Transfer Latest: Liverpool Set to Lose out on Top Targets
So far in the transfer window, Liverpool seemed set to acquire every player they set out for: Downing, Adam, Enrique and Jordan Henderson. The only thing Liverpool have yet to sign is a centre back and although they have been looking for some of the top British talents in the Premiership, it seems they're going to miss out on their targets.
So far Liverpool have gone for Ryan Shawcross, Scott Dann and Gary Cahill, in an attempt to strengthen their defensive outlook. These players will significantly strengthen Liverpool, however, so far the Reds have not been able to get any of these centre-backs.
So far Liverpool have had a £10 million bid for Shawcross rejected by Stoke, who value the defender at £18 million. Although that is probably justified given Shawcross' ability, I don't think Liverpool should be spending that sort of money for him, since they've already spent quite a bit.
Scott Dann, as I have expressed in a previous article would be a fantastic buy for Liverpool, seems to be on his way to Arsenal after bids for Cahill and Christopher Samba failed. With Arsenal more likely to give Dann a key role on the team, a move for him would certainly benefit his career. Although Liverpool could definitely do the same for him, the amount of centre-backs currently on the roster could turn him off a move to Anfield.
That leaves Gary Cahill, who scored a fantastic goal against QPR at the weekend. Liverpool have apparently offered £12 million plus David N'Gog (an interest of Bolton's), which to me is a fantastic deal for both parties and gives both teams the players they need. However, I do think Bolton will hold out for more money for Cahill (as they should, he's worth at least £16 million.) The inclusion of N'Gog might just seal the deal.
If this goes through, however, it does leave Liverpool without a backup striker, meaning Liverpool's transfer spree is unlikely to end if they do get Cahill.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?