Liverpool Transfer News: Reds Claim Luis Suarez Will Remain at Anfield
Rest easy, Liverpool fans, as manager Brendan Rodgers has promised that Luis Suarez will remain a member of the Reds for the foreseeable future.
What do you think of this decision?
According to the Press Association (via The Guardian), Rodgers stated that “unless something drastic happens,” Suarez—who still has three years left on his contract—would stay with the Merseyside outfit.
The 26-year-old seemed unhappy at Anfield and made that readily apparent during interviews in the offseason, but Liverpool rejected a £30 million offer from Arsenal for his services and recently named him to the 27-man squad for the club’s upcoming tour of the Pacific Islands.
Before getting hit with a 10-game ban for biting Chelsea’s Branislav Ivanovic—a ban he still must serve a portion of this season—Suarez managed to score 30 goals.
The Uruguayan striker is extremely important to the success of Liverpool, and Rodgers made that clear at his press conference in Jakarta, but also made sure to emphasize that no player would be more important than the team as a whole.
The manager had this to say, as per The Guardian:
Luis Suarez is a wonderful player and he is still very much a Liverpool player. No matter who the player is, nobody is bigger than Liverpool Football Club.
Luis is a very important member of this squad and I am looking forward to working with him again this season after he had such a fantastic season. There has been lots of speculation about Luis moving to another club but, as I said, he is very much a Liverpool player. We had an offer that was nowhere near what we value him at. He's one of the top strikers in the world.
Liverpool finished seventh in the Barclays Premier League last season and is hoping to improve on that performance in 2013/14.
With Suarez and Rodgers back for another season at Anfield, the possibility for improvement is certainly strong.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?