Saint-Fred

I am not sure that's true..there are loads of instances where a fee is agreed after the player has agreed terms. I am sure the club just need permission. Obviously agents talk all the time about what deal they can get a player but I think it's the player/manager contact in this case but especially the blatant briefing of the press. If you do it, keep it in house!

All right Jurgen..you have been rumbled, stop whinging, admit it and take your medicine like a man.....oh yeah, you don't do that do you? No? OK ...then blame the dry grass again...say it makes your mind go all "funny" PS Your English writing lessons aren't going well then?

It will be disappointing if it is Liverpool. I'd Much rather city, Chelsea, United or Spurs even.. It would be nice for those plastic scousers to not believe they can automatically take any of our players they want..all season it's been "we are having Bertrand" "we are having Virgil," "I like Gabi we will have him next summer".... I get we sell players but in this case..Liverpool can't be the only option surely? Perhaps if we string it out to late summer it may seem like we don't bend over backwards as soon as they call?

You make stats up..that doesn't count as science! Show me the shots on target against the top 6...in the league please, stop going on about cup games...

Of course agents do the deal first and of course you could both be right... did your contact say what happens if the club don't name a price? You are living in a one dimensional world if you think your scenario is the only one that happens.

Just had a look..despite the draw at City we only had THREE shots on target against them in the two games...against Liverpool in the league at home we didn't have a shot on target..against Chelsea at home we didn't have a shot on target..if you want to talk penalties..Spurs were a penalty miss away from scoring five against us....you were right, I was wrong actually we were a billion miles away from the top six when we played them...despite the few examples you have given.

They weren't even trying that day...we were a penalty miss away from losing at home to Bournemouth, that doesn't make them better than us? There was a massive gulf between us and the top six when we played them..I wonder if the 9 can produce the shots stats for those 12 games? We stopped Liverpool Lscoring 4 times but at no point did we dominate them..they missed chances and a penalty. TBF it was effective against them and Puel should get credit but playing like the isn't a long term strategy for getting into the top 6 no matter how the 9 dreams it is.

You live in a fantasy world.

We were a million miles from getting a win against any of the top six...in those 12 games we created very little..and you think we will be challenging them next season?

Our record against the top 6 last years was something like (from memory so might be wrong) P 12 W 0 D 4 L 8 F 6 A 22 pts 4 And you think Puel is going to close that gap so we actually compete against them?

If you compare we are in the same ball park for numbers wise as those around us. Teams like Burnley, Watford etc won't have spent anything like us. My point is I don't think the board can be accused of not spending money.

Absolutely mental.

I think you will find we have spent 10m + as many if not more times than most clubs around us including Everton. How many times have West Brom spent that much?

I think that is unfair..the club have spent more on players than ever...a few years ago I never dreamed I would be watching a team with multiple 10m+ players in the side, let alone with a few sat on the bench most games! The players have talent, it just needs to be unlocked by playing a system that suits them.

This does make me laugh...and someone said the Puel out camp were unrealistic in their view of where the club sits!

This assumes the club is looking to sell by putting a price on a players head. If a player is on a long contract there is no need to fix a price and the club can simply say "not for sale this season"

You need to call Man City and explain that to them! http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11679/10900569/man-city-fear-chelsea-and-liverpool-will-drive-price-up-for-virgil-van-dijk

I wonder if they put a value on the "suitable offer"...talk of £100m? I think any of our players (and most of the leagues players to be fair) could have had that agreement!

L Austin knew..that's why he took the ball off him to take that penalty himself...Austin for manager!

How come Man Utd and Liverpool NEVER sell to each other then if it is down to the player only?

They don't pay the wages that Man U, Man City and Chelsea pay.

I can imagine it now.."sell us VVD and we will let you win the cup semi final"... If Jose hadn't hated Shaw perhaps they would have let us win the final!

Isn't that just in the gossip section? They are saying the daily mirror are reporting that. Must be true if it's in the mirror!

Of course they do...we had the fourth most clean sheets..therefore Forster is the fourth best keeper in the league.

That's a good signing for them IMO.