Fabio Borini (Sunderland/QPR)

What are you going on about?

The point we are debating is which one of them has consistently played at a higher level during their career hence "going off information four years old" is appropriate because we are comparing their careers.

If you want to compare what Lambert had achieved at the same age as Borini has be my guest.

You talk about Lambert "upgrading" himself - I guarantee that by the time Borini reaches Lambert's current age (?31) he will have continued to play for bigger clubs and won more than Lambert has so far - so tell me again who is the better player.

Bizarre.

What are you going on about?

The point we are debating is which one of them has consistently played at a higher level during their career hence "going off information four years old" is appropriate because we are comparing their careers.

If you want to compare what Lambert had achieved at the same age as Borini has be my guest.

You talk about Lambert "upgrading" himself - I guarantee that by the time Borini reaches Lambert's current age (?31) he will have continued to play for bigger clubs and won more than Lambert has so far - so tell me again who is the better player.

Bizarre.

Borini will not get as many goals as Lambert has in his career. He may win more trophies, but that's purely because he'd prefer being a bench player here than actual moving to get first team football.

Borini will never be good enough to get first team football ahead of Sturridge.

Borini will not get as many goals as Lambert has in his career. He may win more trophies, but that's purely because he'd prefer being a bench player here than actual moving to get first team football.

Borini will never be good enough to get first team football ahead of Sturridge.

Borini has been bad at the top level whereas Lambert has been good at the lower level.  It's not that comparable as people are making out.

Borini will not get as many goals as Lambert has in his career. He may win more trophies, but that's purely because he'd prefer being a bench player here than actual moving to get first team football.

Borini will never be good enough to get first team football ahead of Sturridge.

He doesn't have to be better than Sturridge to get games and be of use to us though.

He doesn't have to be better than Sturridge to get games and be of use to us though.

Would he get ahead of Lambert? Would he get ahead of this other striker Rodgers has said he wants to buy? Would he get ahead of Origi when he comes back from loan?

If he was going to be getting many games, why did we agree to sell him?

Borini will not get as many goals as Lambert has in his career. He may win more trophies, but that's purely because he'd prefer being a bench player here than actual moving to get first team football.

Borini will never be good enough to get first team football ahead of Sturridge.

- unlike you however, Borini won't need to move the goalposts to try and win a point.

How good Borini is compared to Sturridge - not the point.

How many total goals Lambert scores for Stockport VS Borini's goals for Roma - not the point.

However much you like Lambert doesn't change the facts about what we are debating - Borini has consistently played at a higher level during his career than Lambert. Fact.

Therefore if Sturridge gets injured, as he likely will, Borini has every right to back himself to play ahead of Lambert.

What are you going on about?

The point we are debating is which one of them has consistently played at a higher level during their career hence "going off information four years old" is appropriate because we are comparing their careers.

If you want to compare what Lambert had achieved at the same age as Borini has be my guest.

You talk about Lambert "upgrading" himself - I guarantee that by the time Borini reaches Lambert's current age (?31) he will have continued to play for bigger clubs and won more than Lambert has so far - so tell me again who is the better player.

Bizarre.

Why compare their careers? Who the F**k cares what someone did 4 years ago? That is like saying Torres is still a world class striker because if you look at his stats for LFC those are quality stats.

And again no one gives a sh*t what Borini does when he is 31 years old. It is all about who can contribute now. Lambert can contribute more than Borini right now. Borini has looked sh*t in preseason and we are trying to sell him.

Comparing who has played at a higher level and who had a better career is possibly the most pointless thing anyone can argue about. It is all about how they can contribute to the club right now

- unlike you however, Borini won't need to move the goalposts to try and win a point.

How good Borini is compared to Sturridge - not the point.

How many total goals Lambert scores for Stockport VS Borini's goals for Roma - not the point.

However much you like Lambert doesn't change the facts about what we are debating - Borini has consistently played at a higher level during his career than Lambert. Fact.

Therefore if Sturridge gets injured, as he likely will, Borini has every right to back himself to play ahead of Lambert.

If the manager had thought that, he wouldn't have accepted a fee for Borini.

Just compare PL goals they've scored. Lambert has twice as many PL goals as Borini. Plus he's played in higher level competitions (the WC).

I think you're struggling to see the obvious here

Why compare their careers? Who the f**k cares what someone did 4 years ago? That is like saying Torres is still a world class striker because if you look at his stats for LFC those are quality stats.

And again no one gives a sh*t what Borini does when he is 31 years old. It is all about who can contribute now. Lambert can contribute more than Borini right now. Borini has looked sh*t in preseason and we are trying to sell him.

Comparing who has played at a higher level and who had a better career is possibly the most pointless thing anyone can argue about. It is all about how they can contribute to the club right now

Well the original point we were talking about was whether or not Borini was right to stay or should move to Sunderland.

In my view Sturridge is injury-prone - right now, as you put it, that leaves Lambert and Borini competing to play if he is out - Borini has every right to back himself to play ahead of Lambert given the history of their careers. And by the way - that'e a far better guide of how good they are compared to "how they have done in preseason".

That's why right now Borini is valued as a 14 million pound striker and right now Lambert is valued as a 4 million pound striker.

If the manager had thought that, he wouldn't have accepted a fee for Borini.

ha ha ha so why did he "accept the fee" for Suarez?

Your posts are pure comedy.

ha ha ha so why did he "accept the fee" for Suarez?

Your posts are pure comedy.

We didn't accept the fee. Barcelona paid the buy out clause.

Jeez you're a F***ing dumb knobhead.

We didn't accept the fee. Barcelona paid the buy out clause.

Jeez you're a f**king dumb knobhead.

Who do you think set the buyout clause? Arsene Wenger? 

Absolute gold.

Anyway, back to the point. You have no idea what the manager has said to Borini - as things currently stand  he has every right to think he can get games ahead of Ricky Lambert who is a player who has spent the majority of his career being a journeyman for low-level clubs.

We didn't accept the fee. Barcelona paid the buy out clause.

Jeez you're a F***ing dumb knobhead.

Buy out clauses aren't leaglly binding in the UK.

Buy out clauses aren't leaglly binding in the UK.

Yeah didn't Arsenal trigger his buy out clause.

Yeah didn't Arsenal trigger his buy out clause.

According to JWH there was no buy out clause.

Who do you think set the buyout clause? Arsene Wenger? 

Absolute gold.

Do you really think he'd have signed a new deal without a firm buy out clause in it.

You're a bigger idiot than I thought.

Buy out clauses aren't leaglly binding in the UK.

I thought that the £40 million was a gentlemen's agreement buy out clause, that gave us the option to accept or reject, and the reason he signed a new contract was because we added a firm buy out clause.

Hence how Remy has a buyout clause for CL teams and Non CL teams.

Can I ask, are Federer, Ribapuru and Hollywood Balls all the same person?

According to JWH there was no buy out clause.

In an interview he confirmed that there was but they didn't mean anything. And Arsenal triggered it but they weren't willing to sell to a rival.

Maybe my MEMORY is failing me but I am pretty sure that was the jist of the interview.

Buy out clauses aren't leaglly binding in the UK.

Yeah didn't Arsenal trigger his buy out clause.

According to JWH there was no buy out clause.

From what I gather, Suarez's 'clause' merely stated that if an offer of over £40M was made, we had to CONSIDER it, which we did and deemed it unacceptable so rejected the offer. This was my understanding anyway.

Wasn't there a law firm reviewed the contract and deemed it was NOT a 'Buy Out Clause' but a 'good will' thing? Confusing to say the least.

Do you really think he'd have signed a new deal without a firm buy out clause in it.

Again, what are you on about?

You are saying the club don't think Borini is as good as Lambert because they accepted a 14 million pound fee for him. Are you seriously trying to suggest we would turn down a 14 million pound bid for Lambert? What about 20 million? or 30?

Can I ask, are Federer, Ribapuru and Hollywood Balls all the same person?

Thanks for contributing absolutely nothing of note.

In an interview he confirmed that there was but they didn't mean anything. And Arsenal triggered it but they weren't willing to sell to a rival.

Maybe my MEMORY is failing me but I am pretty sure that was the jist of the interview.

Your correct and your memory is in tact.

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/462678/John-W-Henry-admits-Liverpool-ignored-Luis-Suarez-s-buy-out-clause-after-Arsenal-bid

Well the original point we were talking about was whether or not Borini was right to stay or should move to Sunderland.

In my view Sturridge is injury-prone - right now, as you put it, that leaves Lambert and Borini competing to play if he is out - Borini has every right to back himself to play ahead of Lambert given the history of their careers. And by the way - that'e a far better guide of how good they are compared to "how they have done in preseason".

That's why right now Borini is valued as a 14 million pound striker and right now Lambert is valued as a 4 million pound striker.

Borini has a right to stay.

Lambert was 4M because of his age. Had he been 23 or 24 his fee would have been much higher. Therefore you can not compare fees.

Agreed that is a better guide but imo Lambert is proven and Borini is still unproven. That is why I believe Lambert is better. We can't sit around and hope a player to come good, we need a player that is proven and ready to go. Borini is a risk, Lambert really isn't.

Again, what are you on about?

You are saying the club don't think Borini is as good as Lambert because they accepted a 14 million pound fee for him. Are you seriously trying to suggest we would turn down a 14 million pound bid for Lambert? What about 20 million? or 30?

Where did I say that?

You clearly don't understand what age and resale value means so I'll let you do a bit of research on that. I'm finished speaking about this.