As widely reported Blackpool boss Michael Appleton has
confirmed no new bids are as yet forthcoming from Liverpool
for Tom Ince. The stumbling block, once again, appears to be an agreed
valuation for the highly promising youngster.
Liverpool may be risking another public relations embarrassment
over a player who was let go by the club only to go on to shine at Championship
Blackpool. Having signalled his willingness to return Ince will immediately alert
premierships rivals to his availability.
There is an argument that paying the reported £6 million
asking price may be bad business as the player may become available out of
contract at the end of the season. However this view relies on no other club
being shrewd enough to snap him up.
Ince has shown undeniable quality as Blackpool
and is almost the perfect match for FSG’s stated aim of securing young,
technically gifted players suited to an attacking style of play.
For the fans however having signalled our intent to re-sign
the player it would come as something of an embarrassment if we are seen to
again shy away from a higher fee. Negotiation is to be expected, nobody accepts
the first offer unless what they’re selling is a lemon!
This weakness in our strategy was shown to disastrous effect
with the Clint Dempsey saga. Here was a player who wanted to be an Anfield, a
player with all the attributes we were seeking and more importantly a player on
whom we had focused to the exclusion of other available targets. Yet at the
final hurdle the deal disintegrated due to an unwillingness to negotiate over
the fee.
What many will fear is that the club misses this opportunity
and we go on to see Ince shining at one of our major rivals. While value for
money and wise spending are virtues brought to Anfield by FSG, and are to be
applauded, missing targets due to a lack of flexibility in negotiations may be
costly in the long term.
This window is FSG’s opportunity to lay down a marker and
demonstrate the wisdom of their approach, what better player to make that
statement than Tom Ince?
No comments:
Post a Comment