Liverpool Banter Archive June 11 2015

11 Jun 2015 22:43:39
I was curious do Liverpool have any strong links with certain clubs, I merely find it strange that Liverpool haven't created a very strong link with a lower league team that is based close to them so that there wouldn't be any relocation for the players and could almost be a Castilla equilevent. What are the limits on loanees to one club?

Thanks for your reply!

{Ed002's Note - It varies but the club is dreadful at dealing with having a growth program for players.}

11 Jun 2015 23:14:24
Didn't we used to have a professional link worth accrington Stanley?

{Ed002's Note - But they are no longer willing to loan players to Liverpool.}

11 Jun 2015 23:30:50
I walked into that. ZING

11 Jun 2015 22:27:59
Dear Eds, what is your assessment on Bogdan and why are we signing him instead of a top keeper?

{Ed002's Note - All accounts are that he can catch. Your expectations were perhaps misplaced.}

11 Jun 2015 22:56:46
LoL 002, best one i've seen for a while

11 Jun 2015 22:01:48
Gotta chuckle at Man City's Sterling bid, according to Sky it was £25 million + £5 million in add ons.

Why did they even bother wasting people time? £40 million+ i reckon.

11 Jun 2015 22:21:30
He's nowhere near that . Sanchez went for 32 mil

11 Jun 2015 22:25:00
Even if this was true, a bid like that would be the best way to test the other teams resolve and it could ultimately mean that the asking price is lowered and you get him for x amount cheaper

11 Jun 2015 22:28:09
Probably seen our tactics, laughable bids.

Mind you, as much as I agree we should be looking at £40m. He was woeful last season and as many have said, he will be a squad player elsewhere. £30m suddenly sounds bout right.

11 Jun 2015 22:35:06
But ironic, seeing as we do exactly the same thing with our bids for players

11 Jun 2015 22:20:42
He's going to be one of the best players in the world,, but the thing is,, Man City is a poor choice for him IMO.
I'm not complaining though,, around £50m !!?? HOPE we spend it well and not like the Suarez money which we wasted

11 Jun 2015 22:26:02
Sounds like something we regularly do to be honest our initial bids for players are laughable even the 10m for clyne and the 15m for kovacic are silly bids, but we want 50m for sterling. Our transfer dealings are very strange indeed.

11 Jun 2015 23:09:11
Sterling has a lot of potential, he's young and English. He scored 10 goals last season and 11 goals this season and he plays in a variety of positions (de-facto with Rodgers as his manager).

But i think £40 million + is a good price. He's definitely a good player and will only get better in the right position/system and with quality coaching and nurturing but he obviously has his part to play in this as well.

I'd happily take a couple of City's highly rated youth players, such as Lopez and Forfana or Pozo and Iheanacho and a chunk of their money for Sterling, but it's most likely wishful thinking.

But I would have tried to counter their (Man City's) offer with something along those lines.

11 Jun 2015 23:17:07
Liverpool bid for Kovacevic was lower than that.

11 Jun 2015 23:54:02
10m for Clyne with 12 months on his contract is a fine bid. 15m for Kovacic may be a bit low but it is respectable enough to negotiate, as per Nevada though I think we came in far lower.

12 Jun 2015 00:05:14
City seem desperate. Let's get the most we can get and get that striker we need.

12 Jun 2015 00:47:01
We offered €15m for kovacic they want €25m. Saints want £15m for clyne. I expect him to go to utd and us back to montoya.

12 Jun 2015 04:54:41
Kovacic ain't worth that much and is just a waste of funds not because he can't play, but because he is not needed in an area we already well furnished in. We are making the same mistakes again by sorting out areas that don't need to be sorted out as in, midfield when we have a howling striker problem that needs to be addressed.

12 Jun 2015 05:15:53
"He's going to be one of the best players in the world"

Sorry, I can't see it. Terrible attitude, all pace and average ball skills. One injury away from mediocrity.

12 Jun 2015 07:17:01
Sanchez 32 million
Lallana 25 million

English players are a premium, especially for Man City at the moment plus Barca were open to selling Sanchez whereas we are not selling Sterling willingly.

{Ed001's Note - except Man City are not able to just throw money around like they once did, so they will have to negotiate a decent price or go elsewhere. Though, by January, Sterling's value will have dropped further and we will be just glad to get anything.}

11 Jun 2015 21:51:07
So the bidding war starts on sterling, I've read we want 50m if that is true the situation could not have been about money because if you expect 50m for a player irregardless of potential his wages must be in the 100k + bracket, at the same time though take city to the cleaners 50m sounds about right loooool, eds what do you think about the transfer fee if we have set it at 50m?

11 Jun 2015 22:19:14
If Liverpool get anywhere near 40-50 million for Sterling now the owners should take the money and run. Sterling is by far nowhere near the finished article and could very easily become a small fish in a very big pond at City, Chelsea, Madrid. and end up in obscurity!

12 Jun 2015 00:06:43
He ain't worth 50m BUT if they wanna pay that for a kid who's still learning the game, let nobody stand in their way.

11 Jun 2015 21:10:07
There still hasn't been any news on where Konoplyanka is going. A few days ago it looked like he was signing for Sevilla, but that hasn't happened yet.

Macca seemed to think we were interested still but as yet we've heard nothing. Could he actually be holding out for us pr has he given up?


I doubt it's likely to happen only because we've tied up two free signings already, and surely if we had interest we would have tied this up by now too.

It would be disappointing if we missed out on him after almost signing him not so long ago.
He looks good enough to start in our 11 from th games I've seen of him over the last couples of years. He has great delivery and trickery and pace. His creation would be a boost for the team too. He's a creator and a finisher.

For a free I can't understand why we haven't tied him to a deal. I understand he'd still be on a big contract but I'd say he's worth signing.

12 Jun 2015 04:02:01
Not sure we're making any moves for him, but given recent history and that Raheem's on the way out it does seem a bit of a no-brainer

12 Jun 2015 08:16:18
If RS were to go he would be an ideal replacement. Perhaps we are stalling whilst we wait for any deal with Sterling to go through. Would we replace a player before he has been sold as that may put us in a position to be held to ransom. Maybe I'm talking crap and need another coffee before my brain starts working!

{Ed002's Note - Less Orange Sunshine and not more coffee is required.}

11 Jun 2015 19:09:12
Was the Moore's family ever any good for the club?

I remember Ed001 saying that David Moores basically screwed us over when selling to the cowboys in 2007, in order to line his own pocket.

However, the Moores family owned the club for more than 50 years, and David Moores was Chairman from 1991.

Can our inability to win the league for 25 years be linked back to Moores' stewardship, or is it just a coincidence that we didn't win the league during hid tenure?

One of the things holding us back now is the lack of development of the stadium. Was Moore's not savvy enough to see how much revenue we were giving away, especially to Man Utd, by having such a relatively small stadium? The plans that FSG have put in place don't seem to be that 'out there' that they couldn't have been done before?

Also, was Moores scared or unable to maximise the commercial opportunities that have been there since the creation of the EPL and which we only recently seem to be cashing in on?

Really interested to hear from Eds or anyone else to hear about our past ownership and club management.

{Ed001's Note - David Moores was the issue. He refused multiple chances to build a new stadium as it would mean putting his hand in his pocket instead of taking money out of the club, like he usually did. Moores only interest was taking. All he wanted was a free ride and that is what he got.}

11 Jun 2015 20:22:47
In my opinion we should of won the league but generally speaking we have been mismanaged but right now we are so a behind the top 4 we are closer to the bottom 4.

11 Jun 2015 21:14:26
I always found it quite alarming how much United overtook us in the 90s. Don't know why that happened, but I'm guessing some form of bad-management.

11 Jun 2015 21:21:23
Apart from Moores, the individual who almost single handedly held us back was Rick Parry - Peter Robinson was that good for us he was always going to be a hard act to follow - and allegedly one of the main reasons we went with the 2 American idiots was his influence and insistence, in my humble opinion, and from someone I knew within the club, Parry was only interested in Rick Parry.

11 Jun 2015 21:21:50
Nonsense OG. A little too much drama from your good self. We were a few wins of a top 4 spot and we could not have played much worse.

11 Jun 2015 22:49:16
Souness era, bad management, good manager at Utd. Where do you want to start?

11 Jun 2015 23:11:45
There is a whole era of poor management - club shop closed after 2005 win, not inviting tenders then getting Carlsberg to sponsor us for £7m a season when Spurs were getting treble that.

That's why our percentage profit has been so great - due to it being previously so poor.

Gillet and Hicks did know this and it started improving under them - not much else did then.

It pains me but Man U, Chelsea, etc. were streets ahead of us and are probably still are on a number of fronts - not just commercials!

11 Jun 2015 17:55:23
{Ed001's Note - We have posted a new article entitled, Should Birmingham Sell Gray?

11 Jun 2015 18:12:46
Try the Birmingham page 😜

11 Jun 2015 19:35:00
It's not black and white if they should sell him, more like 50 shades of. oh, I'll get me coat.

11 Jun 2015 19:56:00
Everybody seems in joke sharing mood today ☺

11 Jun 2015 23:12:42
If I was ed for the day - Sam's post would be "post of the day"!

11 Jun 2015 13:22:29
Eds reports on some sites linking us digne the young french keft back, anything in it? If so is there any news on moreno ir would they compete. ?

{Ed002's Note - RTP.}

11 Jun 2015 17:24:31
It may be staying the obvious but I only think we will sign anyone now, excluding it seems bogan, when someone leaves with a bit of value/wages, so replacing balo, sterling, maybe Byram if enrique goes, and maybe a cb if ilori and skrtel leave.

11 Jun 2015 14:36:26
There's some really good banter on here today boys n girls (and Ed002).

Makes a change from the last few days/weeks!

Keep it up!

11 Jun 2015 16:09:25
I must have missed it ;)

11 Jun 2015 16:45:28
where?

11 Jun 2015 18:06:58
It ended when red lobster posted :(

11 Jun 2015 20:06:53
When did that happen?

11 Jun 2015 14:33:18
Bogdan compared to jones
Less wages
Younger
Better
Free

Milner compared to gerrard
Younger
Similar wages
Free
Better player currently

Ings compared to borini
Similar age
Less wages
Free
Similar level

11 Jun 2015 15:07:59
Agree with all the above - all three improve the team but none make us a top 4 contender as we still have 3 biggest issues to address

1) Still no top striker to back up Sturridge if he gets injured - Ings may become that option in a year or two but not yet. Compare us to Chelsea last season with Costa, Remy and Drogba, Man Utd with Rooney, Falcao, RVP and City with Aguero, Jovetic, Dzeko
2) We lack at least one top FB - I personally would play Manquillo and Moreno but both young and it would be good to get a top player in who can play both LB and RB if required
3) Will Sterling leave and should we replace him or not?

If we get those right we're set I think provided we're sensible in our team selections and setup. I'd love to see Illori played with Sakho in preseason for example, and Markovic given a real run at LW and Can played in midfield etc.

11 Jun 2015 18:12:53
Ings will be better than Borini.

11 Jun 2015 20:08:33
But won`t get us over the hump without a top striker to help him like surez helped Studge, sterling and Couts perform and get better

11 Jun 2015 22:44:49
Borini and jones hardly played so anything is an improvement or a waste depending on how you see it.
Gerrard was well past it so again anythings an improvement there as well.

12 Jun 2015 00:11:09
That's how low the bar is right now, Mikey

11 Jun 2015 13:51:53
Can someone please tell me when we've had a decent bk up keeper. Cavalieri, intanje, kirkland, carson have been and gone so why all the fume over bogdan.

11 Jun 2015 14:01:09
Not having the right personnel in the past is not a good reason for not doing so now.

11 Jun 2015 14:03:28
I think the last time we had (arguably) 2 No 1s was thet famous transfer window when Ged brought in Dudek and Kirkland. I though Kirkland could have been our (and England's) No 1 for a very long time if injury had not got in the way.

11 Jun 2015 14:34:46
Plz tell me user013 where the pot of gold is too buy this gk whos happy too not play everygame

11 Jun 2015 14:47:47
I always thought Doni was a pretty decent back-up keeper.

11 Jun 2015 14:48:53
Hmmm. I said not having a good backup in the past is not a good argument for not having one now and you, DR, ask where the pot of gold is.

It's at the end of the rainbow mate. By the time you get there you may have learned to follow the thread of conversation.

11 Jun 2015 15:05:54
i think its really more to them wanting another first team keeper rather than buying a backup gk.

11 Jun 2015 15:48:47
Kirklands main problem was that if you shot from a freekick and it was on target and it meant him moving for it it went in awful awful reactions

11 Jun 2015 20:10:25
Kirkland could not stay healthy for two games running.

11 Jun 2015 20:56:58
The point is dorset is that most feel we need a better keeper than mignolet not a worse one. Mignolet is average at best, and should he have another wobble like last season will bogdan really be good enough especially as he can't displace the bolton no.1.

I suspect that due to ffp the piggy bank only has coppers left in it and we are forced to shop in lidl. I am happy enough if that is the case, but when we sell sterling and the other fringe players i would hope we use some of those proceeds to buy at marks and spencers as i suspect we would still be close to our proverbial credit limit and harrods will not be viable as yet.

I am not suggesting we spend for spendings sake as i am not equating spending bucket loads with quality. I just mean that we need to target the right players that will be a demonstrable improvement in areas that actually need improvement. Ings and milner are examples of improvement on what we have, but are they the right players. Ings has a better case than milner under that criteria but is still a welcome addition on a free. But kovacic would not make sense to me especially as we have Can and an abundance of attacking midfielders already at the club. We have other more pressing areas to improve on where real quality is required and i'd rather we saved our money and bought the finest range rather than 2 for 1 own brand if you know what i mean.

11 Jun 2015 11:45:20
For me some of our best transfers since I've watched liverpool. Fees in euros so with exchange rate could of been more or less.

Reina- villarreal 9.8m
Arbeloa- la coruna 3.9m
Hyppia- willem II 4.5m
Henchoz-blackburn 5.4m
Finnan- fulham 5.25m
Riise- monaco 6.10m
Agger-brondby 8.76m
Skrtel- zenit 10m
Aurelio- valencia free
Alonso- sociedad 16m
Sissoko- valencia 12m
Hamman- newcastle 12m
Garcia- barcelona 8.75m
Litmanen- barcelona free
Maxi- at madrid free
Smicer- lens 6.8m
Benayoun-west ham 7.3m
Kuyt-feyenoord 18m

As you can see some truly great baragins there. Imagine our reaction if we brought them now. We would be moaning like schoolgirls as they wernt from big clubs or the best players in the world. Last time i checked we made world class players not brought them. P.s ed2 sorry for finances.

Source-transfermarkt

11 Jun 2015 12:12:43
Surely saurez and torres have to been in there? Both bought for around £22-25m, scored goals for fun and were sold for more then double their transfer fee?

Fair enough saurez had is problem and fans were unhappy with how they left but both were arguable the best player whilst at the club. Fair enough didn't win trophies but if you look at what they did for their country or at other clubs can argue it wasn't to do with their ability

11 Jun 2015 12:46:45
Dorset

Not a bad list, the only problem is there are no players from the last 5 years that have made it.

That's maybe why the fans question signings, and also the bad far out ways the good.

11 Jun 2015 13:19:50
I would definitely include Torres & Suarez, as well as Countinho and Sturridge aswell. All deserve to be in that list.

Can't argue with any of the others, although did wobble over Skrtel. However, when Rafa bought him to partner Agger, we weren't playing the high line and therefore Martin was a much better fit into our defence.

11 Jun 2015 13:26:31
Smicer? Really?
6.8 million was a fairly high price in those days.
The man went from "wet lettuce" to legend overnight on the 25th May 2005 but I'm general his performances were mediocre at best.

11 Jun 2015 13:36:02
Lavers there arw no players from the last 5 years because the op was trying to make the point that in this day and age those signings would have been ripped apart.

11 Jun 2015 13:47:30
Was going to include suarez and torres but wanted to show the players we've not spent loads on who are important. Coutinho and sturridge not been here long to judge them for me. i'd say possibly can out of the recent talent. Also on looking since 2008 the transfers have been shocking.

11 Jun 2015 13:51:04
Good list Dorset, and good to get some banter going. I'd agree that both suarez and Torres should be there, but also where is Gary Mc?
One of our best signings in the last 30 years

11 Jun 2015 14:38:10
Completely agree on Gary Mc - was going to put him in my earlier post but got distracted, lol!

The influence he had on Gerrard alone was worth 10 times his wages, not to forget THAT goal against Everton!

11 Jun 2015 14:40:33
Imagine how close we could've got to the league in the 1990s (when we had a couple of good chances) if we'd bought him a few years earlier.

I compared Milner's signing to him a week or so ago, and I think, on paper, the comparison's do add up. Midfield general, extremely hard worker and model pro (important for the kids) and they both know what it takes to win the league.

11 Jun 2015 15:01:41
I only remembered soon as i hit send, my bad.

11 Jun 2015 15:57:02
Reetred

Reina,Alonso and Garcia all came with big reputations I don't think anyone would have questioned them.

{Ed001's Note - Litmanen's reputation was also huge, he was one of the biggest names in world football when we signed him.}

11 Jun 2015 16:57:17
Also Aurelio was garbage another sick note, and maxi had more bad days than good.

11 Jun 2015 16:59:01
What about Markus babbel he wasn't a bad signing

11 Jun 2015 17:29:24
Did any of them win the league?

11 Jun 2015 17:30:22
Aurelio was great when fit, and I always liked maxi, not blessed with pace or power but a gifted player, have to disagree with you lavers

11 Jun 2015 17:55:05
Ozone - if Rafa hadn't have bottled it, that crop with Alonso, Stevie Mac etc. Would have. So not a fair question, and actually, most of that crop did win the league, just not with us !

11 Jun 2015 19:03:34
Fencey

I can see your argument for maxi but come on Aurelio!

{Ed001's Note - Aurelio was crap for 6 games, played out of this world for the next one and then would start a second game brilliantly only to be carried off after 35 min and not play again for 6 months, when he returned to the beginning of the cycle. On those very rare times he was fully fit, he was a top class player with a brilliant delivery from wide or dead balls. If only he had stayed fit.}

11 Jun 2015 19:30:08
Maxi was sensational, unbelievable football brain his link up play with Suarez and Bellamy was immense.

11 Jun 2015 20:12:38
Ozone, that is a Dear Rafa question

11 Jun 2015 11:15:46
Edd001. Bar continho where do you think our creativity is coming from?
We can't expect the forwards to create their own chances and as we seen we created very little last season. I know Rodgers had a part in that and some players played out of position but I'm struggling to see how our midfield will create and dictate play. when alonso left we never replaced him and I know he's worldclass and very few like him but we are missing that passing midfielder That is the anchor to how we play. It is not saying hendersons isn't good enough, he just isn't that type of midfielder.
If continho had of been injured this season god knows were we had finished.

{Ed001's Note - that is why we have players like Ibe and Lallana, to create chances. It doesn't always have to be about passing. Pace, power and trickery by those two can create space for Coutinho to work. I do agree though, which is why I fail to understand the thinking behind Milner, as he is not defensively minded nor is he creative.}

11 Jun 2015 11:49:43
I still don't think milner passed his best. he can shoot, pass and cross with both feet. he is less quicker version of henderson in terms of forward runs.

He can also play in any position. ideal for rodgers. he can be played as wing back tooo.

11 Jun 2015 11:44:53
Milner is cetainly better than Allen in every single way. Good signing. Can, Hendo and Milner is a pretty intimidating midfield in terms of physical prowess.

11 Jun 2015 13:21:43
Creativity to what end would be my question. We have plenty of creative players but absent a goal poacher who spots a gap, gambles, makes a run, finds some space, or offers a headed option from a cross then we will continue to have a whole hoard of crestive types tippy tappying around on the edge of the box trying to walk it into the net.

11 Jun 2015 13:23:20
Allen is not a high bar nor a yardstick to measure how good a midfielder is he has had some very good games, i`l admit IMO but he isn`t good nor consistent enuff for where we want to get to.

11 Jun 2015 13:56:06
I suspect Milner will play deep lying playmaker and Hendo/Coutinho providing midfield creativity ahead of him. Not sure about Milners CDM credentials but defensively no mug if he can get the positioning right.

Alternatively Milner alongside Hendo as a midfield pair looks useful as both solid allrounders.

In terms of who's going to create goals next season, I think it's Hendo, Coutinho, Llalana, Sturridge and perhaps Ibe and Ings if they settle quickly but I do worry if Sturridge is injured.

11 Jun 2015 10:35:57
Eds, 3 players I loved watching playing for lfc during the 90's, spelling prob slightly off.

1. Jari litmanen, I recall never got enough game time.
2. Marcus Babel brilliant defender
3. Karl heinze riedle

Just wondering wat your thoughts were on these players and how ud rate them now if they played in this generation?

Thanks eds

{Ed001's Note - 1. I loved Jari Litmanen and was absolutely delighted when we signed him. Sadly Ged didn't see eye to eye with him and he very rarely got a chance to play.
2. Babbel was top class, but a horribly debilitating illness robbed him of a number of years of his career. Shame because he was clearly a fantastic defender and we were lucky to have him.
3. Riedle was at the tail end of his career, good leap and lethal in the air, but never got the service with us.

All three are good enough to walk into the team we have now.}

11 Jun 2015 13:26:53
Babbel was my type of defender from his days at Bayern and the Manschaft in the mid 90`s. I remember him man marking Shearer at Euro `96 and that was a battle within the battle itself. one of the best individual duels I have ever watched. He was that good.

11 Jun 2015 13:39:08
Shame jari never featured more often! Some defence we had then with babel, and relatively cheap at the time

11 Jun 2015 13:48:48
We went through a spell in the 90s of having the hex sign over RBs. First Rob Jones' career was cruelly cut short - Neville wouldn't have got a look in if Trigger hadn't got injured!

And then Babbel getting Guillain Barre Syndrome.

Didn't really settle until we got Finnan and then Arbeloa a few years later.

You could argue the hex struck again when we paid £18m for Johnson, but that would be a trifle naughty ;-)

11 Jun 2015 20:16:51
Remember vegard heggem? Injuries destroyed him like it did to Rob Jones

11 Jun 2015 10:00:49
Realistically, and given the various rumour mills, who do people think we will end up buying as our main striker recruit, if anyone else?

I hope not Benteke as either we will need to change our style of play, or he will end up being yet another square peg in a round hole.

I would love Lacazette, but given his agents comments, its unlikely he'll come to us without CL.

I would be happy with Walcott, although still fearful of his injury record when we have Sturridge already. Also not convinced at all that Arsenal would sell to us except as part of a deal for Sterling.

Dzeko as part of a Sterling deal could be interesting.

Ibrahimovic would certainly sell shirts, but would cost a bomb in wages. Also, imagine the sparks in the dressing room with Zlatan and Mario in there, if we couldn't sell Mario.

Vietto could have been intersting but looks like he's off to Athletico.

Or we could just stick with what we have, having exited Mario, Ricky, Fabio and Iago, and play with Sturridge, Ings, Ibe and Sinclair as our attacking options. However, that would be a big risk, imo, with 2 under 20, one who gets injured a lot and a final one who is still finding his feet in the top league.

Other views? Eds, I know you hate 'most likely' type questions, but given our financial situation, and the lack of CL, who are the strikers you know of who could be available and would suit our style of play?

Instinctively, and steering away from phrases like "marquee", I would rather have someone who already has experience of a top European league with a larger club and could therefore, hopefully, hit the ground running.

{Ed001's Note - Dzeko is woeful, he just offers nothing unless it is all handed to him on a plate. Terrible signing that for Citeh, they could have had anyone up front with their midfield scoring those goals, he is simply not good enough. Poor touch, doesn't work hard enough, despite being tall his aerial threat is neglible, slow, has no ability to beat a man or create space for a shot. I really do not see why we would consider him, he is a worse version of Andy Carroll.

If Walcott could stay fit, and he would be played as a striker, because he is not a good winger, then he would be worth getting.

The only other one I can see that would even consider us is Higuain.}

11 Jun 2015 10:14:34
Ed would Higuian come to us if everything fell into place.

{Ed001's Note - it would be a possibility, not a certainty, but he would consider it.}

11 Jun 2015 10:19:37
Higuain Walcott (as a striker) Mandzukic. All realistic and I'd take any of them happily

11 Jun 2015 10:24:49
Funny, I just wrote a long post explaining why I think it would be Falcao (on loan), or if we are very lucky, Tevez. These are the two only realistic options in my view.

11 Jun 2015 10:58:25
I would take Falcao on loan and hope his pre injury form returns. Tevez I wouldn't touch with a barge pole, attitude stinks would be more trouble than he's worth. Higuain or Walcott down the middle would be my first choice though, this would also allow Origi and Ings to bed in whilst giving us proven premier league experience alongside a genuine world class goal scorer

11 Jun 2015 11:19:50
fanobip, you might have to relook and see what realistic means mate.

11 Jun 2015 11:55:18
What is unrealistc about it, Kaizer? Monaco will loan him again this season. According to several sources he wants to stay in the PL and it is up to him to decide between us and Chelsea. He may choose Chelsea but may prefer us for guaranteed playing time. If he does, I think FSG will take him on loan - too tempting money wise. You think them spending 30M on Benteke is more realistic?

11 Jun 2015 13:03:57
Hig wages would be unrealistic.

11 Jun 2015 13:21:34
what AG said fanobip. not even sure if we can even pay half what United paid to him.

11 Jun 2015 13:32:44
Forgot Higuin! And most embarrassingly of all, I forgot about Divock! Make that 3 under 20!

Ed, with your knowledge and the 'beef on the street' (Huggy?), do you think any sort of deal for Walcott is a possibility except as a makeweight in a Sterling deal? Just wondering if Arsenal would sell directly to us?

Given the age of Walcott when he joined Arsenal, I presume if he didn't negotiate a new contract and therefore left at the end of his current deal, Arsenal would be due a development payment a la Ings?

{Ed001's Note - no Arsenal would not get a development payment, and they will consider moving him on if he continues to stall on a new contract.}

11 Jun 2015 14:01:52
Higuan, Walcott, Aubameyang would be my picks

11 Jun 2015 14:55:47
Falcao`s time has gone and England regardless of what he says, doesn`t suit him based on what I am see. he just doesn`t have the pace and speed of thought to play in the PL. Reminds me of Morientes. Great player and formidable finisher but England did not suit him at all. As for Dzeko, the less said the better.

11 Jun 2015 08:22:26
well seems even newcastle are finally doing it right.

liverpool- oh well we still have Rodgers!

11 Jun 2015 08:52:40
Can we not end this Rodgers bashing?
I just feel he is the manager of our club, let's get behind him and the team.

11 Jun 2015 09:26:34
How do you get behind a man that like most of his players is a square peg in a round hole. The only difference being that players can be moved to their correct positions were BR can't as I think we have enough tea ladies.

11 Jun 2015 09:32:22
I support the club, not the manager slowly destroying it.

11 Jun 2015 10:04:37
Mikey it is not the manager it is the owners. He said he was willing to go (albeit with his contract pay), Klopp seems to be interested, I don't know what do you want from BR - that he will resigne and go with nothing? No manager would have done that. Every football mind on this planet knows that Klopp for BR is a no brainer other than the owners.

11 Jun 2015 11:07:53
They only think in terms of money.

11 Jun 2015 15:03:25
The owners are the ones to blame as well because they bottled it. Pay out? Nonsense! I thought they were business men so I guess they`ve never heard of cutting your losses. He has lost them a couple hundred million already w/ his failures so a pay out would be chump change in comparison which is why, they are saying nothing about how they arrived at such a dreadful decision because any man worth his brain cells will never be able to swallow whatever explanation they may give.

11 Jun 2015 02:08:27
Ed001 when you're around, I know it's a dodgy time there. What's your opinion on the academy? I personally feel there's a lot of potential in there at the minute, but the second they play everyone seems to heap a lot on them. For example last year it was sterling, then Ibe this year. I think we have good players coming through, but surely the expectation placed on them the second they start to make the first team is too much?
I look at United and Blackett as well, I think in time he will be good, but he's got too much expectation on him.
I'm basically asking do young English talent get too much asked of them at a young age, they seem to be expected to be superstars straight away, and if not they're labelled as a flop. Can't help but think this is a large part of why homegrown talent generally fails.

{Ed001's Note - neither Sterling nor Ibe are academy products mate, that is why they have the expectation heaped on them. When you are talented enough to be bought at the age they are, people expect a lot more. The media hypes up any player that has a good game, builds them right up so they can sell papers, get people to click on links to read about them. Then they can sell more knocking them down later.

It is not why English talent fails though. Homegrown talent fails because of three reasons, mainly. Firstly the coaching is not there, these young lads don't get to play on the streets all day like I did as a kid, out in all weathers kicking a ball around, so they need top quality coaching in the academies to improve their game. There simply aren't enough coaches, quantity and quality wise, in English football. So our players are not getting the coaching needed to improve their ability. They need more coaching sessions on an individual basis, which just doesn't happen. Glenn Hoddle's academy in Spain had a lot more coaches per player than a standard academy and took players deemed not good enough for youth set ups in England. Those players all made genuine improvements to their game.

Secondly it is the way, at young ages, we still have this idiotic notion that bigger, stronger, faster is what it is about. So the only players getting picked are the biggest lads, rather than the best players.

Finally it is simply a lack of real opportunities to develop their game through first team football. Managers lack the balls to give them a chance when their job is on the line. They do not want to spend their time developing talent, knowing that it will be a few years down the line before it pays off and they probably will not be there to benefit. That is why I am in favour of English clubs moving to the DoF model, to have someone above the manager who has a long term strategy in place and makes the manager give the talent a chance. At a young age they are inconsistent, so you have to accept bad days as well as good days, as we can see with Sterling, sometimes it can be hormone imbalances, growth spurts or simply just a lack of experience. A manager needs to have the bottle to stick with them and keep working with them to help them through it. Very few in England do so, which is why Dario Gradi has my utmost respect.}

11 Jun 2015 07:22:37
Ed I you say there are not enough coaches in the English game and I know the stats supports this but I'm told while on courses that coaches even with uefa band higher are out of work so tthat's not enough jobs ?

{Ed001's Note - it is both. We simply do not employ enough in England and there aren't enough top quality ones either. More people would qualify if there were more jobs available.}

11 Jun 2015 07:37:22
Ed - Glenn Hoddle's academy in Spain had a lot more coaches per player than a standard academy and took players deemed not good enough for youth set ups in England. Those players all made genuine improvements to their game. How is this measured please , any examples ?

So the only players getting picked are the biggest lads, rather than the best players. Sterling !

{Ed001's Note - what? Measured? What kind of dumb question is that? Clearly it is obvious how to measure the number of coaches and that the players were ones released by youth academies around England due to being below standard. Or did you mean the genuine improvements shown by the fact that a large number of them are now employed in professional football? Try making your question clear please.

That bit was badly worded, it should have said in a large number of cases the only players being picked, but don't be an arse please. Showing one exception does not make a case, as every rule has an exception.}

11 Jun 2015 07:52:26
Ed001, your points about quality coaching or the lack thereof, and the notion of bigger, stronger , faster resonates with me greatly, we have the same problem here in Australia. My son attended high school at one of the allegedly best high school football academies here. The coaches there were all about bigger, stronger, faster athletic types, and the genuine footballers with the technical ability, the football brain and smarts, the boys who could read a game well were more often than not left out of teams or they were riding the pine getting splinters in their backsides, while the big strong athletic players who could run fast played.

The three boys that were the best footballers, of which my son was one, now no longer play the game at a high level, while two of the boys they attended the academy with, made their debuts this year in the A League. One of them is a completely left sided player who couldn't pass the ball with his right foot not even five feet, but he is quick, and the other has next to no technical ability, but boy is he an athlete and he can run fast, so fast that he was the national age champion for the 100 meter dash. Neither of them are 'footballers', they are athletes that can kick a ball yet somehow managed to make their A League debuts. Its very disillusioning as a coach myself. The problem isn't confined to England, its here in Australia too.

{Ed001's Note - it is worse in Australia, you only have to look at their national team to see it is built on being stronger and more physically imposing than the opposition. Their whole game is built around bullying opponents, which might work well against weaker opponents, such as they get in the Asian competitions, but it will always struggle at the highest levels. That is why Tony Pulis never wins trophies.}

11 Jun 2015 08:08:40
ed i think your right about the coaches lacking quality and quantity, but you can't improve as a coach without the opportunity, so its a bit of a conundrum without getting the chance you can't learn and prove your quality, and on the scouting side of thing I've seen it myself over the last few years managing youth squads players you see with raw talent and skill potential getting overlooked for player who are more the on the athletic side. On a side note you mentioned spain and we must agree they seem to discover young gems a lot would you agree that because the likes of real madrid valencia barcelona etc all play their youths in teams that are competitive segunda leagues where age ain't a restriction that they come through with more experience and develop quicker.

{Ed001's Note - no, because if that was the difference young players would just come through from the lower leagues in England just the same. Most of the second string sides tend to be simply players who are not good enough for the main team, rather than youngsters.}

11 Jun 2015 09:27:07
BrisbaneLFC

I fully empathise with you re Australia and coaching = the "bigger, stronger , faster" problem has been the same for 50+ years, it was the same when my father played and it was the same when I played, and by the sounds of it nothing has changed!

If you were deemed "small" then you had to be outstanding technically just to get a look in, and even then they tended to opt for the "bigger" kids. I would say that coaching has improved regards teaching the technical aspects but it still has a mighty long way to go, and in truth I doubt it will ever reach the standard that is required.

For years I have maintained that for players from Australia to really excel/improve they need to come to Europe at an early age, worse case scenario at around 16 years of age. This sounds quite harsh (and I fully understand it is easier said then done), but what I believe happens is that up to 14 years or so Australian players are quite competitive, as a generalisation they hold their own, but after this the level of competition within Australia stagnates/plateaus, in short, they simply play against players of the same ability, and thus never improve, unlike their European counterparts.

As you are well aware football (soccer) is truly up against it in Australia, especially from a media perspective, whilst it's youth registrations far outweigh the other sports re growth and expansion, the media exposure/coverage the sport receives at senior level is bordering on disgusting . suppressed by "concerned" Rugby League faction and the powerful domineering Australian Rules magnates . which certainly doesn't help the sport.

Wishful thinking but not totally absurd, but wouldn't it be nice one day to see an Australian side with players that at least have the technical ability of the Japanese.

11 Jun 2015 09:50:24
Thought I'd throw in my 2 cents as an American. The problem we have here is a bit of a different one- the quality we have at U-14 or so and below is immense, sadly it evaporates quickly in high school as the best athletes turn to more popular sports (read that as the games the girls go to, like basketball or handegg).

I will say the technical ability of our youngsters is miles from where we were a decade ago and I'd guess we're maybe another decade or so from having a very good national side that can maybe challenge, so in that respect things are going relatively well though.

11 Jun 2015 11:11:54
Guru, as a coach here, when it came to the beginning of a new season and having to pick players for my team, I had many an argument with parents, other coaches, club coaching directors for not picking a player who was fast, big and athletic. None of them could ever grasp the concept that I wanted footballers in my teams, not athletes. If there was a big, fast tall player with technical ability of course I would select him, but without it I wouldn't.

I once had a boy who I managed to bring in from another club, who had all the attributes that I liked, he played as a striker on his other team, whereby his coach would play him up front, knock the ball over the top and he would run onto it and score a goal. The old kick and chase it coaching technique. When he came to my team I made him a CB to teach him how to read a game better. Everyone was against it, his parents whined and whinged but the boy actually appreciated it and could see what I was trying to do with him. All his parents saw was their kid no longer scoring a gazillion goals a season anymore.

11 Jun 2015 13:19:31
Great reading there eds but a couple of questions.

One were you have said that the managers "lack the balls" to play them, isn't that more down to the media, fans and owners putting pressure on them to succeed? Hense why they feel they can't afford to put them in?

Like how would everyone feel if we finishes the same this year or lower but had rossiter, brannagan, Sinclair etc in the team would the owners look at that and say well its because of the younger players or would it still be deemed a failure and our current team is full of kids and all the problems you have mentioned with there hormone inbalances etc yet Brendan has been ripped a new one, had a review, lost his backroom staff etc yet he is trying to achieve with kids and are expectations are he should be in the top 4 with kids.

And dof role works well if done were say they say your not getting a new player you cab use ibe from the academy per say then do they get extra understanding that ibe will need time and work and would expectations get lowers because instead of giving him that 20 mil pound man who could help he has been given a kid to develop?

{Ed001's Note - so that would be having the balls to stand up to the pressure then.}

11 Jun 2015 15:26:00
Stand up to pressure. They just ge sacked if they don't hit targets (although Brendan seems to have broken that mould for the time being - although we don't quite know what reasons were used to keep him, if it was the youth then hats of tp them for understanding that they can he an issure with incositencts etc)

But sorry eds if managers don't succeed they het sacked. Its bot about standing up to the pressure. It would be if he was told to play his older players and he went and played the kids because he believes in them and won stuff.

But playing rossiter, sinclar, branno and not achieving would jaut be him giving his job up because owners, fans and media don't look at it like some. They just see chelsea didn't get top 4 etc and don't loom into why.

I think if the owners said we don't mind fluctuations between 3rd-6/7th whilst the younger players gain experience and develop then great and I think a lot more would get there chances. But if a managers jib is on the line and he's trying to get into top four etc then no manager will play the kids. That's everywhere.

How many academy players under say 21 played more than 20+ games for any of the top nations league winning teams.

Psg, barce, Bayern, juventus, Chelsea even add in Celtic, psv, sporting (I think won the league or porto) - I'm not completely sure but if someone knows please let me know as I think it will be interesting.

Nkw there are some rules they can't have been sold and then bought back as they weren't developed in that team and they can't be older academy graduates like iniesta etc

I'm sure there won't be alot, apart from th lesser nations.

{Ed001's Note - sorry but that is just crap. The kids are good enough, the manager just needs to have the balls to give them a try instead of messing around playing players out of position. I am bored of this idiotic notion that just because a player is young he might not perform. Owen was at his peak at the age of 18.}

11 Jun 2015 20:28:29
Another poor post, maxi. EVERY club uses it`s youth players to some extent. Xavi, Iniesta, Muller, lahm, Alaba, Raul, Ramos navas and on and on and on were all given a chance by the coaches because they thought they were good enough. Xavi got his chance at 18 to learn from Pep and the examples are unending. What is it with you always thinking that it is no use playing youth just because they may not amount to something. how do you know they will amount to something or nothing if you don`t play them? if all the clubs on the planet thought like you, then we should just scrap the academy and FIFA should scrap the youth competitions because by your tortured logic, none of the great players who came out of thes will amount to anything. That is a defeatist attitude which BR IMO, has and you seem to be falling for it. You need courage to play the youngsters but there are ways to bring them through with the right plan in place because many other clubs dot even the big clubs, do it. How did real find Raul? You think he dropped from the sky? LFC has no plan and no direction and the failure in place is making it worse because he has the very thought process you have. The diff is, he is forever ready to take credit for their development after he has spent his time either trying to sell them like Flanno and Kelly (which he sold for a pittance) or sent out on loan like Ibe and Wisdom. Give it up, sir because your arguments make no sense

11 Jun 2015 20:32:51
Brazilian Ronaldo was thrown in at the deep end as an 18 year old, as was messi, aguero. If they are good enough then that's all that matters to me. I quote cesare Maldini who said once when asked about risking a young player for Italy - "I do not see an age when I look at a player, I see his talent"

11 Jun 2015 00:24:01
Brendan Rodgers almost joined Twitter, but was put off when he found out about the character limit

11 Jun 2015 17:12:47
Made me chuckle, good one.

11 Jun 2015 01:28:02
Hi all,

So the idea of signings is to improve on what we've already got.

Milner
- better than Allen, Lucas, Markovic, a grumpy sterling.
- As good as Henderson, Lallana, an ageing Gerrard, Can.
- Not as good as a happy Sterling, Coutinho, potential Ibe.

I know they are not like for like and everyone has there own opinion, but generally I would say this signing improves our squad.

Ings
- Better than Ballotelli, Lambert, Origi, Borini.
- Not as good as an injury free Sturridge

On the face of it a good signing.

But. With the exception of Ballotelli none of our other strikers ever got a run in the side. Borini scored 9 goals in 24 for Roma (2012), last season Ings got 11 in 37. How can we judge these players unless they got a run in the side. Ings is an improvement or not? Unless he plays we will be moving him on in a few years. Strikers need to play. I would rather we splashed a large part of our budget on a striker that is good enough to start every game, rather than having 4 on the bench. Provided we could attract them.

don't get me wrong I like Ings and especially his attitude but will he have the confidence of the coaches and be selected.

11 Jun 2015 04:55:51
Ings is English and you can understand where that signing comes from, he was free transfer (albeit not now as we know), young English forward and LFC are a sucker for English players who can do a bit of good. Now can we move Balotelli Borini and Lambert is the question really? and the answer looks like no we cant, i cannot see a club in the world that would want to pay for Balotelli. Lambert will be difficult to move given his age, and Borini can be moved But then again he should have been moved last summer, but he wasn't.
I don't see the point in adding strikers unless we move the ones we have. That is just a financial suicide. FSG are doing it right They signed Ings on a free, just in case we cannot move any of our trio of strikers at all. if we can move the trio then probably we can sign a good striker at premium wages.

However what i don't understand is Milner at premium wages. we didn't actually need him specially not at those wages. I really thought this Year Hendo would lead the midfield and the pack and be the Senior player. Now milner is the Senior player and kind of would be the midfield leader if he plays( i guess he will be playing all games because of those wages) he also makes little sense because we are interested in Kovacic and we have been looking at him for some time now. and if we are to buy him then Milner makes zero sense at all. if we don't sign kovacic , then well milner is still a bad deal because Kovacic just would have been better. I am not against milner as a player, he is good at what he does always has been with all teams he has played for, but to me atleast signing Milner Esp on Hefty wages makes no to little sense if at all. ( just like lallana, markovich were last season) . the things that works for the signing is we didn't had to pay a transfer fee and he is 29 so probably has atleast 2 good years in him.

11 Jun 2015 06:53:06
Ings scored his goals in a struggling side in the premier league.
Fabio scored his goals for one of the best sides in Serie A.

Fabio has always struggled to take his chances in the premier league. He's ok at wonder strikes, but you need someone to tuck away the simple finishes and he doesn't do that often enough.

Nothing against Fabio, he's just not clinical enough.

11 Jun 2015 08:57:26
Borini had no problem tucking away his chances at Sunderland. AT LFC, he was never given a run in the first team like Ings was at Burnley; that is the reality. This constant pandering and defense of Rogers' failed methods is getting tiresome.

11 Jun 2015 09:18:11
Do you honestly think Ings is Rodgers first choice? I'll defend him because we have owners in charge who can not take us to the next level.

11 Jun 2015 09:37:56
Knowing Rodgers, Ings will probably get a game at right wing back, a few sub appearences then brendaned just like borini.
Should have sold borini last summer when we had the chance, I know he wanted to stay and prove himself but I bet in hindsight if he knew he would be treated like he has done this season then he would have packed his bags.
He should have at least got half of ballotellis games.

11 Jun 2015 09:42:40
Borini would have likely doubled his wages to go to Sunderland or QPR back in August but he wanted to prove himself here. This was after he scored 10 goals for Sunderland in 40 appearances, very like Ings' record from last season only Borini played from the wing most of his matches.

Borini should have been given far more match time with Sturridge injured for most of the season. He really has been badly messed around.