Dr. Gonzo

Shola plays for Botts County with player-manager Kevin Nolan and Newcastle legend Alan Smith. And they play in black and white and call themselves the magpies... The legacy lives! How did you lot like Gini Wijnaldum? I think he plays a bit deeper for us than he did for you... but I'm pretty impressed with his first season. He's very well rounded, works hard, has barely ever had a bad game, and he's had a few important goals for us. Imo he's a pretty underated player & he does all of the things Joe Allen did playing well, but is more physical and imo a better player overall. But didn't he lose his place under Rafa? Agent Rafa has now given us Sturridge and Gini at pretty decent prices I'd say.

It's looking like a real shame for us on the pitch we didn't follow the rules re: VvD. Klopp and him had talks including video on how we would set up defensively and the predicted impact he'd have on the team - very specific planning for why the move was good for the club and the player. It reminds me of Rafa Benitez's recruitment of Mascherano - very specific tactical roles were explained to him to show how the player would be a major part of the midfield and essentially how he would be key to not only his area of the pitch but the whole side. That convinced Mascherano to join... and it looks like we very nearly could have had VvD with similar recruitment, but for arrogance and stupidity. What a shame, cuz if VvD had anywhere near of an impact as Masch did he would be a fucking amazing signing.

Hard to really justify for LFC... generally when we miss our top targets we buy overpriced shite to fill the gap - which often ends up being overpriced shite. I have lots of faith in Klopp. But I don't have a whole lot of faith in our recruitment team, especially when it's headed up by a novice. I worry that beyond our top targets, we've got a shortlist of dross.

Our media leaks rarely ever work out to our advantage. Instead we learn we were interested in someone very good... and then we piss off the selling club and they move to a rival. Don't see how that's any benefit to the club or the fans, tbh... though it's probably good for shite sports journos getting clicks to their stories.

I'm not so sure. Our club's cozy relationship with so many sports journos seems to be a major part of what got us into this mess.

Our Technical Director Michael Edwards looks like he might be catching some heat from our Board. With Ayre gone, Edwards got an internal promotion from being a recruitment analyst (he was instrumental in picking Sturridge, Coutinho, and Firmino) to take over the role of negotiating main transfers. John Henry had to personally be involved with the apology to Southampton - and Edwards is essentially now having his position reviewed because the transfer window hasn't even really opened and we've already cost ourselves our top target for the summer.

I'm reading Zulu by Carly Ferey.

I think Lallana's better tbh. Firmino scores more though. In all honesty I doubt we'll bench either of them for too many games. I imagine we do a 433 some games and maybe go back to the 442 diamond like we did at the end of the season against smaller teams that sit back.

He's played deeper in the midfield before, but we'd need Can or another defensive midfielder next to him for sure.

That would be fucking fantastic!

I want to go to Japan, but I probably can't until next year. So probably no big holiday anytime soon for me.

Apparently a lot of clubs have agreed terms and are ready to trigger his (incredibly fucking small) release clause - but yeah, he's waiting for Atleti. Must be nice to be in his shoes right now. His release clause is only £5m! I'm not surprised so many clubs are in for him.

Sturridge has said he's happy at the club, has 2 years left on his contract, and wants to play in the CL with us. He's on huge wages and we can't really rely on his health... but maybe now that we're in the CL, it's a luxury we can afford for a bit. If we sign a new quality striker, we can perhaps give Sturridge time to prove his long term fitness and play his way back into form by subbing him on early in the 2nd half. Beyond Sturridge there's Origi, who I like but his development has been slowed down to an injury caused by a shite blueshite player, and he's not really progressed like he did at the end of last season. Then there's Ings... someone who's basically been injured for two years. We clearly need more depth in the position and if we want to be competitive, having Sturridge around might not be the worst thing. Expensive though, certainly. Apparently we've got a shortlist of players with the following names on it Virgil van Dijk -- probably the most sought after defender in our league, if not the most sought after player. I don't doubt we're in for him, but there's also Citeh and Chelsea in for him and he apparently wants to work with Pep. I don't think we can compete with either of their money... but worth making an attempt at. Naby Keita - DM at RB Leipzig. Apparently Bayern are interested in them too. I don't watch the Bundesliga and I don't know a whole lot about RB Leipzig except that they seem to be universally hated. Probably has something to do with 1.) being owned by a shite drinks company, 2.) being associated with the total gobshite owner of Red Bull. It looks like Lucas might have just had his last match for us - and I think it's been pretty universally claimed by our support that we've got the need for a DM. Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain - I'm all for this. He's versatile, energetic, and imo underrated. Rumours are that he's been wanting a move to us for months - but who knows if that's true, sports journalism seems to be at least 90% bullshit... Sandro Ramirez - Apparently he's available at a total fucking bargain price. La Masia graduate with a good return of goals at Malaga at a decent price - sounds good to me. Jonas Hector - A good LB who plays at Koln and is apparently our first choice to usurp Mildini's (see what I did there ) role as our left back. Ben Chilwell - Seems like the cheaper option for LB, but I personally don't think he'd be one to kick Milner out of a starting role. Honestly, seems pretty fucking underwhelming to me... Mattia De Sciglio - Milan's LB & a good player. My apprehension here is thinking about how 1.) Italians rarely seem to work out in England, except for special circumstances with really great players (although I wish that wasn't the case as a fan of Serie A football) & 2.) Liverpool haven't ever had a good Italian player. Having said that... correlation isn't causation and none of that actually means anything. He's got one year left on his contract, so the thinking here is we can potentially get him at a decent price if Milan's new Chinese owners don't tie him down to the club with a contract. Douglas Costa - the Bayern Munich winger who's apparently been unhappy that Ribery & Robben are still preferred choices and wants more first team opportunities. I'm all for this. Pierre-Patrick Aubameyang - Dortmund's star striker. I think we don't have a hope in hell for this one haha, I don't even know why it's being reported. Highly speculative, would be incredibly expensive, and I'm sure Dortmund would politely tell us to fuck off Isco - This won't happen because he's said he's staying at Madrid. I'm assuming those aren't the only players we're looking at, because a few are totally unrealistic & it also doesn't leave a whole lot of options for us at CB or DM if we fail to get our first targets.

Stan Kroenke is saying he won't sell his shares in Arsenal. Shame for Arsenal, because the man is an utter cunt.

Is it true that Sakho has been nominated for your player of the season vote? I feel like he hasn't played that many games... has he really been that good?

Even if they don't make the grade, a few "alright" performances here and there and you can probably shift the ones who aren't good enough to championship (or sometimes a shite prem side) and that's not necessarily a load of money but can be a nice healthy profit. You churn out enough "ok" youth players and your club start getting a little bit more self-sustaining even when they don't make the grade. Obviously you're going to want more players who are good enough to make the grade and become permanent fixtures in the side... everyone does. But the reality is Everton are looking to turn a corner, and it with how competitive the league is at the top, it will be hard for any young player to step through and make the grade at the level that the fans and manager will want to see from them to make the next step up. Obviously there's no guarantee not giving youth a chance will be any better, and there's that mantra that "if you're good enough, you're old enough." Regardless, having a promising group of kids is obviously only a good thing. Everton will most likely make some money flogging some off if they can get a few good first team performances out of them, and maybe a few squad players or better emerge out of the ones who take their chances.

It's because of the way they set up in big games. Mourinho is too conservative, and I don't blame him... he's had a good track record with his style. But when all the other big teams are playing football that's good to watch, it's less easy to justify. Honestly I think his side is too imperfect compared to his Chelsea and Inter to be able to defend like that and stay fucking deadly on the counter. He's also got players at his disposal that are better suited for less rigid approaches. And when they're playing us and not testing our wonky defense, sure we might not be able to score... but they're also not exploiting our weaknesses. I hope to fuck his collapse at Chelsea and the rise of sides playing entertaining football is an indication that Pullis' and Porto Pulis' style have been sussed out.

So from Macron on Brexit: "Britain must understand that our interest in the medium to long term is to have clear rules. So if Britain wants to trade with Europe it has to choose a model, such as the Swiss, Norwegian or Canadian [I'm assuming grammar wasn't translated]. We have to accept that there are losses. But it's the British who will lose the most. You cannot enjoy the rights in Europe if you are not a member - otherwise it will fall apart. Europe is what has enabled us since 1945, in an unprecedented way, to preserve peace, security, freedom and prosperity in our continent. The British are making a serious mistake over the long term. Boris Johnson enjoys giving flamboyant speeches but has no strategic vision; the turmoil he created the day after Brexit proves it. Nigel Farage and Mr. Johnson are responsible for this crime: they sailed the ship into battle and jumped overboard at the moment of crisis. Theresa May has handled it but what has been happening since then? On the geopolitical level as well as on the financial, realignment and submission to the US. What is going to happen is not "taking back control": it's servitude." So aside from his pretty scathing comments on Farage and Johnson (all accurate btw) - he's also mentioned 3 models where British trade with the EU may fit in in the future. Which of the 3 models do you lot prefer? Norway's model (EEA): fairly free access to single market for businesses, but exceptions for farming, fishing (separate zones) and food imports (lets say, allowing import duties on French cheese to favour Norway's farmers). Free movement of people (unlike the UK, Norway is in the Schengen border area), EU citizens have the same access to health care as locals, etc. No requirements to join the Euro. New EU regulations are added to Norweigian law pretty much automatically - and unlike EU members there is no way to influence the regulation for Norway (as Norwy has no EU representation). There is flexibility in Norway's parliament can at any point not to accept a regulation... but they must then leave the EEA. Switzerland's Model: Similar to Norway's, but each area negotiated individually. Freedom of movement has tended to be as if the Swiss were an EEA country. In some areas is closer integration than Norway (food imports) and others less. New EU regulations have to be negotiated again. This has led to the Swiss having lots of referendums, which may require that earlier deals are broken and may need to be renegotiated. Canada model: This is completely different to the other two. It's a very comprehensive trade deal where we remove tariffs (mostly), agree on some mutual standards and a mutual recognition on the certification of standards (if you can sell paint in the EU because it doesn't have lead in the paint, you can sell it in Canada without having to get the equivalent certification to the EU certification). But this does not do anything for our services sector which relies on the freedom of movement or our financial services sector which relies on "passporting" (agreeing to recognise mutual standards in financial services and each nation's regulators). The EEA model is a way for us to exit with minimal economic impact whatsoever - but in all honesty, it will leave both those who were for leave and remain both unhappy. Remainers will be happy that we can avoid weakening our standing economically in the aftermath of Brexit... but the EEA will also leave us beholden to EU regulations without any representation or means to have a say in what those representations for me. As someone who had to endure calls of how Brexit would give us national sovereignty and reaffirm principles of democracy - this solution seems totally lacking in giving any of that. If anything, it subverts our national sovereignty more than remaining in the EU does. And from my perspective, the biggest issue for leavers was immigration. This does not solve that. This also does not fly with the leave rhetoric of "muh national sovereignty! I suppose there is the emergency brake release from the EEA... but then we're back where we are now and left to negotiate where we stand on the continent AGAIN. Switzerland's model is a bit intriguing. Can we count on the British public to have the stomach for regular referendums though? It would take a long time for us to have the full deal negotiated, it took a very long time for Switzerland's deal to be negotiated. Canada's model, by excluding the service industry, does not solve the issues of Britain's biggest contributors to the GDP in the face of Brexit. Ultimately, what's best for our economy is the EEA - but it does not fly in the face of the political arguments made... and is no better option than remaining in the EU (which is as unrealistic a proposition as the belief that the EU will let us wipe the floor with them in negotiations, despite having less leverage).

That's sad, I hope he gets all the help he needs.

But he's not banning social media use, he's banning social media use showing his squad in training. If Pogba wants to dab on social media, he's free dab his retarded little heart out, as long as he's not on their training pitch.

He can dab all he wants, as long as it's not on the training pitch. Don't know why Mourinho was so furious at Shaw's footage of him training at home though. Seems a bit... oversensitive (or something) to believe it portrays United in a bad light.

There was no massive government coverup of Heysel, people went to jail for it, and England was banned from European football (although it probably just should have been us banned, but honestly in the 80s English fans were generally dangerous cunts, so it was safe). Whereas we had an MP feed lies to a sensationalist scumbag to cover up the fact the ground shouldn't have been chosen for the match, and that the police basically crushed 96 people to death. And it wasn't until decades later that there was any sort of vindication from them. So it's a bit different... Probably not to Juve fans... But it's not like they had to wait decades to not accused of killing their own. Because with Heysel it was clear what happened and there were things done to hold people responsible and Dole out punishment. Meanwhile we've got Kelvin Mackenzie still at the sun, the MP responsible for the lies has had no punishment, nor has the police who admitted responsibility. And to be honest Sheffield Wednesday and the FA played a part in it too, as they should never been allowed to host it when Spurs fans were crushed.

I don't know how to neatly split quotes up like you did... so I'll just go one by one. I didn't know that about McLaren, Honda and the spare Mercedes engine. It's interesting, reverse engineering to try to build upon an already good system is something Japan has done very well in the automotive industry. I honestly don't know what Honda is trying to prove by refusing to look outside of Honda for the answers. Definitely agree that Alonso's conduct has really hindered him, the way he left Ferrari probably damaged his chances of ever being in one of the best cars in a F1 season for the rest of his career. I agree, Renault is probably the most realistic option. I think he'd do well in a Williams car though, I think he's could outperform Massa right now - and I don't have a whole lot of faith in $troll. I also think Ricciardo will take Kimi's spot at Ferrari soon, personally. I think it's very close between Mercedes & Ferrari. Mercedes looks better in testing, but in an actual races Vettel and his car have looked outstanding.

I think Honda can go back to the glory days of McLaren-Honda of the 80s-90s, but it will take a serious attitude change from them. They no longer had any of their old F1 Engineers working, they lacked expertise and they've refused to bring in external people to help them get back into the sport. And they're really struggling for it. Ultimately, I hope Honda does get it together - it's better for the sport with more of the auto-industry involved. But it will require a big culture change from them for them to enjoy success in F1 again. And it really is embarrassing how bad their power unit has been for McLaren. If a car struggles to even make it through testing because of its engine, there will never be suitable testing for the chassis. The focus will always be on increasing the reliability of that power unit... and that's not even addressing the complete lack of power they're facing. I think Alonso needs to bail ship ASAP though. He doesn't have a lot left in his career, I'd like to see him do a bit more than struggle to finish races as he winds his career down. So how would we rank the cars right now? I think it's tough to tell who's better between Ferrari and Mercedes, Red Bull is comfortably third IMO, then I think it's pretty up in the air so it'd be interesting to see how we all rank them... and at the back of the pack Sauber and McLaren, in that order. For my middle of the pack: I'd go with: Williams, Force India, Toro Rosso, Haas, and then Renault.

Hahaha the Nasr thing is hilarious. As for Alonso shitting on Honda, I think it's justified. I think McLaren and their mechanics are fed up with this partnership but they can't go public, but Alonso is virtually unsackable. He can apply the public pressure on Honda. Let's be honest, the power units Honda has supplied for the last 3 years are shambolic. This latest one is such a massive regression, and with a company as large as Honda it's pretty unacceptable. It was a poor decision to leave Ferrari on Alonso's part, but Honda's ineptitude is literally pissing away a legendary racer's ability to compete and making a storied F1 team look like a total embarrassment. The entire McLaren team is being let down by Honda. While it might be arguably unprofessional and hurting the brand... it's also unprofessional to send a team out to compete without being properly equipped and it hurts the brand when that team can't finish a race. Honda, imo, look a total joke right now.