Liverpool Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014 mod warning linked in OP 26/07

T-K-O · 22-07-2014 11:01PM

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Nine times out of ten Johnson goes up the right wing and gives the ball away...THAT doesn't help anyone.

I'd imagine that's a little high

Kerrigooney · 22-07-2014 11:06PM

T-K-O wrote: »

I'd imagine that's a little high

Figure of speech...but not too far off,I'd say.

T-K-O · 22-07-2014 11:11PM

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Figure of speech...but not too far off,I'd say.

I get that but those comments quickly escalate in here to Johnson has never completed a pass.

If he was on half the money the trainee accountants would be fine with him as a squad player.

Super-Rush · 22-07-2014 11:12PM

K-9 wrote: »

Time to update the sig, stuck through Suarez through and through, even a couple of pms saying it was terrible behaviour having him as my sig and me a politics mod!

Had to change my avatar today. I was still using Christmas Suarez from two years ago.

Super-Rush · 22-07-2014 11:14PM

Rafa paid way too much for Johnson at the time. Way too bloody much.

Washington Irving · 22-07-2014 11:22PM

Super-Rush wrote: »

Rafa paid way too much for Johnson at the time. Way too bloody much.

Portsmouth owed us money for Crouch, money we never would have got back if not for the Johnson deal.

MD1990 · 22-07-2014 11:28PM

Washington Irving wrote: »

Portsmouth owed us money for Crouch, money we never would have got back if not for the Johnson deal.

So we overpaid for Johnson because they owed us money from Crouch.
Doesn't make sense should we not have got Johnson cheaper then?

Morzadec · 22-07-2014 11:28PM

Johnson is nowhere near the liability he is being made out to be.

However, his performances are inconsistent and he's shown a lot of poor decision making recently I feel. A bit dawdly on the ball too which slows down attacks.

Like Knex says he's 'grand', he's not someone I see in the team as a major weakness who I'm worried is going to cost us points.

It's a position we could consider upgrading, but I wouldn't be shocked if Johnson turned in some good performances to surprise people.

Because of his wages and stature within the game I feel it's probably not something we will properly look at until his contract runs out.

murpho999 · 22-07-2014 11:31PM

Live and free coverage of the squad training is now available on LFC website if you're interested.

Edit: Bar stewards only did it for about 10 minutes which is a complete waste of time.

Washington Irving · 22-07-2014 11:33PM

MD1990 wrote: »

So we overpaid for Johnson because they owed us money from Crouch.
Doesn't make sense should we not have got Johnson cheaper then?

We didn't pay the whole fee for Johnson. £18 million fee agreed, Portsmouth owed us £7 million which they didn't have, so we pay them £11 million and write off the other 7.

darced · 22-07-2014 11:37PM

This post has been deleted.

Pilsbury Doughboy · 23-07-2014 12:09AM

Sign me up to the Johnson fan club, well the he's nowhere near as bad as people make out club.

It's obviously popular in here to make a harmless joke at GJ's expense, but I hold out hope he might come back next season with a bit of fire in the belly, he seemed to be very lax at times last year, hopefully a good break in the summer and he will get back to near his best form, when he's on form he's a quality player.

Knex* · 23-07-2014 12:18AM

Pilsbury Doughboy wrote: »

Sign me up to the Johnson fan club, well the he's nowhere near as bad as people make out club.

It's obviously popular in here to make a harmless joke at GJ's expense, but I hold out hope he might come back next season with a bit of fire in the belly, he seemed to be very lax at times last year, hopefully a good break in the summer and he will get back to near his best form, when he's on form he's a quality player.

You're just looking for thanks from the other members :pac:

Pilsbury Doughboy · 23-07-2014 12:22AM

Aye but we're seemingly a rare breed so I won't gather too many thanks! Dissing Johnno is the way to accrue the big numbers!

T-K-O · 23-07-2014 12:34AM

Remember when Rodgers did the unthinkable by asking Nuri Sahin to turn left.

Charlie19 · 23-07-2014 12:50AM

There ain't much between our fullbacks ability tbf but when I take out the abacus:), Johnson would be the first one I'd move on. That said, I still see Johnson being a regular starter for the new season, think it would be fairly hard to find a buyer because of his high wages.

OwaynOTT · 23-07-2014 02:03AM

Sorry but Johnson has been muck for quite a while and anyone saying otherwise is just being contrary.
His concentration is terrible, his touch makes Kuyt look like messi at times, he just doesn't head the ball, strolls back, positionally awol on numerous occasions, shots with his left foot with frequently diminishing returns, steals toilet seats, runs into traffic with the ball and loses it a lot, over plays too often, woeful crossing but gets a few assists to help cover up his faults and doesn't make too many obvious defensive errors which helps mask his decline and he has some pace.

martyos121 · 23-07-2014 02:09AM

If everyone here tears into Johnson for being caught out of position and having below average defensive skills, I'm dying to see what ye'll say about Moreno if we sign him. He's great going forward, and has a bit more pace to get back to defend a counter attack, but he's no better than GlenJo defensively.

kevohmsford · 23-07-2014 02:16AM

Speaking of Glen Johnson. He is 30 today.

Ferris_Bueller · 23-07-2014 02:18AM

For me Glen Johnson was always suspect defensively (although not as bad as some people make out) but there was a time where his attacking play made him worth having in the team, for me he was one of the best right backs in the league at one stage. Over the past 18 months though his performances dropped a lot and in the second half of this season it got to the stage where he was very bad defensively and offered nothing productive going forward. I'd be willing to give him another chance this season but at least between Manquilo and Flanagan we have people who can step in if his performances don't improve.

OwaynOTT · 23-07-2014 02:21AM

OwaynOTT wrote: »

Sorry but Moreno is as bad as Johnson and anyone saying otherwise is just being contrary.
His concentration is terrible, his touch makes Kuyt look like messi at times, he just doesn't head the ball, strolls back, positionally awol on numerous occasions, shots with his left foot with frequently diminishing returns, steals toilet seats, runs into traffic with the ball and loses it a lot, over plays too often, woeful crossing but gets a few assists to help cover up his faults and doesn't make too many obvious defensive errors which helps mask his decline and he has some pace.

martyos121 wrote: »

If everyone here tears into Johnson for being caught out of position and having below average defensive skills, I'm dying to see what ye'll say about Moreno if we sign him. He's great going forward, and has a bit more pace to get back to defend a counter attack, but he's no better than GlenJo defensively.

Yeah I said as much above.

kevohmsford · 23-07-2014 02:21AM

Super-Rush · 23-07-2014 02:39AM

Washington Irving wrote: »

We didn't pay the whole fee for Johnson. £18 million fee agreed, Portsmouth owed us £7 million which they didn't have, so we pay them £11 million and write off the other 7.

Its the same thing though. He was never worth £18, not in a million years.

There was a reason that Chelsea let him go.

Dont be at yourself · 23-07-2014 02:48AM

The reasoning behind it, as Rafa explained, was that is was ultimately cheaper to add an attacking threat from full-back than to buy a top class wide midfielder.

For what it's worth, I agree with that, and looking at some other fees, I don't think Johnson was a bad buy, even at a notional £18m.

Hollister11 · 23-07-2014 03:39AM

http://www.thisisanfield.com/2013/07/the-rise-and-fall-of-football-empires/

best article i have read in years

woodyg · 23-07-2014 04:27AM

5starpool wrote: »

Johnson, like Lucas is blamed disproportionately for things. It's lazy analysis mostly I think. Also, he is worse than he was, but not as much as is made out imo.

i agree with this and to be fair he played when injured and has also filled in left back which is not his position.
another season from him would be fine.
spend the money elsewhere this summer
Agger is looking like a goner so another centre back will be needed if Lovren isn't coming.
I still would like another midfielder to be got even on a loan.
Just someone to play the cups and 10 league games.
An experienced player would be ideal.
A Gary Mac type if you get my drift

martyos121 · 23-07-2014 05:09AM

OwaynOTT wrote: »

Yeah I said as much above.

Well that's odd. I see that you mentioned Moreno in your quote, but he isn't mentioned in the original post that you quoted?

T-K-O · 23-07-2014 05:12AM

martyos121 wrote: »

Well that's odd. I see that you mentioned Moreno in your quote, but he isn't mentioned in the original post that you quoted?

you''re just being contrary

~Rebel~ · 23-07-2014 06:16AM

Super-Rush wrote: »

Its the same thing though. He was never worth £18, not in a million years.

There was a reason that Chelsea let him go.

Some people seem to be missing the point on this - he wasn't 18 million, he was 11.

They owed us 7 million, which we were never getting. Noone they owed money to got any money. We wanted a player they had who had a value of 11. It suited both parties to call it 18, write off the 7 owed, and walk away happy.

Why would we pay 11 if they owed us 7? Why wouldn't we just pay 4? Because there is 0 incentive for them to take that deal. They were under no obligation to sell to us just because they owed us money. If we wanted to do that, they'd just sell to someone else for 11 or 12 or 13.

We struck a deal which suited both parties. We get the player for a pretty fair value, they get to make their disastrous accounts look a little better.

tomaussie · 23-07-2014 06:34AM

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Some people seem to be missing the point on this - he wasn't 18 million, he was 11.

They owed us 7 million, which we were never getting. Noone they owed money to got any money. We wanted a player they had who had a value of 11. It suited both parties to call it 18, write off the 7 owed, and walk away happy.

Why would we pay 11 if they owed us 7? Why wouldn't we just pay 4? Because there is 0 incentive for them to take that deal. They were under no obligation to sell to us just because they owed us money. If we wanted to do that, they'd just sell to someone else for 11 or 12 or 13.

We struck a deal which suited both parties. We get the player for a pretty fair value, they get to make their disastrous accounts look a little better.

What a truly weird way to look at it.

So why not value him at 11 and pay them 4 ?

If they were so broke them why not play hard ball and offer as little as possible ?

I understand what you're saying but it makes zero sense to me in terms of business.

Liverpool Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014 *mod warning linked in OP 26/07*

Comments

Liverpool Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014 mod warning linked in OP 26/07