Trending Topics

      Next match: Betis v LFC [Friendly] Sat 27th Jul @ 12:30 am
      Acrisure Stadium

      Today is the 15th of June and on this date LFC's match record is P1 W1 D0 L0

      LFC Reds Poll

      Q. Are LFC genuinely interested?

      Yes we are ready to go head to head to sign him
      49 (44.1%)
      No, it's PR spin
      62 (55.9%)

      Total Members Voted: 109

      Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)

      Read 273452 times
      0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #552: Jun 06, 2017 11:34:50 am
      Can't make this crap up.....

      I don't see anything different in the way this was reported than any other transfer window for any other team. Sounds like sour grapes on the Saint's part but of course it would have to be difficult.


      https://www.thisisanfield.com/2017/06/southampton-ask-premier-league-to-investigate-illegal-approach-from-liverpool-over-Jürgen-klopps-involvement-in-virgil-van-dijk-chase/

      What cracks me up is it was Chelsea & Man City who reportedly got in touch with him first before we did yet because he chose us it's us who get reported. Haven't they done this before? Only to be found to be telling porkies.
      AlwaysTheKop
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 8,628 posts | 1518 
      • CHAMP19NS.
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #553: Jun 06, 2017 11:39:01 am
      Everything was going too calmly this transfer window wasn't it?  :lmao:
      HScRed1
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 20,232 posts | 4421 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #554: Jun 06, 2017 11:43:23 am
      A bit of posturing from Saints showing their fans they don't want to sell.

      In reality they are probably peeved off City have pulled out and there will be no bidding war to drive up the price!
      Diego LFC
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 19,340 posts | 2838 
      • Sempre Liverpool
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #555: Jun 06, 2017 11:46:27 am
      Yesterday we were discussing the possible lineups with Van Dijk and Salah.

      I wake up this morning and now we're being reported over one, and "won't be held to ransom" for the other.

       :mad:
      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #556: Jun 06, 2017 11:53:22 am
      So it all comes down to the reports that Klopp was the deciding factor and Van Dijk liked how Klopp took a personal interest in persuading him to join Liverpool. Guardiola was more stand-offish.
      andylfcynwa
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 9,367 posts | 1638 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #557: Jun 06, 2017 11:58:28 am
      Yesterday we were discussing the possible lineups with Van Dijk and Salah.

      I wake up this morning and now we're being reported over one, and "won't be held to ransom" for the other.

       :mad:
      Thats precisely the reason why I refuse to get excited the last couple of transfer windows have been painfull under this lot ill just wait till thd prefered targets trot out the door at melwood before I get the bunting out .
      PurpleMonkey
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 10,000 posts | 1991 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #558: Jun 06, 2017 12:07:13 pm
      What cracks me up is it was Chelsea & Man City who reportedly got in touch with him first before we did yet because he chose us it's us who get reported. Haven't they done this before? Only to be found to be telling porkies.

      What cracks me up even more is how nearly every F***ing manager does it, be it through their players or of their own accord.
      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #559: Jun 06, 2017 12:22:58 pm
      All they ever seem to do is make allegations and threaten to report other teams. It's embarrassing. I get that they don't like other clubs coming after their players but it happen at every club. It might also help if they gave their managers some money to spend from time to time.
      HScRed1
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 20,232 posts | 4421 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #560: Jun 06, 2017 12:32:44 pm
      Just threaten to cancel the direct debit.
      red_kaiser
      • Forum Legend - Benitez
      • *****

      • 1,506 posts | 60 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #561: Jun 06, 2017 12:43:34 pm
      Go on a strike Virgil
      Beerbelly
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 6,983 posts | 2054 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #562: Jun 06, 2017 12:54:49 pm
      Southampton report Liverpool to Premier League

      Southampton have accused Liverpool of a possible illegal approach for Virgil van Dijk.

      Mirror Sport revealed on Monday that the Reds had won the race to sign the Dutch defender in a £60million deal.

      Manchester City and Chelsea were also keen but Jürgen Klopp persuaded Van Dijk to choose the Anfield project.

      But Southampton are angered by the situation because they have not received any contact from Liverpool over the defender.

      They have asked the Premier League to investigate a possible illegal approach

      http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/arsenal-liverpool-united-transfers-live-10562221
      RedLFCBlood
      • Guest
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #563: Jun 06, 2017 12:59:08 pm
      Southampton report Liverpool to Premier League

      Southampton have accused Liverpool of a possible illegal approach for Virgil van Dijk.

      Mirror Sport revealed on Monday that the Reds had won the race to sign the Dutch defender in a £60million deal.

      Manchester City and Chelsea were also keen but Jürgen Klopp persuaded Van Dijk to choose the Anfield project.

      But Southampton are angered by the situation because they have not received any contact from Liverpool over the defender.

      They have asked the Premier League to investigate a possible illegal approach

      http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/arsenal-liverpool-united-transfers-live-10562221

      Easily rectified to the F.A, it was paper talk, prove it.
      crouchinho
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 42,508 posts | 2620 
      • TU TA LOUCO? FILHO DA PUTA!
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #564: Jun 06, 2017 01:00:13 pm
      They haven't received contact?

      But all the journos and twitter-ITK's said we had bid/were in ongoing discussions :roll:

      Tripe.
      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #565: Jun 06, 2017 01:07:39 pm
      They haven't received contact?

      But all the journos and twitter-ITK's said we had bid/were in ongoing discussions :roll:

      Tripe.

      The reliable ones I saw mentioned how we then had to open discussions regarding the transfer fee but you're not wrong on the chancers. A ton of them said the fee had been agreed which would have had to have happened in record time for it to be true.

      On top of all this, I think it was quite strange for Van Dijk to agree to a 6 year contract only this time last year. No idea why his agent encouraged him to do that if there was the potential for him to move to a bigger club. This is something that could put Southampton in a position of strength when it comes to negotiations.
      HScRed1
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 20,232 posts | 4421 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #566: Jun 06, 2017 01:16:48 pm
      So Bertrand about to sign for City, it's plain to see Saints are trying to appease their fans.
      Understandable they are going to be pissed off.

      Cut throat world this transfer business where the big sharks prey on the minnows.
      JD
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 39,687 posts | 6981 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #567: Jun 06, 2017 01:18:21 pm
      If I were a Southampton fan I could understand their refusal to do business with us.  This would be the 4th season we've gone in and raided them for their key players. 

      They are a club with clearly a far better scouting department that our own and yes they are being handsomely rewarded but they are a club just outside the top six (except last season) who Liverpool are effectively paying to keep them out of it.
      MIRO
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 12,989 posts | 3124 
      • Trust The Universe
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #568: Jun 06, 2017 01:18:53 pm
      Good feeling gone   ...  !
      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #569: Jun 06, 2017 01:19:00 pm
      So Bertrand about to sign for City, it's plain to see Saints are trying to appease their fans.
      Understandable they are going to be pissed off.

      Cut throat world this transfer business where the big sharks prey on the minnows.

      Wish they'd kick up a fuss about a player that's not about to fetch them 50-60m though :D We should take a leaf out of their book though and get sh*t done on the quiet.
      PastorGeek
      • Not Actual Geek
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 2,632 posts | 765 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #570: Jun 06, 2017 01:19:32 pm
      We have the worst transfer policy and scouts i swear to god. Southampton must be sick of the sight of us
      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #571: Jun 06, 2017 01:20:51 pm
      If I were a Southampton fan I could understand their refusal to do business with us.  This would be the 4th season we've gone in and raided them for their key players. 

      They are a club with clearly a far better scouting department that our own and yes they are being handsomely rewarded but they are a club just outside the top six (except last season) who Liverpool are effectively paying to keep them out of it.

      I can understand their refusal or at least their willingness to get as much as possible for Van Dijk but crying to the Premier League is a bi*ch arse move.
      srslfc
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 32,368 posts | 4973 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #572: Jun 06, 2017 01:25:41 pm
      I can understand their refusal or at least their willingness to get as much as possible for Van Dijk but crying to the Premier League is a bi*ch arse move.

      It is but if we want him that badly just make an offer.

      Really strange this summer the amount of leaks coming out that we've agreed with players without any offer to the selling club.

      I know talks go on before clubs approach each other but I don't recall so much of this coming out on social media and the press.
      RedPuppy
      • Still European.
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 19,269 posts | 2859 
      • Parum Rutilus Canis: Illegitimi non carborundum
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #573: Jun 06, 2017 01:32:47 pm
      He just needs to put a transfer request in.

      But in the mean time...

      mcarz
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 17,179 posts | 1355 
      Re: Virgil Van Dijk (Southampton)
      Reply #574: Jun 06, 2017 01:36:36 pm
      It is but if we want him that badly just make an offer.

      Really strange this summer the amount of leaks coming out that we've agreed with players without any offer to the selling club.

      I know talks go on before clubs approach each other but I don't recall so much of this coming out on social media and the press.

      I'm with you on that one.

      I can see why some clubs would want to offer personal terms first but I think in future we should stick to offering clubs the money for their players first before anything. At least then we don't get sh*t like this.

      Quick Reply