Man City's latest moves perplex; Liverpool ownership saga drags on
They do call the summer transfer window silly season, but this one's got me flummoxed.
Manchester City's attempts to sign
With such visible wealth, City will inevitably have to pay more for players -- whether Milner, unquestionably a good player, is worth $47 million is therefore beside the point, which is this: If the selling club feels the same way you feel when you realize you've been given change for a $20 bill instead of a $10, is it a good piece of business?
In a straight cash deal, it's clear that Milner's absence would have had a big impact on Aston Villa. Though the emergence of pacey, excitable young things
As it is, in a $28 million-plus-
And then there's
It's not difficult to understand why Bellamy would want to drop down a division and play for Cardiff City, envisioning a year in which he terrorizes defenses, scores a hat trick every week and gets the Bluebirds, his hometown club, promoted. It's a year that has "hero" written all over it, and because Manchester City has ensured he won't take a pay cut, all's the better.
But it's harder to get your head around City's thinking on this one. Bellamy scored 10 goals and created another 10 last season, helping the club to victories over Arsenal and Chelsea along the way. He was dangerous on the break, offering guile in addition to his speed toward goal -- exactly what City lacked until new signing
If City manager
For those Liverpool fans who spend time and money coordinating protest banners like the "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" effort on which Sunday's television cameras lingered, yesterday isn't soon enough for the club's co-owners,
But four months after Royal Bank of Scotland, which is owed $370 million by the pair, decided that it would not continue to refinance the debt, the whole murky business of reselling the club is as opaque as ever, with conflicting reports on the bidding process, when a deal might be done and the consequences of further delays.
The specter of administration looms large in the background (RBS can call in the debt on Oct. 6), but the bank has made no moves toward taking over Liverpool, let alone sinking it into administration, so long as discussions are ongoing. Ultimately, RBS wants its money back through the sale of the club, and finding new buyers will be easier without that millstone.
A fresh statement from the noisiest bidder,
But dealing in whispers has characterized August for Liverpool: Very little has come from verifiable sources and what has, has often been contradicted. Is it true that fewer than five bids were actually received? Is it true that Huang's bid is being aided by former Chelsea and Manchester United chief executive
Leading up to Gillett and Hicks' arrival in 2007, the papers were stuffed full of reports on their benevolence and healthy business interests, and quotes insisting that the buyout would be nothing like the Glazers' debt-laden purchase of United. Within a year, the loans the pair had indeed taken on to buy Liverpool were shifted to the club itself. A well-publicized move isn't guaranteed to be the best. And the club's silence may well be a symptom of the care it is taking in assessing all the offers, at a time when bidders' posturing or deadline days ahead might easily force its hand.
The thirst for details, for progress and for a decisive outcome, is understandable, however, and the suspicion that the current owners might be maneuvering to maintain control of the club fuels doubts as to the cause (and effects) of the delays. Didn't chairman