1) Did Kenny promise CL qualification? silly thing to do if he did. Kenny didn't spunk £50 on Carroll, or the £35 million he actually cost for that matter. The price was a result of leaving the transfer ti the very last second and was basically paid for by Chelsea agreed to meet the total price of the combined fees of Suarez and Carroll.
2)Brendan didn't lie? Are you mad? Brendan consistently told us he had the first and last say on transfers, this was NOT true, as the arrival of Mario confirmed. He publicly stated one season that he had enough squad players and wanted first team players bought, but didn't get them.
3) I've never denied that they balanced the books. Given the manager's plenty to spend, but with difficult restrictions on how must be spent. You will of course deny this, but it's been clear as day.
4) I don't belief they are the worst owners in the world, I believe they are (very) average owners that don't share the ambitions of the supporters.
5) F**k RAWK! Don't bother with it, and from what I here they don't allow much criticism of FSG.
6)They've been here 7 years, or finances were sorted years ago, when will the trophies start to arrive?
1) KK promised it, he also wanted Carroll, asking Comolli "Can we get him?" so no amount of spin will change that unless you want to call KK a liar.
2) Rodgers lied. He thought he was the master of spin, but it turned out to be as empty as his fabled dossier. He was either lying then or he's lying now, either way, he's a known liar, and so not to be trusted.
3) You see, there's these things called
budgets which have to be adhered to when you don't have unlimited amounts of money to spend. Every club works to a budget, but I suppose we should go into debt, waste money left right and centre, and then get into financial difficulties like Leeds. That plan worked out well for them, didn't it? "The club will only spend what it earns". Sounds pretty sensible to me.
4) They will make more when they sell if we are successful. So by your logic, they don't want to make more money when they sell.
5) RAWK have some very bright posters. It's not that they "don't allow" criticism, but it has to be realistic or it gets pulled to shreds. A bit like your arguments.
6) Our finances weren't "sorted years ago". We've been playing catch up after 20-odd years of neglecting off field income. You can thank Moores and Parry for that, the lazy fucks. Being financially viable isn't the same as having revenue streams that allow player recruitment to be competitive.
In addition, our wage bill is the highest it has ever been.
This happens every January when you and a couple of others have a hissy fit because we haven't gone out and spent all our money on overpriced players.
If we spent it all, you'd spend the time moaning about us getting shafted in the transfer market again.
Klopp had money to spend, couldn't get his targets, said very clearly "it was nothing to do with money" and refused to settle for secondary targets.
So FSG ensured the money was in place, Klopp couldn't get the players he wanted after offering to pay extra above their valuation, decided to wait rather than just spend for the sake of it, but that's FSG's fault.
Then you imply that Klopp's lying to protect the owners.
Protect them from what?
It's F***ing laughable how some try to re-write history to suit their agenda.
Bottom line is that we aren't in a position to compete with oil sheiks, dodgy billionaires and publicly traded clubs who owe a shitload of money.
We don't have the revenue (yet, but we're catching up).
But maybe you're right, and Klopp should have blown all his budget paying over the odds for players so that we have nothing to spend come the summer.