been a purple patch.

Theo Filippo wrote:How much more do you think Spurs offered than Liverpool?

10,000 a week, maybe? Just a random guess.

Gatsby wrote:

Jord wrote:More disappointing from Sigurdsson. He obviously wanted a bit more dosh.

He went to the better team who was offering more money? The fiend!

Sarcasm Sean strikes again. I'm sure you have a crush on me

Can't remember where I read it, but I read Spurs offered him double the wages we did.

I think Rodgers said we offered him the same wages Rodgers was going to put him on at Swansea.

Going by that, I'd say we offered 30-40k p/w, and Spurs offered 60-80k p/w.

ricky//habana wrote:Call this bitterness, but I never saw the sense in buying someone who's been good for a fairly short period of time like him.

Bit like the purchase of Mereiles of Chelsea, while still a good player, I'm not sure what specific role he would fill in the team apart from just being a good player.

Sigurdsson is just 22 though.

CollieBuddz wrote:Can't remember where I read it, but I read Spurs offered him double the wages we did.

I think Rodgers said we offered him the same wages Rodgers was going to put him on at Swansea.

Going by that, I'd say we offered 30-40k p/w, and Spurs offered 60-80k p/w.

We are not going to sign anyone decent with that mindset.

Does Rodgers really think Sigurdsson is going to sacrifice 40k a WEEK just to play for him?

That is fine with me, I only want players who live and breathe for the crest and the Kop and Kenny and Brendan.

Theo Filippo wrote:Does Rodgers really think Sigurdsson is going to sacrifice 40k a WEEK just to play for him?

I think Rodgers is the best judge of Gylfi's talents. Maybe Rodgers seen Gylfi as a bargain but once the wages demands went up he realised there were possibly better options for 80k a week. I mean you act like its nothing but that would put him as one of our highest earners. Not to mention the 40k a week difference is nearly 6m over a 5 year contract.

I'm not making excuses for him, but I have personally came across this example on FM where I've went to buy an upcoming player but their wage demands went to the same as an established player.

CollieBuddz wrote:

Theo Filippo wrote:Does Rodgers really think Sigurdsson is going to sacrifice 40k a WEEK just to play for him?

I think Rodgers is the best judge of Gylfi's talents. Maybe Rodgers seen Gylfi as a bargain but once the wages demands went up he realised there were possibly better options for 80k a week. I mean you act like its nothing but that would put him as one of our highest earners. Not to mention the 40k a week difference is nearly 6m over a 5 year contract.

I'm not making excuses for him, but I have personally came across this example on FM where I've went to buy an upcoming player but their wage demands went to the same as an established player.

I'm not saying Liverpool should pay that, but you can't blame him for joining a club that has a slightly better team at the moment AND getting twice the wages (Not confirmed). It's quite ridiculous if he's on 80k a week that's what Van Persie is on for us at the moment.

Jordo wrote:<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9ELftAuSvR0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Fantastic player. Please don't become Pacheco V2