nogs

We seem to be very good at losing players in a certain position. Last year it was strikers and this year its defenders! I think even if Distin has a strain he will play becuase we cant afford to not have him out there. I would also stick by my original decision and have Duffy start at CB. Distin will know he has to be the commanding defender and pull his finger out (hopefully). We will have an even bigger problem if Rodwell is out because that also means we have no holding midfielder in any way shape or form. I wouldnt really call Jack one but he is the only thing we have resembling a DM right now. Cahill and Felli in the centre of midfield will be a shambles as neither will know what to do going forwards or backwards. I dont even know if any of our youngsters play there?

 

What I do know however that if both Distin and Rodwell are out we havent got a hope in hell.

I'd have to agree. As shite as Yobo and Distin have been recently i don't fancy taking on a side who beat Benfica at home with two reserve team players at centre back. I'm worried...

Saying that, looks like we can at least put out a decent midfield and forward line. If we're short on bodies at the back, it's going to force Moyes's hand to go for it a bit - I think we have to play 4-4-2 and attack them, they looked shite at the back themselves at ours

even though Johnny has played RB in the past, i agree with the original post, that he has found his place. He could be the answer to Carsley. Then, when Neville comes back, put him at RB. Johnny gets stuck in and doesnt shirk from a challenge (not that Pip does mind you!) but i just think he has a bit more pace and better eye for a pass than Neville.

 

As for the midfield, wont it be nice for DM to have a headache with the selection! im still sure we should do 442 depsite the performance at Hull, but if not, maybe 451 but with Saha supporting Jo/Yak. His pace and skill is vital going forward and he can win a header too. he would see more of the ball too, as we wouldnt have to hoof it long for him to battle it out. just a thought....

Wouldn't disagree with you about Heitinga, he certainly adds much-needed physical presence in the centre. I just think we need RB still and that is surely what Heitinga was signed to do. I'm all for 4-4-2 if we can get the right balance of steel and creativity - it would help if we could rely on Fellaini to play like he did in the derby every match, when he plays like that I don't think there's any question he's wasted floating around behind the striker.

I still think Heitinga is a right back first and foremost, and nevermind what their 'right' position is, you couldn't get much worse than Yobo and Distin at the back yesterday, I'd rather play someone out of position just to make sure they don't play alongside eachother at the moment (see other thread), they just do not work as a pairing.

I can forgive Yobo's uncultured flailing boot diverting a crap speculative shot into his own net, but when he gave away the ball in his own box to Gerrard, i wanted him hung, drawn and quartered. Having had a night to calm down, I'll now settle for him being dropped immediately. His head has gone, he's a liability at the moment and needs some time to sort himself out. Distin's not much better, but not sure we can muster up two replacement CB's right now...

And yes, I reckon Neill should be the man to go in there for Yobo. Not much good for Athens i know, but it's pretty clear that Yobo and Distin don't have any leadership qualities between whatsoever, there's no organisation between thm, no talking, no steel. Neill offers experience, leadership, grit and determination - it might not be his position, but let's face it, he couldn't do any worse, and we can't just keep throwing points away coz of bad defending like we are. Heitinga is the other obvious option, but I think he's doing a decent job covering for Pip in CM at the moment.

I am full of confidence for the future after that performance. When we get a full strength side out, we will do very well. Not scared of anyone now, pity the result did not reflect just how dominant we were really.

 

But that is football, doesn't matter how good you are, it is the goals that count.

I agree it was great to see us actually playing anything like good football but we need points. Spurs and Chelsea up in the next couple of weeks, and no matter how well we play elsewhere on the pitch, if we don't fucking sort out the two clowns masquerading at CB for us soon, we'll get nothing out of either of those games. What worries me is we've had our 'easiest' run of fixtures for the season, if we don't get some luck go our way soon we could be in the bottom three and 14/15 points off a European place by Christmas.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/everton-fc/everton-fc-new-stadium//2009/11/27/everton-fc-ready-for-talks-on-shared-stadium-but-liverpool-fc-set-to-go-it-alone-100252-25264688/2/

Warren Bradley speaking about redevelopment of Goodison:

'He said the possible need to relocate the nearby Gwladys Street Primary school, homes in Muriel Street and Diana Street, and Walton Motors to allow for the redevelopment of Goodison was “not a massive hurdle”.'

I always thought it was the council's opposition that made moving the school unfeasible? After all this, could we end up knocking down Goodison and rebuilding on the same site afterall?

If you look at these reports and compare them to the previous year it would show that Everton arent doing too bad. In the year 2008 they had some significant costs (i.e. Finch Farm) and still made 5mil operating profit before player fees which more or less meant the club broke even for the financial year. This is ok but it means we arent eating into our debt and seeing as there is no cash available, all future transfers have to occur via the use of more loans. Our long term debt is around the 30mil mark which isnt too bad providing we can pay any capital repayments and the interest. Given the fact the Moyes couldnt spend any money this summer (only re-invested Lescott money) it hints that we may be struggling a wee bit. With the current financial situation banks may want more capital back from their borrowers, which is the opinion of a few posts that I have read into. If this does occur then it will certainly hinder any potential transfer dealings as any operational profit will be put straight into that pot rather than the transfer kitty.

 

We have creditors of around 83million, although not all of this is exactly what it seems. For instance 17mil of this is from pre-paid season ticket money. In accounting terms its 17mil that the club owes the supporters in football viewing. This means that whilst this figure is high, there is more than meets the eye and the banks wont come knocking at Blue Bills door asking for the money back (or at least that what financial experts on toffeeweb are saying!).

 

The problems arise if we cant keep maintaining the high finishing position and extra revenue from cup games. We need to finish above 7th/8th in order to get a decent TV money, which this year is looking a bit shaky. Should we not make the next round of Europe or the FA Cup then we will be short again and this will hinder Moyes' transfer kitty even further. Add this to the continuing stadium proposal money and the additional interest of the 30mil loan we agreed for the begnining of this season then it does raise some slightly concerning questions, although nothing to start panicking over just yet.

 

However if Everton could continue in a similar vein as 2008 or improve then we would be in a pretty solid financial state as we will be able to service our debt and improve the squad by around the 5mil mark each season. Yes that isnt much but we do have a decent squad when everyone is fit and we could probably go through January and next september without having to buy any new players, if need be. I expect this years figures to be down on 2008 although seeing as we technically didnt spend in the summer we may see similar numbers, we will see. I have to admit though its not in as bad a state as I thought although it could quite quickly turn if on the pitch performance doesnt improve.

Cheers for that summary Bailey - much better than I could have managed! What I do agree with even when I'm arguing that our finances are not as bad as is made out sometimes, we are walking something of a tightrope, and it does make investment in players difficult. In defence of the Kenwright regime, I think it's fair to say he's steered us on a course of steady, gradual progress on and off the field. In criticism, steady progress might not be enough when our rivals can invest more heavily in the team, meaning we risk grinding to a halt altogether if we can't keep finishing in the top seven or eight. And, crucially, he's failed to deliver us a new stadium.

As I've made clear I think kenwright has done a good job, but we need more than he can offer now. I'd be delighted to see the club sold to the right person - but only the right person

ok, so your facts say that our turnover is 75m and our debt is 39m.

the facts that matter to me is that we make a loss every year, and every time that happens we increase our debt. its not like were spending the money on transfers because we tend to spend about £3m a year after player sales.

im happy to agree to disagree (offering my hand to shake on it) but i dont see how you dont see our financial situation as worrying and stil think we are manageable.

Handshake accepted... As Dave Prentice said in the Echo today, we should all stop bickering about the rights and wrongs of the club really coz it doesn't do anyone any good. The fact is, at the moment the team is playing shite and we all need to get behind them, we need to sort a new ground and all need to make our voices heard on getting a realistic solution sorted asap, and Kenwright - however we judge his pat record - is probably not the right guy to take us forward if we wanna make the next step forward. I reckon we can agree on that much anyway

If we lose him we're fucked, Saha isn't gonna last more than a couple of seasons, we'd be lucky to find another 20-goal a season striker under 25 for £10m

Gotta say it's spot on about Arteta/Pienaar - we weren't great at start of the season but at least we could win a match, since Pienaar's been out we've been dreadful. Will he be fit enough to start Sunday? Him and Bily on the wings, you never know, we might even be able to pass a ball every now and then

I reckon finishing in the bottom half would be a disaster for us, nevermind relegation - and yeah, it's looking a real possibility. All the hard work of the last three years is unravelling before our eyes, I can see Pienaar/Yak leaving in the summer if we're not at least somewhere near qualifying for Europe again. God I hope we pull a miracle out the bag and beat the shite on Sunday, but as bad as they are this season, the sad fact is we're worse.

I agree with Romey, the defence is a shambles, nevermind Distin, Yobo is playing like an absolute tool. But in all honesty we're poor all over the park, I dunno how Saha has scored 10 goals this season coz the use fo teh football in midfield is shocking, we used to play better stuff with Pembridge and Gemmill in the centre!

Could either club really afford their share of the costs right now? Liverpool's finances are looking like shit and ours are hardly looking positive either.

Who knows? You'd kind of hope two clubs the size of Everton and Liverpool would be able between them to leverage enough investment to get a project like that off the ground.

Tenaciousj - Good argument but if Liverpool City Council are thinking like this, why haven't they been pushing the idea in public for years, and putting pressure on both clubs to make it happen? The way i see it they've just been interested in flogging land to the highest bidder whether its football-related or not, and don't really seem to give a shite about either club

So come on - Kirkby is dead, we're all broadly happy about that, but let's face the facts, we're back to square one with a ground that is too far gone to redevelop, that is not capable of producing enough match day revenue for us to compete with other clubs that have built/redeveloped stadiums, and which is arguably a main reason why we're unable to attract investment. Elstone has apparently now suggested we would consider a joint stadium scheme with Liverpool. Without any other options on the table, can we seriously afford to dismiss it based on not liking the red shite very much?

Liverpool is putting in its World Cup 2018 bid today - I don't know what's in it, but I imagine it will get laughed out the room at the moment given the fact that no one knows if either of the two football grounds currently in the city will even exist in 2018. It might be too late for the World Cup bid, but isn't it time for the council and the two clubs to sit down and seriously talk about the Stanley Park site anyway? The ares over tit stadium redevelopment plans of both clubs must be making the city a laughing stock all the way from Sunderland to Southampton.

I know what the reaction of most of you will be, but we're just been turned over by Hull, our manager looks as if he's ready to pack it in, we've got a casualty list like something out of a Die Hard film, we've failed in yet another stadium plan and right now it's pretty hard to decide who are the bigger bunch of clowns, the team or the directors. We're in danger of proving all the snides who aid it was a fluke we finished in the top 6 three years on the row right, and being relegated (literally maybe?) back to being an also-club. We need to do something drastic, and if sharing an 80,000 stadium with the shite will mean we can attract investment and stay close to where we belong, then I'm up for it.

If that's true and Pienaar is out then I'd put these eleven on the pitch.

 

Howard

Hibbert

Neill

Yobo

Distin

Baines

Heitinga

Rodwell

Cahill

Yakubu

Saha

 

F*ck knows who'd play where but I just can't bear to see Gosling's angelic little visage wasting a shirt again so they'll have to sort it out.

Maybe we could try the example of the great old Aussie cricketer Keith Miller who when he was captain used to walk on the field and just tell his team to "scatter." We couldn't be any worse (though we could be in a spot of grief if Tim Howard decided he wanted to play up front for a change ).

Easy...

Howard

Hibbert Yobo Distin Neill

Cahill Heitinga Rodwell Baines

Saha Yakubu

Reminds me of the old Walter Smith days of playing six centre backs in the same team....

One thing to note, though, SEVEN of that team are full internationals, six of them current regulars for their country (and on current form, Saha arguably should be). If they can't beat Hull there's something seriously wrong.

Villa Sunderland and Spurs all have wealthy backers, their debts are not in any danger.

what happened to Leeds did not happen to Newcastle. do you remember what happened to Leeds? they spent so much and then had to sell it all for a loss and still pay wage compo to half of the players. Newcastle did not have to sell and still do not have the financial problems of Leeds.

Liverpool can sell up within weeks if their owners would let the club go.

im not saying BK should spend, hes borrowed so much im suprised we can still get any sort of finance (it help when uncle Phil says please)

im happy to agree to disagree, as i said previously, most of your arguments were unfounded when you didnt know the club was so badly in debt, just appeared to me that you were making lots of assumptions.

im sure BKs reputation will be set in stone one day, but not a day soon enough for me.

No, my entire argument is that we're NOT that badly in debt, for a top-flight football club, based on the published FACTS that our debt is around £39m, secured on a turnover of £75m-plus. I'm not asking you to change your opinion on Kenwright, but if you're going to dismiss my arguments in such a patronising way you could least do me the courtesy of putting a figure on the club's debt as you see it, and where you got it from.

I started out being pretty ambivalent about the Kirkby move, erring on the side of support maybe, becuase it's pretty obvious Goodison isn't up to scratch anymore and isn't going to get the makeover it needs (needed to be done 15 years ago if at all). But the longer this saga goes on, the more you get the impression the board have put all their eggs in one basket on this one, no plan B - Elstone saying we'll be a bottom half club in 10 years if it doesn't go ahead, wtf?!? What kind of business plan is that? What's the contingency?

It just reeks of us being seduced by Tesco's offer of cash and waking up one day to find we've signed our future away to Sir Terry and his merry men. He might be an Everton fan, but he's a brutal business man - I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere in the small print we stand to lose a load of money to Tesco if this doesn't go ahead, which is why the board are sounding so desperate. We should have walked away long ago in my opinion, but perhaps that's not an option now.

DM after that Sunderland game...

 

"It is how I have been hoping to get an Everton team playing and I hope we see Everton playing that was more often - hopefully it's the first of many."

 

Funny that we played the much maligned 4-5-1 that day though with Arteta, Carsley, Osman, Pienaar and Cahill being the five (love to be able to put that midfield out just now ).

 

I'm not one for attacking Moyes and I never have been and I'm not against 4-5-1 with the right players but the persistant picking of Gosling so that we can play it I find totally baffling.

Fair enough, but we didn't have two strikers of the quality of Yak and Saha at the club to warrant playing two up top.

I don't like criticising Moyes either, but you've got to admit, the way we played against Sunderland 'that' day was the exception rather than the rule - I just wonder whether he's got it in it to let any team of his off the reigns and go out to batter a side. Like you say, he plays Gosling just to keep numbers in the midfield, even tho he must surely know the poor kid is not offering anything going forward or in defence this season.

im not being funny, but im not here to do the maths for you.

pur debt has increase over the past six years, and our assets have also decreased, which is also a massive problem as we have used up pretty much all of our liquidity apart from the playing staff.

 

you can either go and work it out, or not. its upto you mate, i know my reasons for my opinions, but it seems your opinions are based off BK being a nice guy and us having less debt than united liverpool and arsenal. i dont need to keep backing up my opinion, but educating yourself on the issues before posting may be useful.

And Villa, and Spurs, and Sunderland. Not to mention Pompey, Bolton and two of the teams relegated last season, Newcastle and Boro.

I know my reasons for my opinions as well, and it's got nothing to do with BK 'being a nice guy'. Just to reiterate my original point, in case you missed it - football has become all about buying success, which I think is not only a shame, it is putting the future of clubs at risk. All clubs borrow money to invest in the team to try to win trophies, so it becomes a matter of balancing debt against success. A tiny few - Chelsea and now Man City - are fortunate enough to have super-rich investors who hand them interest free loans. These are a tiny minority and not really anything to aspire to as attracting a billionaire who's prepared to invest hundreds of millions out of their own pocket is highly unlikely. Others - like Man Utd and Arsenal - have developed a big enough 'brand' over many years of success to make large-scale borrowing viable. Most teams fall somewhere in the middle - even those with rich 'investors' most often use them to leverage more borrowing in the form of guaranteeing loans. As I said, it then becomes a question of balancing borrowing to invest in the team with success on the pitch - if you stretch yourself too far and success doesn't follow, you're in trouble, as seen by Leeds, Newcastle, Pompey, West Ham and, potentially, Liverpool.

So i think BK's biggest 'crime' is caution - he could have gone hell for leather and borrowed more and more to try and strive for the top four, but he knew the risks to the club's future if we didn't get there. In either case, to some sections of the club's support he's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't - if he borrows too much, he gets slammed for the levels of debt, if he doesn't invest in the team, he gets slammed for that too.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I accept fully that we're never gonna get to where we want to be without serious investment, which will mean the end of BK's time in charge. But the facts as I see them are that we've been better run for the past ten years than a hell of a lot of other football clubs, which means we've got a better chance of attracting the right kind of investment than we did when BK took over.

I know as a club we owe Moyes a lot, but I'm starting to wonder whether his, shall we call it 'cautious' approach, is ever going to win us anything.

I don't like making knee-jerk reactions to bad runs of form - we've had the worst luck imaginable with injuries this season, and we are a team that tends to go on long runs of poor form followed by long runs of great results. But Spurs' 9-1 mauling of Wigan got me thinking - are we ever going to see that kind of football played by Moyes, and if not, can we ever expect him to win anything? Bar the Sunderland game, I can't remember us ever giving anyone a real drubbing under Moyes (although we've been on the receiving end of a few hidings), we just don't ever play that kind of free-spirited attacking football that I think you need to be successful. Moyes has never gone for that approach, at Preston or us - Someone like Redknapp, on the other hand, has always tried to play good attacking football, even with the kids at West Ham when they got relegated, and looks like he's reaping the awards with it now with (I hate to admit this) what looks like a very, very good Spurs side.

Maybe I'm just letting the last six weeks get to me, but even with our first 11 out - which i still think is a match for anyone on paper - I can always see Moyes playing one up top, putting defence first and trying to hussle for 1-0 wins. I'd happily take that right now, starting with Hull and Liverpool, but in the long run we're gonna get left behind by sides that go out and look to put three or four past the opposition every game.

I suppose when you read some of my posts I harp on about how we need money. I guess realistically one of the reasdons we need it is that we are able to pay for 'proven' world stage performers and that comes at a price. I don't blame anyone for Fellaini as such, however maybe the reason we signed him was that we never quite had the extra spondoolies to get Moutinho. There is no magical way to know whether someone will fit in the premier league - for every Essien there is a Veron, for every Vidic there is a Kroldrup.

 

Pro's and Cons Fellaini:

 

Pro's: Young and time to develop, Great in the air, first touch, combative, get's in good positions around the box.

 

Cons: Slow, gives away too many fouls, needs to make more killer passes, can disappear from the game, don't know best position

 

Top ten signing? Here's mine in order based on importance and value for money:

 

 

1. Arteta

2. Saha (based on assumption was free - most technically gifted player we have IMO)

3. Jagielka

4. Pienaar

5. Cahill

6. Howard

7. Lescott

8. Neville

9. Baines

10 Yobo

Pretty sound assessment of Fellaini's pros and cons, I think the big thing for me is his passing ability, especially for a guy with such good touch, if he could just distribute the ball he'd look a top player, would make up for his lack of pace too. But for me the big thing is being played in loads of different positions - I know he has a good goal scoring record but I just don't see him as an auxiliary forward, juts throwing him up there coz he's big and can hold off defenders is just naive in my opinion, you certainly need pace to play up top in the modern game, and for me he doesn't have the instinct to play that killer final ball say a Beardsley would play, and when he's in the box he doesn't attack the ball like a natural goalscorer. I've said it for a while now, i think Moyes is doing him a disservice trying to turn him into something he's not, he needs a long run of games at centre mid, I think we'd see him develop much better.

I'd personally have the Yak in top ten signings rather than Yobo, when fit and sharp he is as lethal as Saha, perhaps a little more brute strength rather than finesse, but to my mind is best finisher we've had since... erm, Cottee?

not one of our shareholders has invested a penny in the club. Elstone laid that one out on the table in public. the money they spent was to buy the shares and nothing else at all.

 

you might not know the situation, i do. anyone who does understand the figures and has taken the time to read them knows our situation has become worse year on year. it sort of levelled out when Rooney was sold.

 

just because you might not know the situation, dont think other people dont too.

 

 

i'm not saying i think that, but a lot of his comments about the lack of transfer fund would make lots of people think he hisnt happy with the situation.

Not being funny but you haven't answered the question - is our debt just under £40m or not? Coz these are public accounts which under law have to be truthful, which kinda makes me inclined to believe them. If we do have a debt of £40m, as i posted elsewhere in this thread, that's lower than most prem clubs, and hasn't increased significantly in the past five or six years at least.

I'll do this in stages:

 

1.

Record turnover every year??? You would like to think so, inflation has a lot to do with that. In the words of Bill after anouncing record turnover: "Our debt is a big debt and a worrying debt, but it is manageable because of our performance on the field and because we do well each year as a business, thanks to David (Moyes). But it is too much debt that every year is going to be added to" "Every summer it's the same problem. David must think 'every summer, how can I do it?'. He must be sitting there looking at these figures thinking 'they have given me nothing again and they want the Champions League'. "But we do manage to sustain the debt. We have a good bank and we have had to go to them again this summer. All we can do is borrow and that's what we are doing again this year to give David not nearly enough money to take a club that's finished fifth in the last two seasons even higher.

 

2.

Finch Farm was acquired in 2006 by Everton who later sold the land on for £2.1 million and then had it developed to the club’s specification by developers ROM Capital (an arm of the aAim Group). On completion, Finch Farm was valued by ROM Capital at £17 M. Everton signed a 50-year tenancy agreement with ROM Capital for Finch Farm.[2] Everton have an option to purchase the site after 5 years. So we are renting somewhere whilst we are lumbered with the problematic site in Bellefield which can not be built on.

 

3. Biggest shirt sponsorship in the clubs history - £2m a year. Let's put that into perspective... Liverpool have signed one worth £20m a year with Standard Chartered, Man City and Spurs and Arsenal more than double what we are on £5m a year, Fulham receive £4m a year from LG.

 

4. Kitbag haver the rights to sell our kit which is estimated at £3m a year. Based on the fact that it is Le Coq Sportif, I can't see your neutral fan clamouring for it ala Nike/Adidas. The deal we got from Le Coq Sportif was not much better than the one Man City had with them when they were struggling in the league. Before they went to Reebok. Again - is it a success story???

 

I think I won't even get onto the club shops and knowsley stadium move as I am now suitably depressed.

 

 

 

 

Where did I say that it is us v them in terms of players/coaching staff versus powersuits? Must have been where you read the financials....

Your phrase 'in spite of Kenwright' to describe our success on the pitch in recent doesn't exactly suggest you think everyone in the club is working together

What figures are you looking at nogs? The debt has increased around £65million since 1999.

 

Have a look at this site - http://www.scribd.com/SwerveEFC - a load of published accounts since mid Johnson era.

 

SteveO - You Johnsonite!!

 

You know what.. PJ might be a good guest for Talking Toffee.

Right, someone PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong with clear, undisputable evidence to the contrary - here are the official accounts from 2003 and 2008, clearly stating that our debt was £34m in 2003, and £39.5m in 2008. I don't fully understand the balance sheets, but i do know that all the stuff listed in 'creditors' does not equal our debt - if you add all those figures in brackets up, you get a massive sum of money, but that's not 'debt' as in borrowings, it's stuff like money invested by shareholders (i.e. what would be owed if the club was for some reason forced to but back all shares at once) and money owed in transfer deals.

http://www.evertonfc.com/assets/_files/documents/dec_08/efc__1229522006_EFC_Report_and_Account_2008.pdf

http://www.evertonfc.com/assets/_files/documents/jul_08/efc__1215074774_Accounts03.pdf

I think it's important to get this sorted coz it as Everton fans no one is really clear what the financial situation of the club really is, so how can we make a judgment.

I don't think Rodwell's the type to leave - he's playing regular Prem and European football, he's come through the ranks and he can see former academy players around him who have become established prem players under Moyes. Rooney had his head turned by a w**ker of an agent who saw a quick buck and filled his head with tales of trophies and superstardom, Rodwell is still looked after by his dad and is hopefully bright enough to realise he can become a superstar at Everton FC.

Apart from that, I don't think he's quite in the Gerrard/Fabregas/Rooney bracket - they were match winners at 18, he's solid, one who's gonna get better the more he plays. He'd rot in the reserved at Chelsea, they never bring kids on, he'd probably do the same at City with all their stars. Fergie would probably do a great job with him, but he wouldnt be playing much first team football for a couple of years, so why bother?

I resent all the talk that we're 'vulnerable' to offers and desperate for a quick buck - Lescott wanted to go, and let's face it, we fleeced City for him, he's been dreadful for them. The only way Rodwell will go is if he wants to, and like I started off saying, i just don't think he will.

 

You are not looking close enough.

 

But Goodison boss David Moyes is determined to keep Rodwell, whose ability to play an attacking or defensive midfield role, in addition to operating as an emergency centre-back, puts his value to Everton at £9m.

 

Ignore what is in between cos that could have been anything ..........

But Goodison boss David Moyes, who has red hair and wears a black suit, puts his value to Everton at £9m.

 

He doesnt say I think David Moyes puts his value, or i assume David Moyes puts his value, or its rumoured David Moyes puts his value ......

 

Now if you cant see that i suggest you go for an immediate eye test.

 

If that is untrue then i expect Moyes will have him in court like he did Rooney, for saying things about him that are lies. Its a bit different when things go down in print.

Sorry mate you're wrong. Look at how the sentence is put together - "Moyes is determined to keep Rodwell," one clause, stating Moyes's thoughts, which is pretty bleeding obvious. Then, entirely new clause, "whose ability... puts his value at £9m." Moyes isn't doing the 'putting', it's 'Rodwell's ability' - in other words, pure conjecture on the part of the journo.

I'm a former journo myself, i know how this stuff works