I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are.

A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres.

I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts.

The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference.

RaulRaj, 35
Singapore

I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are.

A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres.

I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts.

The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference.

RaulRaj, 35
Singapore

I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are.

A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres.

I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts.

The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference.

RaulRaj, 35
Singapore

I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are.

A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres.

I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts.

The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference.

RaulRaj, 35
Singapore

Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool.

City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool.

City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool.

City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool.

City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

Whats all that about?

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

Whats all that about?

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

Whats all that about?

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

Whats all that about?

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

What the heck has all this got to do with a young lad wanting to further his football career?

We city fans are fully aware of what can happen when credit facilities are overused to pursue success in football, but what happened to us will never happen to Liverpool. Sympathy? I don't think so!

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

What the heck has all this got to do with a young lad wanting to further his football career?

We city fans are fully aware of what can happen when credit facilities are overused to pursue success in football, but what happened to us will never happen to Liverpool. Sympathy? I don't think so!

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

What the heck has all this got to do with a young lad wanting to further his football career?

We city fans are fully aware of what can happen when credit facilities are overused to pursue success in football, but what happened to us will never happen to Liverpool. Sympathy? I don't think so!

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

What the heck has all this got to do with a young lad wanting to further his football career?

We city fans are fully aware of what can happen when credit facilities are overused to pursue success in football, but what happened to us will never happen to Liverpool. Sympathy? I don't think so!

The Bradford Bugler wrote:
Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours.
At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

The Bradford Bugler wrote:
Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours.
At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

The Bradford Bugler wrote:
Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours.
At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

The Bradford Bugler wrote:
Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours.
At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future.

"A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future.

"A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future.

"A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future.

"A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

the first post is a total irrelevance so just ignore it and move on.

Ok--how many youth team players have we had who have come through the ranks say since SM AND NOT BEEN RUINED BY OUR CLUB.

The last I can think of was Tomlinson and we sold him on and then he did not make it because of injury and other factors.

So if this kid, and that is what he is, has the opportunity to go to Liverpool now good luck to him, and I hope he prospers for all concerned.

If we are going to produce youth team players then we have to bring them through properly and, if we start to become a feeder club in the mode of CREWE so be it.

Now let us hope that the money, however much or little is, will be ring fenced into the youth team set up and not wasted on aging journeymen pros seeking a pension in the latter years of their careers!!!

ok:I can see an argument for keeping and developing youith team players but at our level if money is up front for a 14 year old then take it:that money may well be just enough to produce a couple more gems etc etc:it would probably be enough to produce some talent not good enough for higher divisions but more than adequate for our level--also in the mode of Crewe.

I think City are not now in the habit of saying how much they receive and pay for players: good move that!!

the first post is a total irrelevance so just ignore it and move on.

Ok--how many youth team players have we had who have come through the ranks say since SM AND NOT BEEN RUINED BY OUR CLUB.

The last I can think of was Tomlinson and we sold him on and then he did not make it because of injury and other factors.

So if this kid, and that is what he is, has the opportunity to go to Liverpool now good luck to him, and I hope he prospers for all concerned.

If we are going to produce youth team players then we have to bring them through properly and, if we start to become a feeder club in the mode of CREWE so be it.

Now let us hope that the money, however much or little is, will be ring fenced into the youth team set up and not wasted on aging journeymen pros seeking a pension in the latter years of their careers!!!

ok:I can see an argument for keeping and developing youith team players but at our level if money is up front for a 14 year old then take it:that money may well be just enough to produce a couple more gems etc etc:it would probably be enough to produce some talent not good enough for higher divisions but more than adequate for our level--also in the mode of Crewe.

I think City are not now in the habit of saying how much they receive and pay for players: good move that!!

the first post is a total irrelevance so just ignore it and move on.

Ok--how many youth team players have we had who have come through the ranks say since SM AND NOT BEEN RUINED BY OUR CLUB.

The last I can think of was Tomlinson and we sold him on and then he did not make it because of injury and other factors.

So if this kid, and that is what he is, has the opportunity to go to Liverpool now good luck to him, and I hope he prospers for all concerned.

If we are going to produce youth team players then we have to bring them through properly and, if we start to become a feeder club in the mode of CREWE so be it.

Now let us hope that the money, however much or little is, will be ring fenced into the youth team set up and not wasted on aging journeymen pros seeking a pension in the latter years of their careers!!!

ok:I can see an argument for keeping and developing youith team players but at our level if money is up front for a 14 year old then take it:that money may well be just enough to produce a couple more gems etc etc:it would probably be enough to produce some talent not good enough for higher divisions but more than adequate for our level--also in the mode of Crewe.

I think City are not now in the habit of saying how much they receive and pay for players: good move that!!