Winter Transfer Deadline Day Rumours

I'm not as disappointed this time around as I was back in last season's summer window. We never needed Konoplyanka and the 16m would've just been a waste of money which we could've rather invested in a midfielder. We needed a midfielder and in that respect, this window definitely has been a failure. But on the other hand, I'm also glad we didn't sign him. That money will be put to better use in when far better and effective options will be available.

Like I said in the other thread, get CL and this window won't even matter, in fact not having spent anything would be massively helpful in the summer window when we have CL to pull higher caliber players.

Griezmann > Konoplyanka

Mr Nick09 wrote:I would say tho that it's liverpool's fault for waiting deadline to make this deal happen. Speaks of lack of planning tbh

You can keep saying this, but it won't make it true.

I haven't said anything positive about the club in this though, Sepi.  In fact, in multiple instances I've questioned our policy in targeting a wide attacker when we clearly had more pressing concerns in the fullback and central midfield areas.  The ONLY thing I've done here is point out that Ayre and FSG are NOT at fault in the failure to sign Konoplyanka. It is entirely down to the owner of Dnipro. Just as with Nick, you can keep saying what you want, but that doesn't make it reality...

RedOranje wrote:

Mr Nick09 wrote:I would say tho that it's liverpool's fault for waiting deadline to make this deal happen. Speaks of lack of planning tbh

You can keep saying this, but it won't make it true.

He's not wrong.

I fail to believe that we triggered a buy out clause if the owner said no, this transfer isn't going to happen. You can't do that if we bought out his contract.

Also, why are we interested in a winger in the first place if the biggest problem in the team right now is midfield?

Clearly a lack of planning / this committee not being on the same page as each other.

RedOranje wrote:I haven't said anything positive about the club in this though, Sepi.  In fact, in multiple instances I've questioned our policy in targeting a wide attacker when we clearly had more pressing concerns in the fullback and central midfield areas.  The ONLY thing I've done here is point out that Ayre and FSG are NOT at fault in the failure to sign Konoplyanka.  It is entirely down to the owner of Dnipro.  Just as with Nick, you can keep saying what you want, but that doesn't make it reality...

It might be down to the owner but that's the difference between a good and bad negotiator, it's their job to change his mind...

1) It's a matter of legality and there's always a bit of leeway in such deals. The Echo, Sky, the Guardian and other sources are ALL reporting that we triggered a clause in his contract. Whether that was a full-bore buy-out clause or simply one that allowed us to talk directly to the player we don't know, but there was a clause (referred to by reliable sources, multiple ones, as a "buy-out" clause".

2) See previous (and multiple other) post(s).


It's about criticising/questioning the proper persons. Ayre is neither part of the transfer committee nor the manager, so he cannot (or at least should not) be blamed for WHO we targeted this window. Perhaps he can take SOME blame in the lengthy and ultimately unsuccessful pursuit of Salah but he should take absolutely NO blame for Konoplyanka, as that one ended up coming down to a factor completely out of the club's (and his) hands... one that would reasonably have been completely unexpected.

@red alert

Because you are not Rodgers. Maybe he knows why needs the attacker. He literally has not options to change matches from an attacking stand point off the bench when we are struggling (Aston Villa draw remember). And also having converted Gerrard to DM (which worked to perfection against Everton btw) now he has 3 players that can play that position in Lucas, Allen and Stevie. He's also found a formation that uses two box to box CMs and he saw that Coutinho can actually affect the game much better from there than from out wide. So now he's got Gerrard, Allen, Hendo, Coutinho, and Alberto who can all play those two positions. We're really not short in bodies in the middle, it just looked like it because of all the injuries. Same goes for the fullback positions. We've got plenty of guys that play those fullback positions in the squad but unfortunate injuries have made us look thin. However they are all coming back within the next month so maybe targeting an attacker wasn't the stupidest idea. Obviously he would know best.

lszanto wrote:

RedOranje wrote:I haven't said anything positive about the club in this though, Sepi.  In fact, in multiple instances I've questioned our policy in targeting a wide attacker when we clearly had more pressing concerns in the fullback and central midfield areas.  The ONLY thing I've done here is point out that Ayre and FSG are NOT at fault in the failure to sign Konoplyanka.  It is entirely down to the owner of Dnipro.  Just as with Nick, you can keep saying what you want, but that doesn't make it reality...

It might be down to the owner but that's the difference between a good and bad negotiator, it's their job to change his mind...

Not in the slightest. Deals aren't negotiated between a club and another's owner, they're negotiated between one club's representatives and another's... or else it would be John Henry at fault, not Ayre. Even then, there's no accounting for a capricious, pernicious, and stubborn owner. The deal was, by reliable accounts, all but done with a fee agreed between clubs before Dnipro's owner stepped in and literally acted like a spoilt child in refusing to sign the required documents for the transfer. Even Konoplyanka's agent has tweeted his shock and disappointment at the turn of events involved.

Ayre IS apart of the transfer committee. No he doesn't scout, nor does he look for players but his job IS to negotiate and get the player in.

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/10004873/Liverpool-transfers-to-be-decided-by-committee-not-Brendan-Rodgers-claims-Ian-Ayre.html

He's not to blame for Kono, that's clearly on Dnipro's owner but I can see why he's being targeted. He had TWO AND A HALF MONTHS to get the Salah deal done and failed to bring him in. Chelsea wrapped up the deal in a couple of days ffs. And he only went for 11m. So people are clearly still bitter about that.

I still can't accept it was a buy out clause. We may have a bid accepted, and had the right to talk to the player / pass his medical, I can believe that. But you can't just say "no" when a buy out clause is triggered. These reliable sources may have been given the wrong details, you simply can't cancel a deal when a buy out clause is bought.

@ McAgger:

I don't agree with a single thing with what you just said apart from we didn't need to sign a full back.

And I've stated many times that we didn't need to sign a full back, an emergency loan would of been great, we could of brought back Wisdom from loan, but we can battle on with our full back dilemna.

Chelsea bought Salah AFTER we had apparently agreed a fee, so they had the benefit of knowing exactly what price they had to match or beat as opposed to trying to negotiate one. That said, two months should ultimately have been far more time than was necessary, even if the club was in a position to play hardball (as Basle were) so, as I said already, I can see why Ayre has received criticism for that.

And Dnipro's owner didn't "just say no"... he played for time and won. As has been addressed already (getting tired of repeating myself and repeating myself about repeating myself) there is definitely a question of legality to it... but he got away with it no matter how immoral or illegal it should be.

On Salah:

Winter Transfer Deadline Day Rumours
RedOranje wrote:
El Chelsea Fuerte wrote:
Red, the Salah deal is most probably 11-12m pounds + bonuses which could bring it to 16m pounds. Hopefully those bonuses are based on appearances or in another related way based on the player's performance.
No, the LFC offer was 11m plus bonuses taking it to 15m.  Chelsea's offer (which beat ours) was 15 to 16m straight up.

We never put a bid in according to the BBC.

Ben Smith ‏@BenSmithBBC 23 Jan
#LFC wanted to sign Salah in Jan but never made an official bid and failed to agree a fee with Basel. Good signing for #CFC

On Kono:

Again, how do you know we actually triggered a buy out clause? WE MAY have agreed a fee, but that doesn't necessary mean Dnipro's owner HAS to say yes. Maybe he agreed a fee for Kono, looked for a replacement, and couldn't find one, so said no sorry can't do it at the end.

James Pearce (Liverpool Echo)
Ben Smith (BBC)
Chris Bascombe (Telegraph)
Rory Smith (Times)

All reported that we triggered a buy-out clause and that the deal only failed because the owner of Dnipro did not sign the required paperwork in time. Given the sheer number of reliable sources reporting it I'm inclined to believe that that's what happened. If it makes you feel better to ignore all that and blame one or two others that would otherwise be blameless then go right ahead... I'm not longer reading the Liverpool section so complain there all you want and I won't bother to stop you with pesky facts, reports, or reason.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

And just to be clear, if there actually WAS a buy out clause, and we triggered it, the owner doesn't have to sign no paperwork considering the contract is BOUGHT OUT and he's no longer a Dnipro player.

Also, I'm not blaming anyone for us failing to get Kono in. We had no chance of making a deal on deadline day. I have not once blamed Ayre for Kono, I have not once blamed Dnipro's owner.

The only really people complaining here is you... solely blaming Dnipro's owner for us failing to capture the signing. When it's actually Liverpool's fault that they left it so late in the window to get it done.

Except none of what you said is true. Sepi and others have clearly placed blame at Ayre's feet. You began a debate after I pointed out that it wasn't his fault. Multiple reports state that we DID trigger some type of buy-out clause. And the issue of Liverpool "leaving it so late" has already been addressed and never refuted. As it's clear that you're neither going to actually acknowledge the points counter to your own opinion nor actually engage in full discussion I'll leave it at this though, since anything further is pointless.

Red Alert wrote: Whatever helps you sleep at night.

And just to be clear, if there actually WAS a buy out clause, and we triggered it, the owner doesn't have to sign no paperwork considering the contract is BOUGHT OUT and he's no longer a Dnipro player.

Also, I'm not blaming anyone for us failing to get Kono in. We had no chance of making a deal on deadline day. I have not once blamed Ayre for Kono, I have not once blamed Dnipro's owner.

The only really people complaining here is you... solely blaming Dnipro's owner for us failing to capture the signing. When it's actually Liverpool's fault that they left it so late in the window to get it done.

of course the other club MUST sign release papers, you can't go on marauding on other clubs players and signing them without them knowing about it and releasing those players. Even if you pay the buy back clause, then you still need to important signatures for the deal to go through.

That of the player and it depends on him, and that of the club who are forced to sign it. The catch here is even though the club don't have a choice in signing the release of a want away player whose clause was activated, they can procrastinate and such the deal wouldn't go through.

None what I said isn't true? Really?

You stated Ayre WASN'T a part of the transfer committee, I stated he was because he is.

You stated we AGREED a deal for Salah, your very own respectable source in the BBC said we never did. Salah's agent also came out and stated we took too long to negotiate with Salah and nothing was agreed either.

I stated Ayre shouldn't be blamed here, you've stated the same and attacked Dnipro's owner.  

I stated that there wasn't a buy out clause activated (and if it was, it wasn't to acquire his services) simply because if we DID trigger it, he'd be a Liverpool player right now. But because other people that have close-ties to Liverpool say otherwise, I must be wrong and I'm complaining and blah blah.

Yeah, sure. Let's end it. Might aswell close the thread, the windows passed.

The Reds looked poised to seal a deal for the Ukrainian international who was all set to make a £15million switch to Anfield late on Friday night but his club’s owner pulled the plug on the deal by refusing to sign the paperwork.

Liverpool’s offer had triggered a buyout clause in Konoplyanka’s contract and the left winger who was eager to make a dream move to the Premier League had passed a medical and agreed personal terms only for Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk’s mega-rich owner Ihor Kolomoyskyi to dig his heels in over rubber stamping the deal.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/brendan-rodgers-faith-liverpool-fc-6658398

Still confused as to how that's legal for him to do.

Check my post in the previous page, Red.

I dont know why you guys are overstretching this joke

Do we have a summer window rumours thread already
check this
http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/457911/Dnipro-a-thousand-per-cent-sure-Yevhen-Konoplyanka-WILL-join-Liverpool-in-the-summer

Here you go:

http://www.goallegacy.net/t34692-2014-summer-transfer-rumours-mk-i