Steven Gerrard Safe from a Real Transfer: Real Madrid Look Elsewhere
Liverpool fanatics would do anything to keep Steven Gerrard at the Kop. Whilst Jamie Carragher has stated his intent to sustain his career at Anfield, various uncertainties have been raised around Gerrard.
Especially when referencing the club's complete lack of potential last season, many would not expect Stevie G to be averse to a transfer.
Yet those inside the camp still seem stubborn and determined enough to keep a tight grip on the talented skipper. Today the news emerged that Real Madrid have switched their attention to Roma’s Daniele De Rossi.
The reason for this appears to be Jose Mourinho’s rejection of making a bid that matches those made for players such as Kaka and Christiano Ronaldo. He has seemingly played witness to the idea that Liverpool want to get a great amount of transfer funds from such a sale, even if the asking price is beyond what they should be offering him for.
Is this intentional? Most likely.
The club have made their intent clear and it’s not so far removed from the proclamation that he is "not for sale."
So this time, or for now at least, it looks as though the fans will not have to bombard the England skipper with death threats to keep him at Liverpool. They will not have to plague him the with guilt trips which sadly emerged the last time he looked towards the door.
Those in charge seem to think that he can be made to stay, but whether he wants to is another matter.
You would hope, though, that he would give his backing to the club, as opposed to finding himself unconvinced and demotivated by a team that fails to benefit his career and his own sense of self-fulfilment.
What you do not want is a similar situation to that of Ronaldo at Manchester United. His level of excellence drifted as soon as he made his intent about leaving English football clear.
With the team in disarray, Liverpool does not want the same to happen. We will know after the World Cup what Gerrard’s inclinations are.
For now, we can console ourselves in the fact that the first major threat of an exit is behind us. Though there will surely be many more to come.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?