Do Not Sell My Personal Information
  1. Home
  2. Liverpool News

Liverpool: Fans react to right-back report

Liverpool: Fans react to right-back report -Liverpool News

Liverpool won’t use funds from the potential sale of Neco Williams to sign another right-back, according to journalist Paul Gorst

It was reported in June that the likes of Southampton, Leeds United, Burnley and Wolverhampton Wanderers were interested in Williams.

The Reds are apparently open to selling the 20-year-old if their £10million valuation is met.

Williams himself is keen to secure ‘regular first-team football’, having been limited to just three Premier League starts last season as Trent Alexander-Arnold’s understudy.

How would Liverpool use the Neco Williams money?

According to Gorst, though, that £10million wouldn’t be reinvested in a direct replacement.

That’s because Liverpool are confident Joe Gomez and 17-year-old academy prospect Conor Bradley provide sufficient depth.

In theory, the money could instead be put towards a replacement for Georginio Wijnaldum, who departed Anfield at the end of his contract.

It could also be used to sign another forward with a mid-season Africa Cup of Nations calling for Mohamed Salah and Sadio Mane.

Fan feed LFC Transfer Room relayed Gorst’s claim, and here’s what supporters made of it.

Liverpool warned as right-back plan emerges

“They said that last year and look what happened”

Credit: @LeeLeema123

“Sounds a bit like last season when Lovren went and we had cover with Fab at CB”

Credit: @LFC8FAN

“Just like how koumetio offered brilliant depth at cb last season”

Credit: @1mran0402

“We never learn from the mistake”

Credit: @samuelthangte22

“Enough cover for Trent? We deserve nothing”

Credit: @VxskoPx

“Gomez at RB is horrendous, cheap clowns can’t ever just have a backup”

Credit: @egan_96

In other news, fans react as the Reds reportedly look to repeat their 2020 transfer trick.


To Top

Article title: Liverpool: Fans react to right-back report

Please leave feedback to help us improve the site: