Jump to content
IGNORED

RYAN KENT?


Dolman Block B

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Olé said:

I've been away for 24 hours. Has anyone  commented on the fact Harry Wilson was still in the Liverpool youth team when we were explaining how we'd "won" Ryan Kent.

I bet Mark Ashton is a riot at funfairs. Probably runs round with a goldfish in an Iceland carrier bag full of water claiming it's the star prize. 

He was very good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, swanker said:

Right back?

Goal keeper, ball boy and static corner flags.. All creative suggestions.

14 minutes ago, Olé said:

I've been away for 24 hours. Has anyone  commented on the fact Harry Wilson was still in the Liverpool youth team when we were explaining how we'd "won" Ryan Kent.

I bet Mark Ashton is a riot at funfairs. Probably runs round with a goldfish in an Iceland carrier bag full of water claiming it's the star prize. 

Is this the same Ryan Kent that earned a loan deal with Bundesliga side Freiburg. However, that was cut short in January after the winger started only one game and featured for just 241 minutes.

but then Goldfish Man came along... Nice one!!

i am going back to my friend who supports Liverpool, the one who said we signed a dud and it was well known, and see what more I can find out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dolman Block B said:

But 300k ?

The Club always give it the big unne that they won’t do deals to suit  

If true this is one almighty cock up snd embarrasing 

Up there with the Engvall balls up ? Next thing to be rumoured will be the deal with Diony, who was it Dijon? , whereby City cannot send him back and not buy him unless the club pay a pre agreed break fee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, havanatopia said:

Up there with the Engvall balls up ? Next thing to be rumoured will be the deal with Diony, who was it Dijon? , whereby City cannot send him back and not buy him unless the club pay a pre agreed break fee.

Very good, Daily Mail quality:laughcont:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was all over otib when we signed him, that there were clauses in the contract stating there would be fines if he missed so many games and/or a percentage of games not played.

I'm amazed that some people are surprised about this :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Taz said:

It was all over otib when we signed him, that there were clauses in the contract stating there would be fines if he missed so many games and/or a percentage of games not played.

I'm amazed that some people are surprised about this :blink:

'All over OTIB'. So where did OTIB get the info?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Olé said:

Obviously typed that article on an iPhone. No way someone actually wrote "he was a hit at first". They must not have added shit to their predictive text vocabulary.

In fairness, the “a” key is next to the “s” so an easy typo I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

'All over OTIB'. So where did OTIB get the info?

Well for a start it was probably somewhere in this thread when we signed him Kent Interest/Confirmed Signing. It may also have been mentioned in an interview somewhere. 

Not sure if numbers have ever been mentioned, but my original point was that it was pretty common knowledge at the time of him signing, that there would be clauses if he didn't play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Taz said:

Well for a start it was probably somewhere in this thread when we signed him Kent Interest/Confirmed Signing. It may also have been mentioned in an interview somewhere. 

Not sure if numbers have ever been mentioned, but my original point was that it was pretty common knowledge at the time of him signing, that there would be clauses if he didn't play.

I agree that liverpool have imposed clauses on players signing on loan. I don't know where anyone has got 300k from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, petehinton said:

“We don’t have the finances” to go and spend money on big players.....but have the finances to spend £5-10k a week on 3/4 players that are absolute shit and can’t get in the squad?

 

I can’t like this post enough.

But we are only a small club in this league / we don’t have the budget / we can’t attract those sort of players.

All BS - the club choose to pay out on loans for 3 players, one for a full season, who have contributed next to zero.

We could easily afforded to take on  a £40k a week striker for 5 months.

But that doesn’t fit the #toocosy crew narrative.

 

Dreadful decisions made not for the first time under this regime.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I don't know about numbers, however it's clearly a Liverpool policy when they loan young players.

Maybe it's similar with big clubs these days- did Tammy's loan have any clauses along these lines?

Common Liverpool thing who are known to be very strict, so many clubs don’t go to Liverpool for loans. And yes there were stipulations in Tammy’s contract, ‘at least X amount of minutes to be played when fit and available’. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...