Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

Mitch Connor · 26-02-2009 11:53AM

Cyrus wrote: »

this is just getting silly now,

so your car cost you 20k regardless of the fact you got 15 for your old one for example.

what did it cost you 20 or 5?

think about it

It cost me 20k. I didn't trade my old car against it. They are two seperate transactions. On a balance sheet, it would come as a 20k purchase, not a 5k(for instance) purchase. The two transactions are seperate. How else can it be seen?

For instance, Carrick cost us 16million, but we sold a load of players that summer, does that mean Carricks 16million fee is a lie, and that he was actually free? No, of course not. United spent the money on him. How they got that money is not relevant to the fact it was spent. If whelan had said Rafa had a net spend of 200million it would be a lie, but he didn't as far as i know. He said rafa had spent 200million (i don't think 200million is correct either btw) which, for the sake of argument is a lot more accurate than saying Rafa has only spent 80million.

Boggles · 26-02-2009 11:55AM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

It cost me 20k. I didn't trade my old car against it. They are two seperate transactions. On a balance sheet, it would come as a 20k purchase, not a 5k(for instance) purchase. The two transactions are seperate. How else can it be seen?

For instance, Carrick cost us 16million, but we sold a load of players that summer, does that mean Carricks 16million fee is a lie, and that he was actually free? No, of course not. United spent the money on him. How they got that money is not relevant to the fact it was spent. If whelan had said Rafa had a net spend of 200million it would be a lie, but he didn't as far as i know. He said rafa had spent 200million (i don't think 200million is correct either btw) which, for the sake of argument is a lot more accurate than saying Rafa has only spent 80million.

According to LFChistory.net it is £189,866,000

Mitch Connor · 26-02-2009 11:56AM

Cyrus wrote: »

what did it cost you.... this is basic stuff

Keane didnt cost liverpool 20 million he cost them the difference between what he was bought and sold for, jesus lads this isnt difficult stuff

Yeah, you could argue KEANE cost that, cause you sold him.

None of the players playing last night have been sold (obviously enough) so they all cost what ever fee was spent on them. Not whatever fee was spent minus money you got for other sales. You were able to afford them because of the other sales, but that doesn't change the purchase price or the money actually spent.

Cyrus · 26-02-2009 11:57AM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

It cost me 20k. I didn't trade my old car against it. They are two seperate transactions. On a balance sheet, it would come as a 20k purchase, not a 5k(for instance) purchase. The two transactions are seperate. How else can it be seen?

For instance, Carrick cost us 16million, but we sold a load of players that summer, does that mean Carricks 16million fee is a lie, and that he was actually free? No, of course not. United spent the money on him. How they got that money is not relevant to the fact it was spent. If whelan had said Rafa had a net spend of 200million it would be a lie, but he didn't as far as i know. He said rafa had spent 200million (i don't think 200million is correct either btw) which, for the sake of argument is a lot more accurate than saying Rafa has only spent 80million.

and what about when you sell your other car, what happens that transaction, the asset comes off the balance sheet, the funds go into your bank and all thats left is the net position

whatawaster · 26-02-2009 12:01PM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Eh? Has Rafa not spent a lot more than 80million? Keane, Torres and Mascherano would have cost around 50million - surely the rest of the squad was not bough for an average price of around 600k?

And don't go on about recouped fee's. My car cost my 20k. Just because I got money for my old car does not mean I spent any less on my new one.

this is a ridiculous argument. It's part of Rafa's job to balance the transfer books. It's very relevant the players he's sold and how much he's sold them for, because it illustrates the problems he's faced over the last few years. In an ideal world, we'd still have Bellamy, Crouch, Sissoko etc as squad players. But Rafa has been given 80m over the last couple of years to spend on players. To get any more, he's had to sell. It would be retarded to ignore this.

whatawaster · 26-02-2009 12:03PM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Yeah, you could argue KEANE cost that, cause you sold him.

None of the players playing last night have been sold (obviously enough) so they all cost what ever fee was spent on them. Not whatever fee was spent minus money you got for other sales. You were able to afford them because of the other sales, but that doesn't change the purchase price or the money actually spent.

I worked it out yesterday, our entire squad cost around 120m i think it was. On the whole, i think that's money well spent.

therecklessone · 26-02-2009 12:03PM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

So in which thread would a comparison of the formations used by United and Liverpool belong in. Do we need to start new threads for everything now?

On this one, I'd say yes Mitch

By all means discuss the tactics used by Benitez, but when replies start to bring Ferguson's tactical choices into the mix then it's not really relevant to a Liverpool thread. There's a wider topic there, for a wider audience. And it takes the sting out of the topic that inevitably occurs on a specific team superthread.

Mitch Connor · 26-02-2009 12:04PM

Cyrus wrote: »

and what about when you sell your other car, what happens that transaction, the asset comes off the balance sheet, the funds go into your bank and all thats left is the net position

yeah - so what? My car, the one sitting outside, cost 20k (well, a bit more actually). That is the long and the short of it. I was able to afford it because of money gained through other transactions (work, sale of items etc) but the car still cost 20k. I still spent 20k on it. It doesn't matter where I got that money from.

If you want to talk about money recouped, why stop at transfers? I could argue, going by this logic, that Ferguson has spent NOTHING on players during his time at United, given all the money recouped and match day revenue. Surely you could only say, following this logic, players cost the club anything only if the club posts an operating loss at the end of each year.

Karmafaerie · 26-02-2009 12:04PM

God!
Here we go again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Killme00 · 26-02-2009 12:05PM

whatawaster wrote: »

It's part of Rafa's job to balance the transfer books. .

LOL, no its not

Mitch Connor · 26-02-2009 12:07PM

whatawaster wrote: »

I worked it out yesterday, our entire squad cost around 120m i think it was. On the whole, i think that's money well spent.

net or money paid per player?

On money paid per player, that is a decent return at approx 10million per player (including subs used/unused?) I would say Uniteds is a lot, lot, more. Hell, 120 would only have got Rooney, Berbatov, Rio, Ronaldo and Carrick.

whatawaster · 26-02-2009 12:08PM

Killme00 wrote: »

LOL, no its not

well he's bound by a limited budget and has to sell in order to buy, so essentially it is.

ROCKMAN · 26-02-2009 12:09PM

therecklessone wrote: »

There's a Man Utd superthread somewhere if there is really that much interest in discussing formations used by SAF.

Would it really matter where these things are posted , Its the same posters lurking in both

Just waiting for a drop of blood........

Anyway good result last night

That priceless away goal will see ye through .

Mitch Connor · 26-02-2009 12:10PM

whatawaster wrote: »

this is a ridiculous argument. It's part of Rafa's job to balance the transfer books. It's very relevant the players he's sold and how much he's sold them for, because it illustrates the problems he's faced over the last few years. In an ideal world, we'd still have Bellamy, Crouch, Sissoko etc as squad players. But Rafa has been given 80m over the last couple of years to spend on players. To get any more, he's had to sell. It would be retarded to ignore this.

Indeed - this is why i have mentioned the sales are how Rafa has afforded to spend what he has, but the fact is that he has spent close to 200million in his time at liverpool.

whatawaster · 26-02-2009 12:12PM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

net or money paid per player?

On money paid per player, that is a decent return at approx 10million per player (including subs used/unused?) I would say Uniteds is a lot, lot, more. Hell, 120 would only have got Rooney, Berbatov, Rio, Ronaldo and Carrick.

Net. 23 squad players.

Mitch Connor · 26-02-2009 12:12PM

whatawaster wrote: »

well he's bound by a limited budget and has to sell in order to buy, so essentially it is.

well if it is part of his job to balance the transfer books, he is doing a poor job, 80million down in 4 years.:D

It is his job to do the best he can with the budget he has, it is the responsibility of the owners and directors etc to ensure the money he is given is within the limits of what the club can afford.

Cyrus · 26-02-2009 12:13PM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

yeah - so what? My car, the one sitting outside, cost 20k (well, a bit more actually). That is the long and the short of it. I was able to afford it because of money gained through other transactions (work, sale of items etc) but the car still cost 20k. I still spent 20k on it. It doesn't matter where I got that money from.

If you want to talk about money recouped, why stop at transfers? I could argue, going by this logic, that Ferguson has spent NOTHING on players during his time at United, given all the money recouped and match day revenue. Surely you could only say, following this logic, players cost the club anything only if the club posts an operating loss at the end of each year.

fook it, last post, you are just being stupid

first off congrats on having car that cost you 20k, it seems to be a great source of pride for you :P

it is a 20k car, no one denies that, but if you sold another car to buy it, which people normally do with cars, its cost to you was the difference.

Karmafaerie · 26-02-2009 12:17PM

Boggles wrote: »

According to LFChistory.net it is £189,866,000

Try £81,791,000 Boogles, as you well know.

Ronnie didn't imply that rafa had spent loads and recouped loads.

He deliberately implied that Rafa had outlayed a total of £200,000,000 on 69 players.

Rafa has only bought 51 players, and the NET outlay was £81,791,000.
That's over 5 seasons.
That means that Rafa has spent on average £16,358,200 a season!

But then we all know this.
And we all know that the people here don't care, and that they will get involved, saying the exact same things the next time this is posted.
Because they simply want to argue.

We also know that Rafa has spend Net of £81 mill, and has recouped around £50 mill in Champions League money alone, not to mention the £20 or so mill in domestic earnings.

Add to that the increase in value of players like Masch, Torres, Skrtel, Agger, Alonso, Reina etc etc etc.

So Rafa has technically made more money for the club than he's cost them!

His wages are paltry (comparatively), Torres alone has doubled in value in a year, and his win in the CL generated £26,000,000 not to mention the £12,000,000 two years later, and the millions in the other two runs.

But facts are such awkward little things, eh?!;)

mike65 · 26-02-2009 12:20PM

Okay we have reached the point where people do not understand the difference between net and gross spending. I assume they are still at home with mother and father.

Karmafaerie · 26-02-2009 12:22PM

whatawaster wrote: »

I worked it out yesterday, our entire squad cost around 120m i think it was. On the whole, i think that's money well spent.

I'm sorry but your computations were way off.

Rafa has spent £189,866,000 on 51 players.

Rafa has recouped £108,075,000 on 56 players.

The Net spend is, as stated above, £81,791,000.

A bit of a difference (1/3) from £120,000,000.;)

And for that he's gotten Reina, Torres, Masch, Agger, Alonso, Skrtel, Riera, Kuyt, Arbeloa, Babel, etc.

The guy has worked wonders in the transfer maket, plain and simple.

Mitch Connor · 26-02-2009 12:24PM

mike65 wrote: »

Okay we have reached the point where people do not understand the difference between net and gross spending. I assume they are still at home with mother and father.

Oh, i understand the difference between net and gross spending, i just disagree about its importance in the actual argument. We have different attitudes to money and how to assess how it is spent and categorise that. No biggie.

An Cyrus, nice personal abuse, surprised you resorted to it though.

whatawaster · 26-02-2009 12:28PM

Karmafaerie wrote: »

I'm sorry but your computations were way off.

Rafa has spent £189,866,000 on 51 players.

Rafa has recouped £108,075,000 on 56 players.

The Net spend is, as stated above, £81,791,000.

A bit of a difference (1/3) from £120,000,000.;)

And for that he's gotten Reina, Torres, Masch, Agger, Alonso, Skrtel, Riera, Kuyt, Arbeloa, Babel, etc.

The guy has worked wonders in the transfer maket, plain and simple.

hang on, are you telling me there's a €40m black hole? Of profit?

gosplan · 26-02-2009 12:29PM

Karmafaerie wrote: »

A tiny minority of albeit loud voices want him out, while the vast, vast, majority know just how good he can/will be, and Ronnie tries to make out like the fans hate him!

I was in Anfield last week for the first time ever (not a pool fan). After the game against City people didn't have much good to say about Rafa at all. Talking to taxi drivers, hotel people and general Liverpool fans around the city people seemed to be saying

a: His players are muck (Lucas, Riera, Kyut and Benayoun all started)
b: He's been getting by on a European cup that Gerrard won with Houlier's team.
c: He will not win the league playing as defensively as he does and therefore his time has come.

Before people react, I want to stress that this was just what I was hearing from other people and is not personal opinion so please don't start an argument. Anyway, after we left Liverpool, both my wife and I were saying that Rafa could well be gone by next season. (If you lose the owners AND the man in the street, then what's left?)

The main thing that stuck with me was that Anfield was great but the game wasn't at all good or even enjoyable. This got me thinking just how much frustration is there during Liverpool performances?

Rafa's Liverpool team are often mind-numbingly negative and seem content to play without the ball for long spells. I know that Liverpool's fans want them to win first of all, especially on nights like last night, but I think that at this stage they also crave a bit of style and I reckon there must be a few annoyed that they're forking out for a season ticket to see what i saw on the weekend - a front six of Masch - Lucas - Riera - Benayoun - Kyut - Torres.

Mascherano is a defender really and Torres needs the midfielders to bring him into the game but among the other four, there isn't a single good footballer - no-one that is natural on the ball, creative or entertaining in the least. Now I know that Gerrard and Alonso were missing but that isn't that much of a second string Liverpool team, they're all Rafa's picks and the all seem to be quite liked by him.

Seriously - and this was what I most took from the game - They didn't look so much better than the Irish national team. Obviously they were dealing with a superior opposition to our boys in green but Lucas gave the ball away constantly a la Whelan, the only good striker had to drop back to midfield all the time to get the ball, no one looked comfortable on the ball etc.

The Liverpool fans seem great and having been there I finally understand the 'family club' thing but I just get the feeling that they need some style to cheer. Away to Real is one thing but Liverpool will go into a game with Stoke equally obsessed with shape, structure and how they're going to defend when they should be saying "If we get our passing and attacking game right, they don't have a chance".

My own opinion? - Liverpool would be crazy to sack Rafa unless they've someone brilliant to replace him.

whatawaster · 26-02-2009 12:34PM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Oh, i understand the difference between net and gross spending, i just disagree about its importance in the actual argument. We have different attitudes to money and how to assess how it is spent and categorise that. No biggie.

An Cyrus, nice personal abuse, surprised you resorted to it though.

Simplified Argument needed here.

Club A and Club B both appoint new managers on the same day. Their transfer dealings are as follows:

Club A - buy a striker for 30 million

Club B - buy a striker for 20 million and a midfielder for 20 million, however they sold their previous star striker to Club A for 30 million.

You would consider Club B to have spent more, yes?

Karmafaerie · 26-02-2009 12:39PM

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Oh, i understand the difference between net and gross spending, i just disagree about its importance in the actual argument. We have different attitudes to money and how to assess how it is spent and categorise that. No biggie.

Mitch, it is of massive importance.

If Rafa is told he has £10,000,000 to spend, and he wants to buy a player for £15,000,000 he has to sell a player or players for £5,000,000.

Simple really.

Rafa has had to sell to buy, every single season.

The very fact that the phrase I just used "sell to buy" is used commonly football, shows it's an important part of football.

Rafa isn't told here's £40,000,000 buy whoever you want, if you want to sell a player or two, just leave the money on my desk.

He has to sell first.

noodler · 26-02-2009 12:40PM

Torres injured again? No way, who would have thought it? Christ theres a surprise.

Now if only we had another half decent striker..

Oh and Yossi is a fecking legend. Really showing the form we know he has recently.

whatawaster · 26-02-2009 12:42PM

gosplan wrote: »

I was in Anfield last week for the first time ever (not a pool fan). After the game against City people didn't have much good to say about Rafa at all. Talking to taxi drivers, hotel people and general Liverpool fans around the city people seemed to be saying

a: His players are muck (Lucas, Riera, Kyut and Benayoun all started)
b: He's been getting by on a European cup that Gerrard won with Houlier's team.
c: He will not win the league playing as defensively as he does and therefore his time has come.

Before people react, I want to stress that this was just what I was hearing from other people and is not personal opinion so please don't start an argument. Anyway, after we left Liverpool, both my wife and I were saying that Rafa could well be gone by next season. (If you lose the owners AND the man in the street, then what's left?)

The main thing that stuck with me was that Anfield was great but the game wasn't at all good or even enjoyable. This got me thinking just how much frustration is there during Liverpool performances?

Rafa's Liverpool team are often mind-numbingly negative and seem content to play without the ball for long spells. I know that Liverpool's fans want them to win first of all, especially on nights like last night, but I think that at this stage they also crave a bit of style and I reckon there must be a few annoyed that they're forking out for a season ticket to see what i saw on the weekend - a front six of Masch - Lucas - Riera - Benayoun - Kyut - Torres.

Mascherano is a defender really and Torres needs the midfielders to bring him into the game but among the other four, there isn't a single good footballer - no-one that is natural on the ball, creative or entertaining in the least. Now I know that Gerrard and Alonso were missing but that isn't that much of a second string Liverpool team, they're all Rafa's picks and the all seem to be quite liked by him.

Seriously - and this was what I most took from the game - They didn't look so much better than the Irish national team. Obviously they were dealing with a superior opposition to our boys in green but Lucas gave the ball away constantly a la Whelan, the only good striker had to drop back to midfield all the time to get the ball, no one looked comfortable on the ball etc.

The Liverpool fans seem great and having been there I finally understand the 'family club' thing but I just get the feeling that they need some style to cheer. Away to Real is one thing but Liverpool will go into a game with Stoke equally obsessed with shape, structure and how they're going to defend when they should be saying "If we get our passing and attacking game right, they don't have a chance".

My own opinion? - Liverpool would be crazy to sack Rafa unless they've someone brilliant to replace him.

I know these weren't all your opinions but i have to react to them:

1. If Liverpool are so defensive, how is it only Utd and Chelsea have outscored us in the league this season, Utd only by 3 goals

2. Content to play without the ball is complete nonsense. Look at the official stats on the Sky Sports site. Completed passes this season:

Chelsea 11,533
Man Utd 11,365
Arsenal 10,852
Liverpool 10,657
Man City 8,533
..
..
Aston Villa 5,755

You're right, Liverpool never pass the ball or want to keep it.

Headshot · 26-02-2009 12:46PM

noodler wrote: »

Oh and Yossi is a fecking legend. Really showing the form we know he has recently.

what form,besides the goal he was very poor last night

gosplan · 26-02-2009 12:48PM

whatawaster wrote: »

I know these weren't all your opinions but i have to react to them:

1. If Liverpool are so defensive, how is it only Utd and Chelsea have outscored us in the league this season, Utd only by 3 goals

2. Content to play without the ball is complete nonsense. Look at the official stats on the Sky Sports site. Completed passes this season:

Chelsea 11,533
Man Utd 11,365
Arsenal 10,852
Liverpool 10,657
Man City 8,533
..
..
Aston Villa 5,755

You're right, Liverpool never pass the ball or want to keep it.

Sorry, my bad. Clearly your stats show that Rafa is one of the more offensive managers in the league, Liverpool actually don't have a negative style and they generally kill off weaker teams by passing them off the park

Karmafaerie · 26-02-2009 12:49PM

whatawaster wrote: »

hang on, are you telling me there's a €40m black hole? Of profit?

No.

I'm simply saying your calculations were off.

You said £120,000,000.
It's actually £80,000,000.

He bought £190,000,000.
Sold £110,000,000.

Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

Comments