Arjen Robben Plus Cash for Luis Suarez Is Terrible Business for Liverpool
The striker recently confirmed his wish to leave the club due to perceived poor treatment from the British press, but The Guardian suggests the Reds will not let their man leave.
Whatever the player's or club's wishes, bigger clubs will always circle. It appears Bayern have jumped to the front of the queue with an offer, but it's one Liverpool are never, ever going to accept.
Robben took advantage of Toni Kroos' torn hamstring to make himself a key player for die Bayern at the end of last season, taking a starring role in almost every UEFA Champions League game since coming on in Turin and scoring the winner in the final.
His rejuvenated playing style, willingness to track back and positivity going forward was refreshing to see, and it was clear Jupp Heynckes' man-management skills had struck again.
But despite his second coming, Pep Guardiola is not expected to utilise Robben when he takes control of the club this summer.
Bayern chiefs willl be fishing for potential suitors, but the Reds cannot be considered one of them.
Liverpool have a new buying policy, and nowhere in the manifest does it read "purchase insanely expensive player with no resale value whatsoever."
As good as Robben can be—and he's a world-beater on his day, an unplayable nightmare to mark—he's 29 years of age and his speculated earnings are more than £100,000 per week.
He's a little injury-prone, but he'll still ask for a four-year deal. That'll take him through to 33 and a half years of age, and the Reds won't be able to shift him on.
They've had enough problems getting rid of Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing, so why would they make the same mistake a third time, and to top it off, make it the most expensive yet?
Brendan Rodgers follows a similar footballing philosophy to Guardiola—the passing mantra, the tiki-taka style.
If Guardiola—the father of modern tiki-taka—can't find room for him, how on earth is Rodgers in a position to differ?
Throughout the summer we see some insane, crazy transfer links. This might just be one of the least explicable.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?