Arsenal Transfer News: Breaking Down Latest in Luis Suarez Pursuit
So where do we stand on Luis Suarez?
I know that's the question on everyone's mind these days, as every twist and turn in the striker's saga is soooo interesting, and none of us can get enough of the speculation and drama surrounding his potential departure from Liverpool, and, obviously, we all want more where that came from.
Well, I guess someone doesn't appreciate my sarcasm.
To be fair, most Arsenal fans are hanging on every bit of news in the club's courtship of Suarez, desperate to add an elite striker after Robin van Persie bolted last summer.
The latest from Suarez will require some reading of the tea leaves. We turn to BBC Sport, as Mr. Suarez has recently, and perhaps conveniently, come up with a knock:
Unsettled Liverpool striker Luis Suarez will miss the club's pre-season trip to Norway with a foot injury.
The Uruguay international, 26, has been the subject of two bids from Arsenal and may request a transfer to force a move away from Merseyside.
Suarez has played in three of the Reds' pre-season matches—against Melbourne Victory, Thailand and Olympiakos. Liverpool meet Valerenga on Wednesday in their penultimate friendly before the start of the season.
Suarez will have a scan on his foot injury in the next 24 hours, joining Daniel Agger, Glen Johnson and Martin Skrtel in staying in England to receive treatment.
That knock is potentially quite convenient given the second paragraph of the BBC's report. Sami Mokbel and Laurie Whitwell of the Daily Mail have more on Suarez's strategy to force a move:
Luis Suarez is prepared to take legal action against Liverpool in a bid to force through his protracted move to Arsenal, as the controversial striker was snapped leaving training at the club's Melwood complex on Tuesday.
The Uruguay forward believes the Anfield club are reneging on a clause in his contract he thinks entitles him to leave should a Champions League side make a formal offer of over £40million—a step the Gunners have already taken.
Liverpool are disputing the clause, insisting they are obliged only to inform Suarez of the offer.
And so the plot thickens.
Even if Suarez is wrong about the clause in his contract, any legal action—or threats of legal action—will be a major distraction for the Anfield side, as would a formal transfer request. By going to the courts, Suarez is making it quite clear that he wants nothing to do with Liverpool any longer.
His body language has suggested as much. From The Telegraph:
Just like on Saturday at Steven Gerrard's testimonial virtually everything the Uruguay international did brought the select 5,000-strong crowd to life.
However, the 26 year-old did not seem keen to acknowledge their backing—even when the rest of the squad did so at the end of the session.
Consider that just another sign that Suarez has mentally checked out from Liverpool. Another sign was the fact that he was the only player who didn't attend Steven Gerrard's post-invitational dinner, via David Kent of the Daily Mail.
He wants out, Liverpool. Why not just set him free already and bring back a small fortune in the meantime?
It seems pretty obvious Arsenal are the only club in for Suarez at the moment. Brendan Rodgers can't keep the Gunners out of his mouth—in his latest comments, via Andy Hunter of The Guardian, he accused Arsenal of lacking class—and you have to think if a club outside of the Premier League made a competitive offer for Suarez, he'd be gone in a flash.
That obviously hasn't happened yet. For now, it looks as though Arsenal are the lone suitor.
I get why Liverpool doesn't want to sell him to Arsenal, a team the Reds will compete with to reach the Champions League. I get that they don't want to get rid of their best player and appear as though they can be bullied into selling.
But at some point, it isn't worth the headache any longer. At some point, you just take the money and run.
That is what Arsenal are banking on. It's what Suarez is banking on. Let's see if Liverpool finally blinks.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?