Hafnia

If you bred race horses and you had one whichy showed unbelievable qualities as a foal - knowing full well that it could earn you £3m in prize money, would you sell them for £3m? If you say yes then it sounds like you have done simple maths. If you say no then you are looking at the bigger picture. Frankel earned £3m in race money... the best horse ever as can be argued. Yet since retiring he has already earned £16m alone in stud fees with more and more on the way. How can you put a price on the potential of Barkley - its more than just the transfer fee. Take Gerrard - yes Liverpool could have got £50m plus for him but they have been better off for not selling him. He brings commercial money to the club He gets the best out of other players - making them more valuable (Suarez) He attracts better players He wins games that win money His name attracts young talent to the academy You can't put a price on some things. Selling a top talent for money is not always in the best financial interests of the club. Just think how gutted the Khalid Abdullah would be if he cashyed in on Frankel at an early stage?

as succinct as I can put it - is this, "mental development" is where Barkley is at his most needy and for me that is absolutely fine and in line with where he needs to be. As for the other athletic player my feeling is that the development needs are pretty much technical which is my concern. Take Zidane - at Cannes he wasn't anywhere near the level that we came to see at Real Madrid, the reason wasn't anything other than mental, his technique was ridiculously good, it was how he could apply it and that came with experince. The main issue was his temper - opponents knew they could get a reaction based on his algerian roots and it took him away from his game.

Lets see how I can put this in a way of not being seen as dragging Lukaku into the thread, as its a very relevant point - the same way that Peter Crouch is relevant. By all accounts Barkley was physically a few years ahead of his peers - the same way that Crouch and Lukaku were. Crouch can't jump as he never had to and Lukaku never had to try too hard to be athletically "advatanged" over his opponents - just get the ball in front of him and its a goal. Barkley from what I gather was able to have the ball as long as he wanted, his skill and strength was so ridiculous that by all accounts he could dribble back to his own half and run the length of the pitch and score... I believe therefore his urgency on the ball has never had to be there - it was too easy to not lose the ball, - you can see this now, he takes too much time when he needs to be urgent. Top and bottom is that these boys are not playing against small kids or lads who aren't gonna make it, the margins are tighter. I think 24 is the right age to assess Barkley.

I e just watched it. The cryff turn had me out my seat at the time. I was 14, unreal skill. No one is going to dispute gazzas genius, Barkley has the tools to be better.

I just think the problem is people get caught up with the romance of gazza like they did with George best. At their best they were unbelievable, but that wasn't all the time, it's what they could do in a heart beat - incredible skill, pace, inspiration. Barkley has that, it's there. Just allow him the time to get his minimum level up, he's top quality, he's got pure feet.

I wouldn't think it would be Lukaku because surely mentioning him in a thread otherwise titled Lukaku results in a further 20 posts telling everyone how it's irrelevant.

The difference between Barkley and Gazza is that at the same age Gazza made more mistakes. I watched Gazza play for Newcastle, they had Beardsley playing in the same team. I think Beardsley blasted a penalty over the bar at gwladys st end. I remember the place being abuzz about this kid from Newcastle, he was great and awful all in one game. Not because of skill, just immaturity. Barkley is a one off, it's nuts to think he isn't. He's 6ft plus, built like a tank, has pace and tremendous balance and technical ability. What's sad is that transfers used to be a case of what can you add to the squad by letting a player go who had given his best, at least that was the case barring lineker, now it's like every fan thinks it's football manager and who can we sell next to enjoy a good transfer window.

I think the reality is that I would sooner trust Martinez with transfers under £15m. Look at half the dealings, Liverpool blew the Suarez money IMO. Same for spurs with bale money. We have time on our hands with Ross, no need to cash yet and he will get better.

I love the fact that balotelli is their fall guy. They have been absolutely shite and gets the stick for it. Rodgers bought a player low on confidence who I believe will be very good if he isn't picked on. Souness and redknapp on sky are permanently singling him out. Rodgers has badly messed up this season.

I wonder how many games would be missed if paid by appearance.

His touch is actually good, he holds the ball up really well now and is more composed which is where he needed to get better. I remember reading ages ago that Rio Ferdinand rated him as the toughest player to mark at United. He said he would snap him up if he was a manager. As much as Rio is a non, he knows a bit about strikers.

Soooooo, after my initial point on the Barkley thread being that selling him for money to spend on a couple of £20m players doesn't mean you are going to necessarily improve the team.... Which using an example took the thread off topic. We are back to Barkley. The only way I would sell Barkley is if:- He keeps getting injured. Like Rodwell, you just can't afford to lose that much football time. We are offered seriously good players and cash in exchange. I.e David Silva plus £30m. There is no point ingetting a massive amount, clubs put prices up and there's no guarantee you will attract the right player. Teams like city will be looking to future plan for their stars, get their current proven stars.

Welbeck is getting better and better. As a "centre forward" he is night and day difference. Ideal partner is sturrudge

I was being sarcastic. Deffo need that font

Players like Barkley come along once in a blue moon, complete command of the ball with flair, balance and inspiration that can't be coached we could sell him and buy Adam Lallana and a few other gunna bes

I thought he did look sharp. Blood and thunder type of game and he was in amongst it. Worked his line well especially defensively, unlucky not to score, great save by keeper. He just looks that little bit quicker and dynamic every time I see him. I'll be honest, I thought he looked a disgrace when we signed him. he looks far more athletic and threatening. There is a player in there, the fitter he gets the more we will see him.

Agreed, best 17 year old player I've ever seen by a Mile.

Ross needs to be allowed to assess the impact of certain types of play. He is by nature a street footballer, he will destroy players for pace, power and skill and its natural to him. He can also pass it well, but he expresses himself. In the next year or so you will see a very calculated effective player, one that makes the right pass and not the wrong dribble. Sad to see in many ways as dribbling and running at players is great to watch, but his value will rise.

Kept an eye on McGeady tonight. Looks very sharp as did Naismith. Spikey the two of them, all good though. Got to say, McGeady looks like he's gonna be very good soon.

I'm all for talking about how great players are, Naismith, McCarthy, Eto, Stones, the potential of McGeady when he's fully up to speed, and yes we do that. But ffs! Without even slating Lukaku it is deemed I can't can't question. the prospect of selling Barkley in order to let the manager buy more expensive players based on the fact that money spent doesn't equal success. Even taking it back to Barkley and critiquing him pad wants to linger on Lukaku. If he actually goes back and reads the posts he will see that they are valid points. Going to watch the internationals, laters.

I never thought I'd rate a behind the goal seat, but I was in park end nearing main stand for a few years and it was a cracking spec.

Interesting behaviour and comments there pad, you talk about subtlety I mention Lukaku once as a means of an example as to how money to spend isn't equivalent to quality as a justification for not selling Barkley. Now, this is where it gets interesting, I tried to take it back to Barkley just casting its relevance to Lukaku but you couldn't do that. You were too geared I to the verbal jousting. In other words you weren't even arsed about the Barkley relevance but choose to paint me as the reason as to why it goes off topic even though my exAmple was very much on topic. Not really arsed about bigger boards that you've owned but hey, there's the voice of authority coming right there.... Mate. Seriously back to Barkley. Now that I have clearly made Lukaku an example that spending big is not a means to improving big... He's not isolated, we sold lescott and bought bilyaltdinov and heitinga, and the remaining money was the best value = Distin.

You seem to be the voice of authority pad, can't mention the L word no matter how relevant it is, like the episode of blackadder with Macbeth. Back on topic even though you take off topic to obsess over my non obsession.... Bale sold for £90m replaced with shite. Ronaldo replaced with shite, Suarez replaced with shite. Based on value who would you sell to raise funds for the team.... £50m for Barkley, £28m for Lukaku, £20m for McCarthy... First rule of being a popular forum member, "don't criticise players who many have pinned their colours to, no matter how shite they are, stick to safe targets like McGeady and Kone".

McCarthy was money well spent. As for L, unfortunately not. Then again what manager always makes good buys? That's why it's better to retain top talent.

For some reason you think £50m to spend equals £50m in quality. My example of L is that it clearly isn't the case all the time. I think people obsess that I'm obsessing... Its a defence mechanism. Back onto Barkley, we haven't had a long enough continued run with him without getting a big injury lay off. Let's not pretend it's football manager and get excited about who we can spend £50m on. Next thing you know we will have spent £45m on pelle and tadic.