Liverpool take 4th!!!

redspider

There was a very informative posting which detailed some of the signings under GH (up to Aug 2002) and it makes interesting reading.

> GH has brought in way more rubbish players than quality players.

I think like most managers, there is to some extent a bit of a hit and miss with all signings. Many of the big clubs are either trying to get players signed before the player is successful and expensive or before the player is snapped up by someone else. Most of the big clubs do not do transfers between each other (when was the last time Liverpool sold a player to Man U or vice versa) and there is a level of risk taking. All big clubs are under an extra pressure of usually having to pay more both in terms of the transfer fee and in terms of a player’s wages and bonuses. So, getting good players in is not easy.

Also, players are not easy to judge nor are they consistent or predictable. They can shine in certain surroundings, show good prospects, yet can perform to varying degrees. They can play well at one club, in a certain position, with certain other team members, yet move them into another surrounding or another country with a different culture and weather and they can fall apart. They are moody – they are human. Some are prone to injuries, some are unlucky.

Liverpool have given GH the luxury of being allowed to sign so many players. That list contains a colossal 33 signings - some of the names I didn’t know. Total transfer costs are ukp 101m. However, these are not the only costs to the club. Players must also be paid hefty wages, some are on over a million pounds a year and if a player stays over a few seasons, these costs can amount up to being much more than the players transfer fee. The salary bill in 2001-2002 was nearly eur 70m. And there are agents fees too. Also, there is a practice that when players are put out on loan, only a partial wage is paid by the receiving club (eg: Morientes at Monaco where Real Madrid pay 66% of his wages).

Looking at the list (I don’t know how many players have been signed since), only the following players have had a solid positive impact in their time and can be considered good transfers: Hyypia, Henchoz, Hamann, Babbel, McAllister, Litmanen, Baros. They cost a total of 17m or an average of 2.4m.

The second tier of players would include the likes of: Westerveld, Camara, Smicer, Barmby, Ziege, Riise, Dudek, Kirkland, Heskey, Anelka, Xavier, Diouf. Players that have done ok but not fantastic. They cost a total of 60m or an average of 5m each.

Many of the remainder have contributed little to nothing. Overall, the players that have contributed the most have cost the least, ironically. GH’s strategy does seem to be closer to throwing darts than anything else. Then there is the question of what he does with players in terms of their development. That is always a tricky one to answer. You could say that with the likes of Hyypia and Henchoz he has done very well. Even with Hamann who was sort of lack lustre at Newcastle, he has developed and done well as a player. Perhaps with some of the internally developed players he has also done reasonably well, such as with Gerard who has really blossomed. Owen less so, as I feel there is some tension between them sometimes.

But overall, I agree with the poster that GH has not done well. He has not bought well and its unclear if his strategy of having a huge squad is going to bear fruit. It is part of his well-aired long-term plan but Liverpool have some short-term success needs! Should the policy now be to buy say 3x 10m players or 10x 3m players? I think at this juncture the former is the better approach. However, getting the right 3 players wont be easy and perhaps a bigger investment is needed but I think that should be Liverpool’s aim.

Jivin Turkey

Originally posted by redspider
"I’m glad that Liverpool are 4th."

Agreed.


"> Liverpool werent lucky at all! …. To say they were lucky is ludicrous!
> Newcastle have been crippled with injuries all year .. They were very unlucky not to win on Sunday, and again last night.

Interesting points of argument here. So, you are saying that Newcastle are unlucky. I agree with that. Now follow the logic - since the beneficiary of Newcastle’s bad luck is Liverpool, doesn’t that mean by definition of luck that Liverpool are indeed lucky? Luck is a balanced concept – if for example two teams play a close game and one team scores the winner in the 94th minute, the winner is lucky and the loser is unlucky. I see other posters have mentioned the lucky aspect as well. I don’t know what a poll would show or if you are willing to concede on this point. If you don’t, we can agree to disagree I guess."

I understand what you are saying, but I still dont think Liverpool were "lucky" to "achieve" fourth. In all fairness they were better than Newcastle this year, and coped better over the course of the season. What I said was that if Newcastle didnt have such a defensive crisis, they prob would have won their last 2 games and be going to anfield with something to play for. You were hinting towards Bobbys head, and mentioned tension in the camp. Remember they also got to the semis of the UEFA! It was hardly a bad season (although they could still end up 7th)! I would wager that, next season they will really push some teams hard. With Given, Woodgate, Dyer, Bowyer, Speed and Shearer, they have a strong a spine as anyone.

"I would think that your opinion on this is very much in the minority. Yes, Liverpool have been around the 4th, 5th, 6th mark in the finishing months. However, at the 10-game stage Liverpool were 10th on 14 pts. Saying that they never looked like losing their grip on it is really looking at the season with rose-tinted glasses. They never created a gap between 4th and 5th in terms of points so it was nip and tuck the whole way. Liverpool could have easily finished outside the top-4."

In all fairness the 10 game stage was in October. Liverpool have not been out of the top 5 since then, and no matter how many bad results they were putting together, PLUS all the good results Birmingham/Villa put together, they (B'mingham/Villa) never over took them. The only team that "challenged" Liverpool for fourth was Newcastle.

"Rants are fine, rant away – but flaming is off-side. I shouldn’t have risen to the "bait"."

I wasnt baiting you! I enjoyed this discussion, long may it continue!

"I agree with you JT about Houllier! His time should be called to a halt and now is the perfect time. "

Dont say anymore, just sit in hope.