Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12 - Mod Note 4153

Paully D · 27-12-2011 12:06AM

kingshankly wrote: »

It's painful watching downing on the pitch but even more painful watching him on the right wing very frustrating watching him

Yet he did very well at Aston Villa, Carroll did very well at Newcastle, Henderson did very well at Sunderland, etc.

Questions have to be asked of the system and the management, surely?

magma69 · 27-12-2011 12:35AM

th3 s1aught3r wrote: »

I think the owners should be very receptive to that request
what they have spent is peanuts compared to other top teams
If Liverpool dont spend they wont be in the top 4, this season or next

That's utter rubbish. Net spend of the last 5 years for the following clubs gunning for Champions League football :

Liverpool Net Spend
+£39,850,000///+£6,250,000///-£8,650,000///-£5,150,000///+£36,050,000

Approx 68.5 million

Arsenal Net Spend
+£13,400,000///-£3,550,000///-£31,000,000///£6,800,000///-£17,950,000

Approx -32 million

Chelsea Net Spend
+£7,500,000///-£10,800,000///+£17,500,000///+£87,300,000///+£47,200,000

Approx 148.7

Tottenham Net Spend
+£33,950,000///+£19,450,000///+£500,000///+£17,500,000///-£19,000,000

Approx 52.4 million

We've spent more this year and over the last five seasons than both Spurs and Arsenal and look at how they are doing.

Kirby · 27-12-2011 12:35AM

I seem to say this every week to my Liverpool friends but how Downing is still being played on the wrong wing when it clearly isn't working is beyond me. Any manager worth his salt wouldn't keep persisting with it.

Want to player on the wing opposite his strong foot so he can cut inside? It won't work but fine. Do it. But drop downing because it doesn't work with him. Try somebody else.

Oh, and that "We've spent peanuts" lark is ridiculous. "We've wasted loads!" would be more apt.

Paully D · 27-12-2011 12:42AM

th3 s1aught3r wrote: »

I think the owners should be very receptive to that request
what they have spent is peanuts compared to other top teams
If Liverpool dont spend they wont be in the top 4, this season or next

How much do you want to throw at getting into the top 4?

Over £105m spent during the Dalglish reign, that sort of spending on top of the squad already at his disposal (Reina, Agger, Johnson, Gerrard, Lucas, Kuyt, etc) should see top 4 being the minimum expected. Actually it should be absolutely guaranteed, especially in a season in which a number of the perennial challengers for it are having their worst seasons in a long while.

As has been pointed out by 'magma', that sort of spending is nothing near to ''peanuts'' compared to other teams.

Sooner or later it will click with the Liverpool fans in denial that ''King'' Kenny could be doing something wrong. :rolleyes:

tommyhaas · 27-12-2011 12:44AM

magma69 wrote: »

That's utter rubbish. Net spend of the last 5 years for the following clubs gunning for Champions League football :

Liverpool Net Spend
+£39,850,000///+£6,250,000///-£8,650,000///-£5,150,000///+£36,050,000

Approx 68.5 million

Arsenal Net Spend
+£13,400,000///-£3,550,000///-£31,000,000///£6,800,000///-£17,950,000

Approx -32 million

Chelsea Net Spend
+£7,500,000///-£10,800,000///+£17,500,000///+£87,300,000///+£47,200,000

Approx 148.7

Tottenham Net Spend
+£33,950,000///+£19,450,000///+£500,000///+£17,500,000///-£19,000,000

Approx 52.4 million

We've spent more this year and over the last five seasons than both Spurs and Arsenal and look at how they are doing.

Over 5 years as you said. The point that was being made referred to the current owner who've been at the helm for 2 windows.

Liverpool's spend over the last 5 years is roughly on a par with that of Spurs

mike65 · 27-12-2011 12:45AM

What's so annoying is that there is the lurking suspicion certainly in my mind that it wouldn't take much too fix this. They say don't teach your grandmother how to suck eggs but I'm sure most of us can see the tactical failings of the current set up, again hopefully Gerrard can provide a fix if he gets fully wound up and stays fit and of course if he is given the licence to get forward (though I'd like to see anyone try and stop him as I can only guess he's been getting frustrated with what he is seeing as well).

If Suarez gets the 8 match ban this is how I'd set the side up.

Reina
Johnson--Skrtel-Agger-Enrique

Spearing-Henderson
Bellamy----Gerrard----Maxi

Carroll

Doni, Carra, Kelly, Adam, Shelvey, Downing, Kuyt.

yes, play Carroll almost like a carthorse version of Torres, only with more holding up from him and movement from the 3 just behind him so that Gerrard is effectively both an AM and a second striker along with Maxi and Bellamy as wide men/aux strikers (they could play either side). It would mean the full backs having to put in a hard running & defensive shift as space would be created in behind the 3 during attacks, likewise the two deeper midfielders would also have to be full of beans filling in the flanks on occasion.

Kirby · 27-12-2011 12:46AM

tommyhaas wrote: »

Over 5 years as you said. The point that was being made referred to the current owner who've been at the helm for 2 windows.

Liverpool's spend over the last 5 years is roughly on a par with that of Spurs

And spurs are 3rd with two games in had.

Handsome Bob · 27-12-2011 12:47AM

Doesn't Bellamy have problems with his knees? I don't think he can be a regular starter unfortunately.

magma69 · 27-12-2011 12:50AM

tommyhaas wrote: »

Over 5 years as you said. The point that was being made referred to the current owner who've been at the helm for 2 windows.

Liverpool's spend over the last 5 years is roughly on a par with that of Spurs

Over that two windows we've spent 54 million net more than Arsenal and 55 million more than Spurs have spent in the same period of time. For a club that isn't run by a billionaire with a bottomless pit bank account, they have put in a bloody fortune into the club. So what exactly are you/and him getting at?

Le King · 27-12-2011 12:51AM

tommyhaas wrote: »

magma69 wrote: »

That's utter rubbish. Net spend of the last 5 years for the following clubs gunning for Champions League football :

Liverpool Net Spend
+£39,850,000///+£6,250,000///-£8,650,000///-£5,150,000///+£36,050,000

Approx 68.5 million

Arsenal Net Spend
+£13,400,000///-£3,550,000///-£31,000,000///£6,800,000///-£17,950,000

Approx -32 million

Chelsea Net Spend
+£7,500,000///-£10,800,000///+£17,500,000///+£87,300,000///+£47,200,000

Approx 148.7

Tottenham Net Spend
+£33,950,000///+£19,450,000///+£500,000///+£17,500,000///-£19,000,000

Approx 52.4 million

We've spent more this year and over the last five seasons than both Spurs and Arsenal and look at how they are doing.

Over 5 years as you said. The point that was being made referred to the current owner who've been at the helm for 2 windows.

Liverpool's spend over the last 5 years is roughly on a par with that of Spurs

3rd highest in the league behind Chelsea and City.

Also IIRC the difference between gross spend of Liverpool and Spurs is 70 million or so. That's a bit of a difference in fairness Tommy.

daithijjj · 27-12-2011 12:51AM

You have to be looking at big pictures to get progress. What are peoples ideas of investment?, if you sell players totalling 150 mil and spend 220 mil. you havent invested 220 mil, you have invested 70 mil and replaced what you lost in the first place.

LFC as a club has invested a total of 70mil roughly since summer 08. The team we are 3 points behind has invested twice that this year alone.

Its not that simple to get everything right. Practically all of our investment has come under Kenny and the club captain hasnt played the majority of it, think thats his 5th game with Suarez. A problem we have suffered, is the same problem Steve Bruce suffered. 12 months ago, Bruce went to Stamford Bridge and won 3-0, played great stuff and beat Chelsea who were top of the league. Bent hands in xfer request, conveyor belt in and out, and he has left the club since.

Every signing wont settle in right a way, and gob****e posts like Paully D's are ones from somebody who doesnt watch this team play every week, they are just misinformed rants, like the rant that got him infracted in the merseyside derby match thread (and you havent really looked back since have ya Paully?, same constant aroma of ****e coming from your posts regarding LFC).

We are not playing rubbish, we are playing well in the majority and struggling to score. If Charlie Adam scores the pen v Wigan and finds row Z today we are ahead of Chelsea (same games) and 3 points ahead of Arsenal (with a game more played). Yes, its frustrating but the race is only half way run after the next game. Gerrard is back, maybe a signing in January as well and things change quickly.

mike65 · 27-12-2011 12:52AM

Handsome Bob wrote: »

Doesn't Bellamy have problems with his knees? I don't think he can be a regular starter unfortunately.

Hmm forgot that. Well play him every other league game, with Downing taking his place for the other (unless Downing starts to get some reward for his crosses in which case he should keep his place)

magma69 · 27-12-2011 12:54AM

daithijjj wrote: »

You have to be looking at big pictures to get progress. What are peoples ideas of investment?, if you sell players totalling 150 mil and spend 220 mil. you havent invested 220 mil, you have invested 70 mil and replaced what you lost in the first place.

LFC as a club has invested a total of 70mil roughly since summer 08. The team we are 3 points behind has invested twice that this year alone.

Its not that simple to get everything right. Practically all of our investment has come under Kenny and the club captain hasnt played the majority of it, think thats his 5th game with Suarez. A problem we have suffered, is the same problem Steve Bruce suffered. 12 months ago, Bruce went to Stamford Bridge and won 3-0, played great stuff and beat Chelsea who were top of the league. Bent hands in xfer request, conveyor belt in and out, and he has left the club since.

Every signing wont settle in right a way, and gob****e posts like Paully D's are ones from somebody who doesnt watch this team play every week, they are just misinformed rants, like the rant that got him infracted in the merseyside derby match thread (and you havent really looked back since have ya Paully?, same constant aroma of ****e coming from your posts regarding LFC).

We are not playing rubbish, we are playing well in the majority and struggling to score. If Charlie Adam scores the pen v Wigan and finds row Z today we are ahead of Chelsea (same games) and 3 points ahead of Arsenal (with a game more played). Yes, its frustrating but the race is only half way run after the next game. Gerrard is back, maybe a signing in January as well and things change quickly.

We shouldn't be comparing ourselves to Chelsea. They are an absolute joke in the way they do their business and are kept afloat but a billionaire, we don't have that luxury.

tommyhaas · 27-12-2011 12:55AM

Paully D wrote: »

How much do you want to throw at getting into the top 4?

Over £105m spent during the Dalglish reign, that sort of spending on top of the squad already at his disposal (Reina, Agger, Johnson, Gerrard, Lucas, Kuyt, etc) should see top 4 being the minimum expected. Actually it should be absolutely guaranteed, especially in a season in which a number of the perennial challengers for it are having their worst seasons in a long while.

As has been pointed out by 'magma', that sort of spending is nothing near to ''peanuts'' compared to other teams.

Sooner or later it will click with the Liverpool fans in denial that ''King'' Kenny could be doing something wrong. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't dispute that Dalglish has spent poorly, however he hasn't spent £105m on top of what was already there, I think its something like £40m net

Regarding the perennial challengers having a poor season, who? Each one of the top 6 has at least the same number of points as at this stage of the season last year

Paully D · 27-12-2011 01:03AM

daithijjj wrote: »

Every signing wont settle in right a way, and gob****e posts like Paully D's are ones from somebody who doesnt watch this team play every week, they are just misinformed rants, like the rant that got him infracted in the merseyside derby match thread (and you havent really looked back since have ya Paully?, same constant aroma of ****e coming from your posts regarding LFC).

Location: Sligo/Dublin/Birmingham/Bristol

I'd say I watch about as much of Liverpool as you do :rolleyes:

daithijjj · 27-12-2011 01:10AM

magma69 wrote: »

We shouldn't be comparing ourselves to Chelsea. They are an absolute joke in the way they do their business and are kept afloat but a billionaire, we don't have that luxury.

There was 2 separate points really. Chelsea cannot continue to spend like that under FFP. And Arsenal have had their woes in a not to dissimilar fashion to us. They havent invested and they have lost Nasri and Fabregas, they have had injuries with Wilshere/Vermaelen, we have had Gerrard. We are close in the league to both of them.

As regards investment, others have had a steady stream on investment year on year and gradual progress. 60% of the outfield team we started today joined the club this year (2011). The owners have said 5 year plan, you have to have some degree of patience, especially when some of that investement wasnt for instant fixes but for the future as well.

tommyhaas · 27-12-2011 01:16AM

magma69 wrote: »

Over that two windows we've spent 54 million net more than Arsenal and 55 million more than Spurs have spent in the same period of time. For a club that isn't run by a billionaire with a bottomless pit bank account, they have put in a bloody fortune into the club. So what exactly are you/and him getting at?

Le King wrote: »

3rd highest in the league behind Chelsea and City.

Also IIRC the difference between gross spend of Liverpool and Spurs is 70 million or so. That's a bit of a difference in fairness Tommy.

I'm working off the transfer league website, which is saying that since 2006, Liverpool have spent £8m more then Spurs

Spurs have spent very little over the last 2 years or so, but prior to that they did invest heavily and that investment is now coming to fruition. I'm not claiming Liverpool have spent well, my point is that over the last few years, both have spent equal amounts. Spurs have obviously got better value though, have a better squad, and have managed to sell players not needed for more then Liverpool

magma69 · 27-12-2011 01:17AM

daithijjj wrote: »

There was 2 separate points really. Chelsea cannot continue to spend like that under FFP. And Arsenal have had their woes in a not to dissimilar fashion to us. They havent invested and they have lost Nasri and Fabregas, they have had injuries with Wilshere/Vermaelen, we have had Gerrard. We are close in the league to both of them.

As regards investment, others have had a steady stream on investment year on year and gradual progress. 60% of the outfield team we started today joined the club this year (2011). The owners have said 5 year plan, you have to have some degree of patience, especially when some of that investement wasnt for instant fixes but for the future as well.

That's fine. Despite the fact that I don't think Henderson is up to much, he's young and he's a player for the future. Downing and Carroll were signed to be instant fixes, and that's 55 million. Neither of them have done a thing. You can't just ignore that and say, be patient. There's something going wrong there.

Paully D · 27-12-2011 01:18AM

tommyhaas wrote: »

I'm working off the transfer league website, which is saying that since 2006, Liverpool have spent £8m more then Spurs

Spurs have spent very little over the last 2 years or so, but prior to that they did invest heavily and that investment is now coming to fruition. I'm not claiming Liverpool have spent well, my point is that over the last few years, both have spent equal amounts. Spurs have obviously got better value though, have a better squad, and have managed to sell players not needed for more then Liverpool

It also coincided with getting a proper manager into the club. Strange that.

Kirby · 27-12-2011 01:24AM

Arry isn't exactly tactical masterclass. He has blind spots just like Kenny. Every time they lose a winger he shoves VDV or Modric onto the wing....depriving them of width and allowing each player to have an ineffectual and poor game.

I know it's an outlandish and alien concept but perhaps these managers should trying playing actual wingers on their actual wings.

K-9 · 27-12-2011 01:27AM

PaullyD was being ignored all night, stop encouraging him will ye?

The Net Spend argument is a very biased argument. Take out the spending over the last year and its close to negative.

Arsenal had Wenger and a stable club with no crap like going into administration, nice new stadium and all that stuff.

Spurs spent over a few years and not that much at all recently, its a settled team but 'Arry bleeding it dry..

Liverpool nearly went into liquidation, sold their 3 of their biggest players and replaced them with free transfers or Aquillani. Perspective.

4th was the realistic aim all going well, it still is, except Arsenal and Spurs have had great seasons so far.

tommyhaas · 27-12-2011 01:30AM

Paully D wrote: »

It also coincided with getting a proper manager into the club. Strange that.

Harry's done brilliantly this season. However his record at the start of this season, over the previous 53 (IIRC) games, produced 3 points more then Juande Ramos managed in his 53 games. Now any period in a managers reign can be chosen to reflect poorly or favourably on a manager, but Harry is IMO reaping the benefits of having an excellent squad from the start. I don't rate him, if however he maintains Spurs current position, I'll obviously be wrong

michael999999 · 27-12-2011 01:33AM

Paully D wrote: »

It also coincided with getting a proper manager into the club. Strange that.

Same manager left Portsmouth in a proper state!

We get you hate our manager, but guess what we dont give a f**k!

YouTookMyName · 27-12-2011 01:39AM

Paully D wrote: »

It also coincided with getting a proper manager into the club. Strange that.

daithijjj · 27-12-2011 01:39AM

magma69 wrote: »

That's fine. Despite the fact that I don't think Henderson is up to much, he's young and he's a player for the future. Downing and Carroll were signed to be instant fixes, and that's 55 million. Neither of them have done a thing. You can't just ignore that and say, be patient. There's something going wrong there.

It took 300 mil, the best wages on offer to any player, and 3 years for City to get into top 4. We are paying for no investment circa summer 08 to Jan 11 right now. Not all signings will work out for us, if people think that they will then they will never be happy under any circumstances really.

Carroll may turn out to be the biggest mistake Kenny/the club has made, we dont know yet, the guy is 22 and never wanted to leave Newcastle in the first place. He is also on less wages than we paid Harry kewell, the xfer fee was silly high but wages are just as important. You will find some people who say, "well we could have got Aguero for than money", thats ignorant really. Aguero will cost City a further 30mil in wages alone above and beyond what we pay Carroll. There is also the issue that we havent brought anyone through really since Gerrard/Carra, Kelly looks like the only one to me and Spearing is Spearing, a traditional number '22' in the squad for me at best.

Assuming we need English players after Carra/Gerrard leave and assuming we never bought Carroll/Henderson/Downing, how are we going to fit into FFP in 18 months time? with Spearing and Kelly and who else? we need 8 in a matchday squad i believe, we had to make moves like this. We can debate all we like about signing other English players instead of those but who would they be and at what cost, nobody wants to sell these players in the prem and all of them are 'stupid' money.

Paully D · 27-12-2011 01:51AM

tommyhaas wrote: »

Harry's done brilliantly this season. However his record at the start of this season, over the previous 53 (IIRC) games, produced 3 points more then Juande Ramos managed in his 53 games. Now any period in a managers reign can be chosen to reflect poorly or favourably on a manager, but Harry is IMO reaping the benefits of having an excellent squad from the start. I don't rate him, if however he maintains Spurs current position, I'll obviously be wrong

He took a struggling squad that had got 2 points from 8 games before he arrived and got them into the Champions League (somewhere they'd never been before) in his first full season. He even finished 8th in his first season. Whatever way you look at that, it's a fantastic achievement.

He had to do a lot of work to get them there and where they are now today. Signing the likes of Defoe, Crouch, bringing Keane back, Krancjar, Kaboul and Palacios helped them to the Champions League, and he then added the likes of Van Der Vaart, Sandro, Gallas, that summer and took them to a CL quarter final against Real Madrid. I don't think the squad he inherited was anything exceptional and I don't think there's many managers around who would have finished just off a Europa League spot with them in the first season, never mind guiding them to the Champions League a year later.

I rate Redknapp, he's a proper manager IMO and his record on the pitch speaks for itself. People will say he destroys clubs financially, but at Spurs they have a chairman with the best financial acumen in the league and Levy will see them right.

Lads, I know Dalglish is a Liverpool legend, but I just feel he's yesterday's man and isn't up to the task. I just don't see where his ''buy British, regardless of price'' policy is going to be successful and I don't even see a hint of his system beginning to take shape which it should by now. To be kind, his signings are ''questionable'' and I don't see the fire in his eyes any more. I honestly think he will ultimately fail and when he leaves Liverpool will have nothing more than Europa League football and a squad of expensive flops to show for it.

We're obviously not going to agree on anything to do with Liverpool and the current regime, so to save the inevitable arguments that will go round and round in circles I'm willing to leave it at that.

If things work out for Daglish I'll come back on and say I was wrong, if not

All the best!

K-9 · 27-12-2011 01:52AM

I'd also add just because we are Liverpool does not give us any divine right to be in the top 4 and as Daithi pointed out, it took City 3 years and people complained they were too boring and too many draws. We aren't boring at least!

Stick behind your players, when Beardsley had tough times when he came here, fans stuck behind him and he came good. That's the Liverpool Way, you back the manager, the players, if a player doesn't work out, he doesn't work out, but it's not because the fans got on his back or the managers.

Kirby · 27-12-2011 02:02AM

daithijjj wrote: »

It took 300 mil, the best wages on offer to any player, and 3 years for City to become the best team in the league..

I fixed your post there.

Your point was a valid enough one in that rome wasn't built in a day and that it takes money.......... but the time and money didn't make City 4th. The City squad is the best this season and was the best last season....they just underachieved.

All that money made them the best. Liverpool don't need the best. They need 4th best. And spending a third of the city money looks like its going to get them 6th. If you spend big and waste it.......Thats Aston Villa territory tbh.

Liverpool have the backing and fanbase to make it. They just need to spend better.

K-9 · 27-12-2011 02:05AM

Kirby wrote: »

I fixed your post there.

Your point was a valid enough one in that rome wasn't built in a day and that it takes money.......... but the City squad is the best this season and was the best last season....they just underachieved.

All that money made them the best. Liverpool don't need the best. They need 4th best. And spending a third of the city money looks like its going to get them 6th.

Liverpool have the backing and fanbase to make it. They just need to spend better.

Not that much backing from some of the fanbase, as far as I can see.

Kirby · 27-12-2011 02:08AM

I meant financial backing and sizeable fanbase....but I think you knew that and just wanted to make a dig at some boardsies. Which is fine.

Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12 - Mod Note 4153

Comments