Trending Topics

      Next match: LFC v Brighton [Premier League] Sun 31st Mar @ 2:00 pm
      Anfield

      Today is the 28th of March and on this date LFC's match record is P26 W11 D3 L12

      Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)

      Read 373404 times
      0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
      Son Of A Gun
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 5,187 posts | 1269 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3105: Nov 25, 2015 08:05:28 pm
      This is all so ridiculous.  Raheem is a cracking player.  He's only 20 and is already a top talent, in five years he could be world class.  It's funny how apparently he's overrated because he had a bad game against us, but when our players have bad games, oh no, they're not overrated, not at all...

      I've said this before but last spring we were at a real turning point: Raheem wanted out but it was suggested the reason he wanted out was because of Rodgers.  Rodgers, who was bringing the club down, who was playing Raheem out of position, who was a total bellend in the media, spitting in the face of the supporters telling us that we were outstanding when we got played off the park etc.

      Rodgers was the problem, and Raheem knew that we were going no where under him.  And it was reported that he absolutely would've stayed, had we gotten a new manager.  I said it back then: which would we rather do---keep Rodgers and get rid of Raheem?  or get rid of Rodgers, bring in Klopp, and KEEP Raheem?  The answer was obvious.  We should've gotten rid of Rodgers at the end of last season and brought in Klopp straight away.  Then we would've found out if it really was about Rodgers for Raheem or not.  If he still wanted to leave because of money, fine, f**k off to City.  But if he had stayed, then we would be in a position to have Raheem, Coutinho, Firmino and Sturridge all in our attack.  That's nearly unstoppable.

      Instead our owners decided to keep Rodgers and get rid of Raheem, only to sack Rodgers anyway a few months later.  Stupid decision by all.  It turns out Raheem was absolutely justified.  If you watched the 6-1 loss at Stoke you could see the players weren't playing for Rodgers.  Raheem was the only one with the bollocks to come out and say it.  Why?  because our owners were too scared to get rid of their man.  Would anyone have blamed them if we sacked Rodgers after the end of last season?  of course not!  But they didn't.  So Raheem came out and said "f**k it, if you are too scared to admit that Rodgers is the problem then I will."  And he got lambasted for it.  Oh he's only 20, he's a kid, how dare he say that.  What do you mean how dare he say that?  he knows better than anyone, he's there on the training ground day in and day out, watching Rodgers and his feckless methods, watching the players in the dressing room, seeing how they don't respond to him.  FSG were across the f**king ocean, what the hell do they know.  Raheem had a better idea than any of us here that Rodgers wasn't the answer.  And he said so.  And it turns out he was right.  It just took FSG longer to realize it.

      So instead of directing your fury at Raheem you should maybe look at our owners and our structure and wonder why our best players keep wanting to leave.  Suarez, Sterling, Coutinho might be next.  Instead of having a go at the players maybe you should ask why they don't want to stay with us. 

      But it's easier to have a go at Raheem instead of trying to clean up our own house.  yea it's all Raheem's fault.  What a sh*te player. 

      No.  He's not a sh*te player.  He's a very, very good player who has all the tools to be world-class.  Look at what Klopp has done with some of our written-off players.  Imagine what he could've done with Raheem.  I'd rather we keep players with talent like Raheem.  We're never going to pay Chelsea and City type wages so when we do get top players we have to do everything we can to keep hold of them.

      Well I suppose you are an expert on watching sh*te considering you support Chelsea...
      HScRed1
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 20,172 posts | 4401 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3106: Nov 25, 2015 09:47:47 pm
      The wonder boy missing a chance my 13 year old daughter would have bagged.

      I think bluemoon won't be too impressed  :lmao:


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WSeTAipzdI
      « Last Edit: Nov 26, 2015 04:00:54 pm by HScRed1 »
      Pear
      • Forum Legend - Benitez
      • *****

      • 1,275 posts | 79 
      • Me, i always tell the truth, even when i lie.
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3107: Nov 27, 2015 11:19:51 am
      The wonder boy missing a chance my 13 year old daughter would have bagged.

      I think bluemoon won't be too impressed  :lmao:


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WSeTAipzdI
      Yeah i saw that,maybe its wrong thing to say but im happy hes sh*te at Man City.
      HScRed1
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 20,172 posts | 4401 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3108: Nov 27, 2015 04:12:25 pm
      AussieRed
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 20,583 posts | 6643 
      • You'll Never Walk Alone
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3109: Dec 30, 2015 10:36:23 am
      Barber: "What do you want?"

      Sterling: "Did you ever see a Puli dog?"

      Barber: "Say no more."





      Barber: What you after?

      Sterling: You ever seen Sister Act 2?

      Barber: Say no more...


      TheRedPanda
      • Forum Graeme Souness
      • ***

      • 362 posts | 82 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3110: Dec 30, 2015 12:17:46 pm
      F***ing snake
      Ribapuru
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 10,843 posts | 1371 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3111: Dec 30, 2015 02:36:25 pm
      Well I suppose you are an expert on watching sh*te considering you support Chelsea...
      Really is no need for that. Purely bullying! Actually I am sure Federer does not support Chelsea. Another thing, with garbage posts like that I really struggle to think how you ended up with almost 500 likes from 3000 posts. Maybe you have made a 2nd account and clicked like on around 1/6 of your own posts.... if so then that's pretty lame... or maybe your other posts weren't accusing fellow supporters of supporting other teams just because they don't want to bash Sterling but are realistic that we had multiple players who really didn't want to play for Liverpool under Rodgers. Suarez wanted to move to Arsenal... are you going to bash him too? I am a Liverpool fan but if I was a professional footballer and an attacker but my manager wanted to put me as a defender and I didn't feel comfortable with it... as Sterling clearly wasn't... he'd be asking for me to leave really! I thought it was stupid to have Sterling as RB. I also don't blame Suarez for wanting to go, not when he's probably the best player in the world playing alongside Lucas and Allen and using Gerrard as a defender and Sterling as a RB... calamity is one word I'd use. Sterling openly said he would stay if we got rid of Rodger's whilst he was still a Liverpool player. Rodgers and Sterling pretty much disliked each other. I don't really like Rodgers much either and I don't like Sterling the way he went about things, but I certainly don't bash fans with different opinions to the extent of telling them they support Chelsea, leave that in the disgraceful things to say to fellow fans thread which I am sure will never get made.

      Signings under Rodgers, not including loans... and we know damn well Rodgers was influential on signings otherwise we wouldn't have had Borini or Allen who Rodgers was long time admirers of, please how many of these signings would you consider good enough to be at Liverpool?

      Fabio Borini
      Joe Allen
      Oussama Assaidi
      Daniel Sturridge
      Philippe Coutinho

      Luis Alberto
      Iago Aspas
      Simon Mignolet
      Kolo Touré
      Aly Cissokho
      Mamadou Sakho
      Tiago Ilori
      Rickie Lambert
      Adam Lallana
      Emre Can
      Lazar Markovic
      Dejan Lovren
      Divock Origi
      Alberto Moreno
      Mario Balotelli
      Joe Gomez 
      Adam Bogdan 
      Danny Ings
      James Milner   
      Nathaniel Clyne
      Roberto Firmino 
      Christian Benteke

      I highlighted the players I think have been value for money so far. How many good players did we miss out on? Alexis Sanchez said he went to arsenal to work with Wenger, the lure of working for Rodgers wasn't as strong as Wenger, but maybe under Klopp, Sanchez would have joined us instead of Balotelli. Not to mention Diego Costa who I didn't really want anyway or Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Willian and several others.
      « Last Edit: Dec 30, 2015 02:59:35 pm by Ribapuru »
      Frankly, Mr Shankly
      • Guest
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3112: Dec 30, 2015 02:57:24 pm
      Barber: "What do you want?"

      Sterling: "Did you ever see a Puli dog?"

      Barber: "Say no more."





      Barber: What you after?

      Sterling: You ever seen Sister Act 2?

      Barber: Say no more...




      GOOD GOD!
      crouchinho
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 42,508 posts | 2620 
      • TU TA LOUCO? FILHO DA PUTA!
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3113: Dec 30, 2015 03:34:11 pm
      Don't think i'll get over the fact they paid £50m for him :D That's all i think when i see him play. £50m for speed and a sh*t haircut.
      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3114: Dec 30, 2015 03:40:24 pm
      Don't think i'll get over the fact they paid £50m for him :D That's all i think when i see him play. £50m for speed and a sh*t haircut.

      :lmao:

      This English player tax is brilliant when it's your club that's benefiting.
      crouchinho
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 42,508 posts | 2620 
      • TU TA LOUCO? FILHO DA PUTA!
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3115: Dec 30, 2015 03:49:01 pm
      :lmao:

      This English player tax is brilliant when it's your club that's benefiting.

      Thank God he didn't declare for Jamaica! :D
      Ribapuru
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 10,843 posts | 1371 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3116: Dec 30, 2015 04:50:35 pm
      Sterling is not a good striker. Just a good winger. He is not very versatile. For 50m the striker should be able to play anywhere in the front three. Sterling will never be a centre forward because his accuracy is not good enough. He is still a good player with pace and would be welcomed in most premier league line ups... but 25m would be more around his worth.
      Son Of A Gun
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 5,187 posts | 1269 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3117: Jan 27, 2016 10:35:42 pm
      Sterling post match v Everton: "This is what I came here for, to compete in finals".

      .... against Liverpool you dickhead!  :lmao:
      HScRed1
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 20,172 posts | 4401 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3118: Jan 27, 2016 10:44:38 pm
      Sterling post match v Everton: "This is what I came here for, to compete in finals".

      .... against Liverpool you dickhead!  :lmao:


      He was never the brightest.
      bazspeedman
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 15,743 posts | 2436 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3119: Jan 27, 2016 10:49:47 pm
      Sterling post match v Everton: "This is what I came here for, to compete in finals".

      .... against Liverpool you dickhead!  :lmao:

      Moron with a sh*t haircut and worse sideburns.
      DanMann
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 5,635 posts | 866 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3120: Jan 27, 2016 10:50:21 pm
      Sterling post match v Everton: "This is what I came here for, to compete in finals".

      .... against Liverpool you dickhead!  :lmao:

       :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

      Seriously? Oh my!!
      waltonl4
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 37,585 posts | 7139 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3121: Jan 27, 2016 10:56:18 pm
      Sterling post match v Everton: "This is what I came here for, to compete in finals".

      .... against Liverpool you dickhead!  :lmao:

      that was a good moment . Beating him will be rubbed in by some of his former team mates I am sure
      GeorgeRed
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,590 posts | 324 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3122: Jan 28, 2016 06:46:15 am
      Sterling post match v Everton: "This is what I came here for, to compete in finals".

      .... against Liverpool you dickhead!  :lmao:

      I hope Lucas or Moreno rips into him, F***ing c**t.
      GeorgeRed
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,590 posts | 324 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3123: Jan 28, 2016 06:49:05 am

      At least that dog is loyal. I'm also sure it has more brains than this tramp.
      bazspeedman
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 15,743 posts | 2436 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3124: Feb 06, 2016 02:57:55 pm
      Absolutely rubbish today has regressed massively this season.
      BarneyLFC
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 2,838 posts | 137 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3125: Feb 07, 2016 12:55:28 am
      Would have him back in a heart beat. I miss him massively. Would gladly hand City their 49m back if it meant we could have him back.

      Absolutely rubbish today has regressed massively this season.

      10 goals and 3 assists isn't bad at all. People forget that he's 21.
      bazspeedman
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 15,743 posts | 2436 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3126: Feb 07, 2016 12:43:51 pm
      Would have him back in a heart beat. I miss him massively. Would gladly hand City their 49m back if it meant we could have him back.

      10 goals and 3 assists isn't bad at all. People forget that he's 21.

      Are you joking?

      One league goal and one assist since last October.

      He's been absolutely sh*t for City.

      Not to mention he's a cocky little tramp.

      Take him back for £49 mill?

      Like F**k mate!
      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool > Man City)
      Reply #3127: Feb 07, 2016 12:45:36 pm
      Would have him back in a heart beat. I miss him massively. Would gladly hand City their 49m back if it meant we could have him back.

      10 goals and 3 assists isn't bad at all. People forget that he's 21.

      You'd pay 49m for him? :lmao: No thanks.

      Quick Reply