Yes Kenny Dalglish and Liverpool are done. MOD POST #425 ALL READ

amiable · 17-05-2012 10:43AM

inforfun wrote: »

Dont know how much in a hurry Liverpool is with getting a new manager but Bert van Marwijk wouldnt be a too bad shout.

He did sign a new contract with the Dutch FA recently but has a clause in there that if the right club comes, he can go. Liverpool is one of those clubs he does fancy
Certainly if the Euro's end in a disappointment i can see him leave the Dutch team.
And a group with Germany and Portugal is destined to end in a disaster.
Dutch teams (club and country) have a terrible record against Portuguese teams.

Going to take van marwijk @101

He's 59 and I get the feeling that the owners are looking for a younger manager

inforfun · 17-05-2012 10:52AM

At 59 he is probably "younger" in his head after managing the Dutch team the last 5 years than most 50 year olds who have been working at a high profile club for 5 years.

Van Marwijk did the groundwork for Dortmunds recent succes. When he took over he had to clear out players on high salaries and start with youth players (Sahin amongst others) because Dortmund was as good as bankrupt.

Not saying Liverpool is bankrupt but there is need for some serious cleaning there.

daithijjj · 17-05-2012 10:53AM

cambo2008 wrote: »

That's not a very good gauge in fairness.
Pissed off people looking for a rant are far more likely to ring up those shows to complain.

When you get 20 or 30 fans who say the same thing over and over, the majority being articulate people (im not joking), you tend to get a feel for what the majority feel regardless if they didnt phone in.

The truth behind Arsenal's money available isnt widely known, you read someone like David Conn in the Guardian or follow him on twitter (he is excellent) and you find out why Wenger had the summer he had, it isnt all rosy, CL football has prevented more microscopic questions from fans, lets talk in 12 months. Again, not a dig at anyone, i admire Arsenals ethic in alot of ways. But there are fundamental reasons why Arsenal's shopping has gone from building project to signing some older players. Wenger hasnt signed many players like Bennyoun or Arteta or the German in terms of age in the past, he has usually sold them.

counterlock · 17-05-2012 11:00AM

daithijjj wrote: »

Net spend is not irrelevant, as much as people dont like talking about it. Clearouts are different depending on the club, LFC have sold players to Barca/Real/Chelsea in the last 2 years, top class players for massive money, who will United and Chelsea sell for big funds?. Chelsea and City have invested in the team in the last 12 months without major sales, LFC have invested a large proportion of sales money, its ludicrous to compare anyone to City in the last while, they lost 190 mil last year.

One won the league, the other is in the CL final. They are buying talent in to reach their goals which has worked for them this season

I would rather see my team buying talented players than selling them to try to make the net spend look better.

DoctorGonzo08 · 17-05-2012 11:10AM

daithijjj wrote: »

Net spend is not irrelevant, as much as people dont like talking about it. Clearouts are different depending on the club, LFC have sold players to Barca/Real/Chelsea in the last 2 years, top class players for massive money, who will United and Chelsea sell for big funds?. Chelsea and City have invested in the team in the last 12 months without major sales, LFC have invested a large proportion of sales money, its ludicrous to compare anyone to City in the last while, they lost 190 mil last year.

The too long out of the game excuse is lazy. Read on people close to the situation and they will give you the opposite view. The rest of your critique is badly wrong. Sure he made a mistake or two, not signing another striker option is the main one. Not preparing his team? meh, not even going to entertain that.

I will agree Net Spend is not irrelevant but I still don't think it is OK to justify wasting 100+ million, it is just trying to put a better spin on it.

What is wrong with my critique? Downing, left winger, one of the top assists last season. Dalglish thinks he is better suited as a right midfielder. Result 0 assists, 0 goals. Carroll, target man, showed great potential for Newcastle and England. Dalglish sees more to his game, lone striker, ball to feet or to chase, under no circumstances do you cross into him. Transfer strategy? Squad depth? Strengthen certain positions? No, buy English! That's inspiring. How did that work out? But it's the players fault 100% of course. At what stage does blind allegance give way to common sense? They team showed no consistancey against weaker opposition, but played well against big opponents? I would take this as the players lifting themselves for the big stage, which would imply Dalglish has no affect either way. I think you'll find he has made more than one or two mistakes. Sure there was an element of bad luck involved with Lucas going down and Gerrard injured at the start of the season, but compared that to Arsenal having 9 defenders out for the best part of 2 months, or Utd losing Vidic and Fletcher, yet they finish 2nd and 3rd.

Dalglish was a legend at liverpool as a player. He inherited an unbelievable team in the 80s and was very successful. 13 years out of the game, and being more a fan than a manager all point to the fact he was not the right person for the job.

Morzadec · 17-05-2012 11:12AM

Morzadec wrote: »

Arbeloa was signed for 4 million euro (I would guess that was about £3m, probably even under that).

He was a very solid player in possession for us, linking up well with Kuyt and gerrard on the right-side and was defensively solid (kept a Messi very quiet on his debut in the Nou Camp). He didn't offer the attacking threat that a modern wing/full-back needs in a 4-2-3-1 formation, but he was a very consistent defender and had a good couple of years at Liverpool.

For the fee he was signed for he was an excellent purchase. Unfortunately these type of bargain-buys were the type that Rafa was forced into all too often at Liverpool, and almost all managers tend to get more misses than hits when they shop in the bargain basement, even Fergie.

Arbeloa was certainly a successful purchase though, if we can make some shrewd buys like him to fill some problem areas in the squad this summer I'll be delighted

Pighead wrote: »

I think the fact Arbeloa has done pretty well since he left Liverpool has clouded the memories of some Liverpool fans who were pretty underwhelmed with him at the time.

He was regularly castigated on these boards for his inability to cross or attack in general and for a lot of his time at Liverpool fans regularly claimed that Finnan was a better option.

To be honest he hasn't really done that much better at Real Madrid. Yes he has won a lot of things but that's because he has been fortunate enough to play with a team of superstars. I don't think he's improved as a player since he's gone to Madrid.

Right-back is the position they are looking to strengthen in this summer and most Real Madrid fans believe Arbeloa is not good enough going forward (as you have stated Pighead), and to be honest I would agree that he's not good enough to be a regular starter for Real Madrid.

All I'm saying is, find me a better Right-Back for 4m euros. He was a cheap bit of business and he did well at Liverpool. He didn't offer much of an attacking threat no, (much like Enrique on the left-side now) but he was comfortable on the ball, kept possession well and was good defensively. For 4m euro he was not a dud by any means, if we got that level of consistency from all our cheap, bargain-basement signings we'd be happy.

But ideally players who cost 4m euros should be bought as squad players, not as starters

daithijjj · 17-05-2012 11:13AM

counterlock wrote: »

One won the league, the other is in the CL final. They are buying talent in to reach their goals which has worked for them this season

I would rather see my team buying talented players than selling them to try to make the net spend look better.

One almost bottled the league with a 190 mil loss on the books in 12 months and the other could be playing Europa league with Liverpool next year, whats your point?

Chelsea have invested more in their squad in the last 18 months than Liverpool have in 7 years, LFC made a profit on players circa summer 08 to Jan 11. I honestly dont know what you are getting at here, of course i would like Liverpool to buy talented players over selling, did i make a point saying i would not like this or something, this would make me insane if i didnt want this surely?. Im not even going to bring in the wages paid to City players.

daithijjj · 17-05-2012 11:26AM

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

I will agree Net Spend is not irrelevant but I still don't think it is OK to justify wasting 100+ million, it is just trying to put a better spin on it.

What is wrong with my critique? Downing, left winger, one of the top assists last season. Dalglish thinks he is better suited as a right midfielder. Result 0 assists, 0 goals. Carroll, target man, showed great potential for Newcastle and England. Dalglish sees more to his game, lone striker, ball to feet or to chase, under no circumstances do you cross into him. Transfer strategy? Squad depth? Strengthen certain positions? No, buy English! That's inspiring. How did that work out? But it's the players fault 100% of course. At what stage does blind allegance give way to common sense? They team showed no consistancey against weaker opposition, but played well against big opponents? I would take this as the players lifting themselves for the big stage, which would imply Dalglish has no affect either way. I think you'll find he has made more than one or two mistakes. Sure there was an element of bad luck involved with Lucas going down and Gerrard injured at the start of the season, but compared that to Arsenal having 9 defenders out for the best part of 2 months, or Utd losing Vidic and Fletcher, yet they finish 2nd and 3rd.

Dalglish was a legend at liverpool as a player. He inherited an unbelievable team in the 80s and was very successful. 13 years out of the game, and being more a fan than a manager all point to the fact he was not the right person for the job.

You are talking gash bud, sorry.

I will let the 100 mil thing slide as i cant honestly be fked repeating myself.

In case it escaped your attention Downing got player of the year at Villa playing mostly right wing, not left wing, did you even watch any of Villa that year or is this mostly off the cuff stuff?.

Sure Carroll hasnt been a success, he is 22 and so is Henderson, they were bought with an element of playing them and improving them. Who are you to say they wont be great at 24?, how long did Nani take to bed in at United? 17mil quid on Anderson, who had the better season as individuals? Anderson or Henderson?. Its not as simple a tale as you seem to tell. If you are pinning success on buying young players you give them time.

I dont have time right now to go off on tangents about who missed who the most.

DoctorGonzo08 · 17-05-2012 11:35AM

daithijjj wrote: »

You are talking gash bud, sorry.

I will let the 100 mil thing slide as i cant honestly be fked repeating myself.

In case it escaped your attention Downing got player of the year at Villa playing mostly right wing, not left wing, did you even watch any of Villa that year or is this mostly off the cuff stuff?.

Sure Carroll hasnt been a success, he is 22 and so is Henderson, they were bought with an element of playing them and improving them. Who are you to say they wont be great at 24?, how long did Nani take to bed in at United? 17mil quid on Anderson, who had the better season as individuals? Anderson or Henderson?. Its not as simple a tale as you seem to tell. If you are pinning success on buying young players you give them time.

I dont have time right now to go off on tangents about who missed who the most.

Na mate, you're alright. Because you haven't addressed anything I've said. Downing played left wing last year, with Young in the hole behind the striker. Albrighton was introduced on the right. Downing did play some time on the right but very small in comparison to his natural position.

Blah blah blah net spenbd blah blah blah. If I win 100 euro on the lottery and I buy gone off milk for 150 euro I may have a net loss of 50 euro but it doesn't change the fact that I blew 150 euro now does it?

With regard to the players potential etc I wasn't questioning. I was questioning why buy players and not play them in their position. My 100% players fault comment was sarcasm. I was implying the the manager has to accept responsibility. I actually think alot of Carroll and Henderson, and I think it is unfair the abuse they got this year because of Kenny's ineptness as a manager. Fair play to him though, bring talent up and go out of your way to make it more difficult for them.

But who am I to argue with you. I'm not a Liverpool fan, and I don't hold Dalglish in any kind of high regard. Personally I would have prefferred he stayed on and got them relegated, at least then he could say he achieved something.

counterlock · 17-05-2012 11:42AM

daithijjj wrote: »

One almost bottled the league with a 190 mil loss on the books in 12 months and the other could be playing Europa league with Liverpool next year, whats your point?

United were almost champions. Cardiff almost won the carling cup. Liverpool almost won the FA cup. It means nothing. My point is that net spend is meaningless, especially given the fact that Henderson and Downing look like they will never justify the prices paid for them.

17-05-2012 11:47AM

daithijjj owning this thread :cool:

daithijjj · 17-05-2012 11:57AM

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Na mate, you're alright. Because you haven't addressed anything I've said. Downing played left wing last year, with Young in the hole behind the striker. Albrighton was introduced on the right. Downing did play some time on the right but very small in comparison to his natural position.

Blah blah blah net spenbd blah blah blah. If I win 100 euro on the lottery and I buy gone off milk for 150 euro I may have a net loss of 50 euro but it doesn't change the fact that I blew 150 euro now does it?

With regard to the players potential etc I wasn't questioning. I was questioning why buy players and not play them in their position. My 100% players fault comment was sarcasm. I was implying the the manager has to accept responsibility. I actually think alot of Carroll and Henderson, and I think it is unfair the abuse they got this year because of Kenny's ineptness as a manager. Fair play to him though, bring talent up and go out of your way to make it more difficult for them.

But who am I to argue with you. I'm not a Liverpool fan, and I don't hold Dalglish in any kind of high regard. Personally I would have prefferred he stayed on and got them relegated, at least then he could say he achieved something.

Oh, you have gone a bit sour there near the end, nice. Gone off milk is about right.

Downing played a shedload on the right. I like Albrighton, i had him in my fantasy team last year but he played alot as sub and Downing played plenty on the right, when he was either not started, or before he came on and then moved, Downing even played centre mid at times in games that i watched.

Playing players out of position?, Henderson played on the right for Sunderland at times, he dovetailed a bit with Elmohamady there when required. He is a centre mid all day long and after Xmas he was played there more often than not, only filling in on the right when Kuyt wasnt fancied.

I totally missed where Carroll was deployed other than as striker. Im going to have to shape up as football fan of LFC.

Will I Amnt · 17-05-2012 11:58AM

rarnes1 wrote: »

daithijjj owning this thread :cool:

Because you agree with his views???
:cool: :rolleyes:

counterlock · 17-05-2012 11:59AM

cambo2008 wrote: »

UBecause you agree with his views???
:cool: :rolleyes:

No, its because he used the term 'gash' and 'can't be bothered' defending any of the points put to him
:rolleyes:

Pighead · 17-05-2012 12:01PM

Morzadec wrote: »

All I'm saying is, find me a better Right-Back for 4m euros. He was a cheap bit of business and he did well at Liverpool. He didn't offer much of an attacking threat no, (much like Enrique on the left-side now) but he was comfortable on the ball, kept possession well and was good defensively. For 4m euro he was not a dud by any means, if we got that level of consistency from all our cheap, bargain-basement signings we'd be happy.

But ideally players who cost 4m euros should be bought as squad players, not as starters

Yeah, that's probably a pretty fair summation of his time at Liverpool. I'll give you that one.

DoctorGonzo08 · 17-05-2012 12:08PM

daithijjj wrote: »

Oh, you have gone a bit sour there near the end, nice. Gone off milk is about right.

Downing played a shedload on the right. I like Albrighton, i had him in my fantasy team last year but he played alot as sub and Downing played plenty on the right, when he was either not started, or before he came on and then moved, Downing even played centre mid at times in games that i watched.

Playing players out of position?, Henderson played on the right for Sunderland at times, he dovetailed a bit with Elmohamady there when required. He is a centre mid all day long and after Xmas he was played there more often than not, only filling in on the right when Kuyt wasnt fancied.

I totally missed where Carroll was deployed other than as striker. Im going to have to shape up as football fan of LFC.

Well with facts like this how can I argue? As for sour, you made my input in a debate personal, of course I will get a little miffed with this approach, especially when you don't have anything logical to argue against. You haven't made a valid point against the last couple of posts you have replied to. I understand you are a fan, and I understand you support Dalglish and will stand by him. Attacking other posters who are simply stating obvious points is just a little silly. I don't go into the LFC thread and post negative comments, but I take part in general topics such as this.

The facts are Dalglish has spent (net or otherwise) alot of money. He has gone backwards in the league and taken a huge step back from the top 4. He is further away from the CL than ever, which despite yours and his idea that the Carling Cup is more imortant, is a big deal, financially for your 'Net Spend' and for attracting top players.

Cyrus · 17-05-2012 12:10PM

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Blah blah blah net spenbd blah blah blah. If I win 100 euro on the lottery and I buy gone off milk for 150 euro I may have a net loss of 50 euro but it doesn't change the fact that I blew 150 euro now does it?

Try this, if you sell 1 litre of milk for 1 euro and buy another for 1.50, what is the cost to you of having 1 litre of milk?

1.50 or 50 cent

counterlock · 17-05-2012 12:12PM

Cyrus wrote: »

Try this, if you sell 1 litre of milk for 1 euro and buy another for 1.50, what is the cost to you of having 1 litre of milk?

1.50 or 50 cent

What if 75% of the new milk was sour? How much would that cost you?

DoctorGonzo08 · 17-05-2012 12:12PM

Cyrus wrote: »

Try this, if you sell 1 litre of milk for 1 euro and buy another for 1.50, what is the cost to you of having 1 litre of milk?

1.50 or 50 cent

That's actually very well put!

I agree the cost is 50 cent, and I understand the premise. What I am stating is that you still spend 1.50.

And also, what happens next, when you have to sell the 1.50 milk for 10 cent? 1.0 - 1.50 = (+.50). 1.50 - .10 = (-1.40)

In isolated transfers it is quite a significant figure, but take into account a wider scope and it can be interputed very differently.

Cyrus · 17-05-2012 12:18PM

counterlock wrote: »

What if 75% of the new milk was sour? How much would that cost you?

Nothing until you decide to sell it, its price obviously being impacted by the fact that its sour

unless of course potential purchasers require sour milk

Cyrus · 17-05-2012 12:21PM

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

And also, what happens next, when you have to sell the 1.50 milk for 10 cent? 1.0 - 1.50 = (+.50). 1.50 - .10 = (-1.40)

The cost of the milk you are holding is 50 cent, therefore if you sell it for 10c the net loss is 40c.

Or going back to the start, selling 1 litre for 1 euro, buying another for 1.50 and then selling it for 10c, you have received 1.10 and paid out 1.50

daithijjj · 17-05-2012 12:30PM

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Well with facts like this how can I argue? As for sour, you made my input in a debate personal, of course I will get a little miffed with this approach, especially when you don't have anything logical to argue against. You haven't made a valid point against the last couple of posts you have replied to. I understand you are a fan, and I understand you support Dalglish and will stand by him. Attacking other posters who are simply stating obvious points is just a little silly. I don't go into the LFC thread and post negative comments, but I take part in general topics such as this.

The facts are Dalglish has spent (net or otherwise) alot of money. He has gone backwards in the league and taken a huge step back from the top 4. He is further away from the CL than ever, which despite yours and his idea that the Carling Cup is more imortant, is a big deal, financially for your 'Net Spend' and for attracting top players.

I did nothing of the sort, i 'attacked' your assumption that Downing was played out of position by Dalglish as 'gash' because it is 'gash'. How do you explain Capello playing Downing right wing? revolutionary thinking?. I attacked your post, not you, im sure you are a great person. *hugs*

The 2nd highlighted point there is another dream you made up all on your own, if you can be arsed to trawl though my posts i repeat the opposite for a long time.

Ormus · 17-05-2012 12:41PM

The price of milk is shocking these days.

daithijjj · 17-05-2012 12:43PM

counterlock wrote: »

No, its because he used the term 'gash' and 'can't be bothered' defending any of the points put to him
:rolleyes:

Not in reply to you i didnt. I already made the points he was looking for, what does he want? a copy and paste?.

Your post made no sense at all.

Your implied that I (or any football fan) would prefer to see my team sell good players in order to have a better figure in net spend, that's insane talk, what is anyone supposed to say to that?.

counterlock · 17-05-2012 12:59PM

daithijjj wrote: »

Not in reply to you i didnt. I already made the points he was looking for, what does he want? a copy and paste?.

Your post made no sense at all.

Your implied that I (or any football fan) would prefer to see my team sell good players in order to have a better figure in net spend, that's insane talk, what is anyone supposed to say to that?.

You were justifying the net spend by saying that city almost blew the league and chelsea could be in the europa league next year. City now have more depth than anyone else imho and are league champions with CL football to look forward to next year, Chelsea have won the FA cup and are playing in the biggest club game in the world next saturday but you posing the question who will United or Chelsea sell for big money. Why would either of these teams sell their best players unless they wanted to leave?

My point is that these teams achievement at least show some onfield returns in their investment. So Liverpool have turned profit from sales since 08, well done - but this was due more to the ownership's policy than good management.

Helix · 17-05-2012 01:06PM

Cyrus wrote: »

Try this, if you sell 1 litre of milk for 1 euro and buy another for 1.50, what is the cost to you of having 1 litre of milk?

1.50 or 50 cent

ok that's nothing but semantics and does nothing to reflect the reality of the situation

let's say you sell, on i dunno, a ladyman figurine for £50m and buy a giant ponytail for £35m - the overall cost of the ponytail may have been -£15m, but there's absolutely no disguising the fact that you've gone out and wasted £35m on a ponytail

kenny spent a lot of money. it doesnt matter that a plenty of that money came from selling other players. that doesnt excuse the poor quality of the purchases. the gross figure is still the gross figure

if you spend £100m on footballers, you don't excuse the fact that they're mediocre or under-performing by saying "well £60m of that came from incoming sales, so it's really only £40m" - you bloody well expect to get £100m worth of talent

Will I Amnt · 17-05-2012 01:14PM

Helix wrote: »

Cyrus wrote: »

Try this, if you sell 1 litre of milk for 1 euro and buy another for 1.50, what is the cost to you of having 1 litre of milk?

1.50 or 50 cent

ok that's nothing but semantics and does nothing to reflect the reality of the situation

let's say you sell, on i dunno, a ladyman figurine for £50m and buy a giant ponytail for £35m - the overall cost of the ponytail may have been -£15m, but there's absolutely no disguising the fact that you've gone out and wasted £35m on a ponytail

kenny spent a lot of money. it doesnt matter that a plenty of that money came from selling other players. that doesnt excuse the poor quality of the purchases. the gross figure is still the gross figure

if you spend £100m on footballers, you don't excuse the fact that they're mediocre or under-performing by saying "well £60m of that came from incoming sales, so it's really only £40m" - you bloody well expect to get £100m worth of talent

Congratulations.You are the 1,000,000th poster to make an analogy for Liverpools net spend.
Click below to claim your prize.

whatawaster · 17-05-2012 01:18PM

Helix wrote: »

ok that's nothing but semantics and does nothing to reflect the reality of the situation

let's say you sell, on i dunno, a ladyman figurine for £50m and buy a giant ponytail for £35m - the overall cost of the ponytail may have been -£15m, but there's absolutely no disguising the fact that you've gone out and wasted £35m on a ponytail

kenny spent a lot of money. it doesnt matter that a plenty of that money came from selling other players. that doesnt excuse the poor quality of the purchases. the gross figure is still the gross figure

if you spend £100m on footballers, you don't excuse the fact that they're mediocre or under-performing by saying "well £60m of that came from incoming sales, so it's really only £40m" - you bloody well expect to get £100m worth of talent

Exactly right

Helix · 17-05-2012 01:26PM

perhaps this one better reflects it (i do love an analogy)...

you've got a mars bar, and i want it. so i offer you €1.75 for it, because the shop is all out of mars bars and i have to pay a premium for yours.

you take the €1.75 you've just gotten for the mars bar and decide you want to add the change in your pocket (conveniently 25c) to it and buy 200 penny sweets. you go into the shop, and say "shopkeep good sir, i would like to purchase €2.00 worth of penny sweets please"

so the shopkeep takes your money and goes about his business

alas, disaster!

you check the bag when you've left the shop and you realise he's only given you one hundred penny sweets. do you say "ah it's ok, sure the mars bar only cost me 75c to begin with, and i added another 25c, so even though i paid €2 and only got €1 worth of penny sweets, it's alright because my net expenditure was €0 after selling the mars bar"?

do you fcuk

Will I Amnt · 17-05-2012 01:31PM

Helix wrote: »

perhaps this one better reflects it (i do love an analogy)...

you've got a mars bar, and i want it. so i offer you €1.75 for it, because the shop is all out of mars bars and i have to pay a premium for yours.

you take the €1.75 you've just gotten for the mars bar and decide you want to add the change in your pocket (conveniently 25c) to it and buy 200 penny sweets. you go into the shop, and say "shopkeep good sir, i would like to purchase €2.00 worth of penny sweets please"

so the shopkeep takes your money and goes about his business

alas, disaster!

you check the bag when you've left the shop and you realise he's only given you one hundred penny sweets. do you say "ah it's ok, sure the mars bar only cost me 75c to begin with, and i added another 25c, so even though i paid €2 and only got €1 worth of penny sweets, it's alright because my net expenditure was €0 after selling the mars bar"?

do you fcuk

I agree with both your analogys,I've made some of my own before.
It doesn't matter what way you dress it up,it will never sway the opinions of those who argue against it.

Yes Kenny Dalglish and Liverpool are done. MOD POST #425 *ALL READ*

Comments

Yes Kenny Dalglish and Liverpool are done. MOD POST #425 ALL READ