Rafa's Rants (the sequel)

messinkiapina

Gbear wrote: »

To be fair he's not the only one.


The defensive football where we improved year on year, culminating in being the highest scorers in the league and scoring 4 goals against both Utd and Real?

Again, my point is that we failed to beat weaker opposition as consistently as United did and always have done, and that is what is required to win the league.

Gbear

messinkiapina wrote: »

Again, my point is that we failed to beat weaker opposition as consistently as United did and always have done, and that is what is required to win the league.

I'm pretty sure the other 93 goals Liverpool scored that season weren't all against good teams.

Like I said, you need squad depth for that to do it on a consistent basis against packed defences and that's something Rafa wasn't allowed to have at Liverpool. Rightly or wrongly we didn't have the money to bridge the gap.

messinkiapina

Gbear wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the other 93 goals Liverpool scored that season weren't all against good teams.

Like I said, you need squad depth for that to do it on a consistent basis against packed defences and that's something Rafa wasn't allowed to have at Liverpool. Rightly or wrongly we didn't have the money to bridge the gap.

Benitez had more than enough money to spend at Liverpool, he wasted an awful lot of it on very mediocre players. I really don't buy that he didn't have the resources to win the league. He spend as much if not more than United did in the same period I'm sure. If he didn't have a sufficiently deep squad to compete, it was his own fault. I'd argue that we dropped lots of points against weaker teams even with our 1st 11 on the pitch.

eagle eye

Rafa doesn't have the political mind to be a popular guy. He speaks his mind and it will get him in trouble with people from time to time. He was like that at Liverpool and people at other clubs really did not like him. Liverpool fans thought it was because he was moderately successful that people didn't like him but they are wrong about that.

On top of that his football is considered boring by the masses and quite frankly it is dreadful to watch at times. I'm not saying it won't bring some success, its just that top clubs normally play an exciting brand of football and his teams don't.

It appears he had a falling out with the players and rumour has it that Frank Lampard was the leader of the rebellion. There is no way he is going to do well there now if that is true.

I don't think he is totally at fault for what has happened. I'd personally give any manager a chance and the Chelsea fans should have done that. Its too late now though and Chelsea will be a lot better off when he is gone.

niallo27

messinkiapina wrote: »

Benitez had more than enough money to spend at Liverpool, he wasted an awful lot of it on very mediocre players. I really don't buy that he didn't have the resources to win the league. He spend as much if not more than United did in the same period I'm sure. If he didn't have a sufficiently deep squad to compete, it was his own fault. I'd argue that we dropped lots of points against weaker teams even with our 1st 11 on the pitch.

Net spend though it need to be discussed.

smileyj1987

eagle eye wrote: »

It appears he had a falling out with the players and rumour has it that Frank Lampard was the leader of the rebellion. There is no way he is going to do well there now if that is true.

I don't think he is totally at fault for what has happened. I'd personally give any manager a chance and the Chelsea fans should have done that. Its too late now though and Chelsea will be a lot better off when he is gone.

Why would Lampard pull that sort of stunt ? I really don't think he is that type of guy but he could be doing everything in his power to get a new contract .

I like Rafa as a manager but it was never going to work with Chelsea and both parties should never have come together .

gosplan

Couldn't be arsed reading the whole thread but my take on it is that Rafa was doomed to failure when they slapped the 'interim' tag on him.

I'm not his biggest fan but managers need to have absolute authority and he has very very little.

Leiva

Exit strategy -initiated
Agent Rafa.
over and out.

monkey9

Last two Chelsea managers got the boot after playing West Brom. Chelsea play West Brom this weekend.

eagle eye

smileyj1987 wrote: »

Why would Lampard pull that sort of stunt ? I really don't think he is that type of guy but he could be doing everything in his power to get a new contract .

I like Rafa as a manager but it was never going to work with Chelsea and both parties should never have come together .

I don't know anything really, heard that on Off the Ball the other night.

Gbear

messinkiapina wrote: »

Benitez had more than enough money to spend at Liverpool, he wasted an awful lot of it on very mediocre players.

There's certainly an excuse for non-liverpool fans going for this - it's entirely reasonable not to get bogged down in the minutiae of what goes on in other teams.
Are you sure you support Liverpool? A cursory glance at our transfer dealings and a rudimentary knowledge of the environment in which Benitez was working would dispel such ignorance.

It's not like he didn't make mistakes, but all mangers do. Expecting Benitez to be perfect where no other managers are is a ludicrous double standard but it's what would have been required on such a tight budget.

messinkiapina wrote: »

I really don't buy that he didn't have the resources to win the league. He spend as much if not more than United did in the same period I'm sure.

Really? There's no difference between the squad Benitez inherited and the squad that Utd had when he took over?
It's like saying Benitez spent way more to move out of his hovel in some shanty town and move into a mansion than it took for Utd to pay to maintain their mansion.

The fact is that either Benitez would've had to have done a simply incredible job to bridge the gap or else Liverpool would've had to massively outspend their rivals given the state the squad was in.

messinkiapina wrote: »

I'd argue that we dropped lots of points against weaker teams even with our 1st 11 on the pitch.

We got progressively better at that as our first 11 got better but even so, it helps to be able to bring on Dzeko, Nasri, Rooney, Nani or Valencia as opposed to Albert Riera or Ryan Babel.

smileyj1987

eagle eye wrote: »

I don't know anything really, heard that on Off the Ball the other night.

If it was somebody like terry I wouldn't be surprised at all because that would be a very john terry thing to do . I always thought Lampard was a model pro but maybe he is the one who is the grade a c*nt in the dressing room . I would have said it was John Terry .

messinkiapina

Gbear wrote: »

There's certainly an excuse for non-liverpool fans going for this - it's entirely reasonable not to get bogged down in the minutiae of what goes on in other teams.
Are you sure you support Liverpool? A cursory glance at our transfer dealings and a rudimentary knowledge of the environment in which Benitez was working would dispel such ignorance.

I am a Liverpool fan, but being a fan doesn't mean blindly glossing over the failures of you club. When it comes to some Liverpool fan's attitude toward benitez it's like some weird cult who have blind faith in their leader and are oblivious to all his shortcomings. I think Benitez played the poor mouth so often that some fans actually believed it in the end. Benitez was very well bankrolled up until the summer before he left. I don't think fans of any other club rate Benitez highly, there's a reason for that.

Gbear wrote: »

It's not like he didn't make mistakes, but all mangers do. Expecting Benitez to be perfect where no other managers are is a ludicrous double standard but it's what would have been required on such a tight budget.

Don't remember saying I expected perfection. Of course, the best managers in the world will buy duds. Benitez miss to hit ratio is pretty damned high though. Take a browse through this lot and think how many were worth the money? (Not counting freebies)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1221975/Rafa-Benitezs-229m-spending-spree-The-76-players-signed-Liverpool-managers-reign.html

Gbear wrote: »

Really? There's no difference between the squad Benitez inherited and the squad that Utd had when he took over?
It's like saying Benitez spent way more to move out of his hovel in some shanty town and move into a mansion than it took for Utd to pay to maintain their mansion.

In terms of Premier League performance do you think we really got any closer to winning the league than we did under Gerrard Houllier? I don't. And yes, he was given the funds to build upon the squad he inherited. His gross spend was huge. His net spend was comparable to United right up until the summer before he left.

monkey9

Rafa was a very good and successful Liverpool manager. That's why these kind of threads exist and thrive. If he had failed as Liverpool manager, he would have been forgotten about long ago!!

You're some man, Rafa. Fair play!

Gbear

messinkiapina wrote: »

I am a Liverpool fan, but being a fan doesn't mean blindly glossing over the failures of you club. When it comes to some Liverpool fan's attitude toward benitez it's like some weird cult who have blind faith in their leader and are oblivious to all his shortcomings. I think Benitez played the poor mouth so often that some fans actually believed it in the end. Benitez was very well bankrolled up until the summer before he left. I don't think fans of any other club rate Benitez highly, there's a reason for that.

That would only apply if there was any logic to your argument. You're not bravely standing against a tide of baseless zealotry, you're just swimming around in a pool of your own ignorance.

Benitez had a win % with Liverpool of 56.5%, only behind Paisley (57%) and Dalglish's first stint(60%). You don't get to that by being a muppet.
For comparison: Moyes(42%), Wenger(57%), Ferguson (60%)
He made bad transfers, bad substitutions (but those subs changed the result for the better 15% of the time vs 5% making it worse) and the situation with Alonso was certainly a mistake on his part.
Overall he had an excellent record with Liverpool. Trying to suggest anything else is just rewriting history.

messinkiapina wrote: »

Don't remember saying I expected perfection. Of course, the best managers in the world will buy duds. Benitez miss to hit ratio is pretty damned high though. Take a browse through this lot and think how many were worth the money? (Not counting freebies)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1221975/Rafa-Benitezs-229m-spending-spree-The-76-players-signed-Liverpool-managers-reign.html

You're implicitly suggesting that you expected perfection because you're getting bogged down in every little mistake and it's impossible for manager not to make at least some of them.

I think it's pretty telling that the average spent was only 3m per player.
Instead of being able to fill the squad with 5-10m players (nevermind the £15-30m players that the likes of City, Utd and Chelsea have been able to afford) Benitez had to rummage around the bargain bins hoping for a miracle.
That lack of depth was the problem when we'd managed to put a decent first 11 together.

The big money signings were all successful with two exceptions - Keane - who we got most of the money back for and then mysteriously nobody batted an eyelid when Redknapp made a similar transfer shortly afterwards; and Aquilani. Even still the logic was pretty clear on that - we had no money so we turned to Roma who still owed us money and we managed to stretch the deal out with a fairly small sum up front.
And it's not as if the failure was entirely on Benitez given the ****ology that went on afterwards had nothing to do with him and everything to do with the mismanagement of those that came after him.

messinkiapina wrote: »

In terms of Premier League performance do you think we really got any closer to winning the league than we did under Gerrard Houllier? I don't. And yes, he was given the funds to build upon the squad he inherited. His gross spend was huge. His net spend was comparable to United right up until the summer before he left.

Houllier's early years were quite good. His trophy haul was nothing to be sneezed at. He brought a little respectability back after an awful decade. But overall his record wasn't great. His win % was 50% - 5% lower than Benitez.

His net spend was comparable to Utd but they had an already established team with strength in depth that was already capable of challenging for all competitions they were in. Seeing as you didn't seem to get my previous analogy - consider a race - there are two cars that have the same engine (net spend) but one of the cars (Utd) has a massive headstart on the other (Liverpool). Which one wins?

Well, if the driver of Liverpool does a wayyyy better job than the Liverpool one might win.
It's not a perfect analogy because it's always easier to chase than to set the pace but do you not understand the basic point?

messinkiapina

Gbear wrote: »

That would only apply if there was any logic to your argument. You're not bravely standing against a tide of baseless zealotry, you're just swimming around in a pool of your own ignorance.
Benitez had a win % with Liverpool of 56.5%, only behind Paisley (57%) and Dalglish's first stint(60%). You don't get to that by being a muppet.
For comparison: Moyes(42%), Wenger(57%), Ferguson (60%)
He made bad transfers, bad substitutions (but those subs changed the result for the better 15% of the time vs 5% making it worse) and the situation with Alonso was certainly a mistake on his part.
Overall he had an excellent record with Liverpool. Trying to suggest anything else is just rewriting history.

You can pick a stat out to make any manager look better than they actually are, kind of like how you can make Andriy Voronin look good in a 3 minute youtube clip.

The real measure of how good a team actually is lies in where they finish in the league. We never looked like winning the league under him and that's the bottom line. Benitez' league finishes were 5th, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 2nd, 7th. Houllier finished 7th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th, 4th. Evans finished 4th, 3rd, 4th, 3rd. So Benitez didn't really improve upon what either of them did. Unlike those two though, he left a bit of a mess behind for his successor. And yes, Hicks and Gilette were obviously a big factor in that, but Benitez wasn't entirely blameless. That should be easy enough for anyone who isn't part of the cult of Rafa to realise.

Gbear wrote: »

You're implicitly suggesting that you expected perfection because you're getting bogged down in every little mistake and it's impossible for manager not to make at least some of them.

I'm not impliclty suggesting that I expect perfection from any manager (no idea how you drew that conclusion), I'm explicitly stating that I think Benitez is an over-rated manager. That doesn't mean I think he's terrible, it means I think he's gotten a lot more credit than he deserves for his performance as a manager (from Liverpool fans anyway).

Gbear wrote: »

I think it's pretty telling that the average spent was only 3m per player.
Instead of being able to fill the squad with 5-10m players (nevermind the £15-30m players that the likes of City, Utd and Chelsea have been able to afford) Benitez had to rummage around the bargain bins hoping for a miracle.
That lack of depth was the problem when we'd managed to put a decent first 11 together.

The big money signings were all successful with two exceptions - Keane - who we got most of the money back for and then mysteriously nobody batted an eyelid when Redknapp made a similar transfer shortly afterwards; and Aquilani. Even still the logic was pretty clear on that - we had no money so we turned to Roma who still owed us money and we managed to stretch the deal out with a fairly small sum up front.
And it's not as if the failure was entirely on Benitez given the ****ology that went on afterwards had nothing to do with him and everything to do with the mismanagement of those that came after him.

But his time at Liverpool is littered with poor signings that cost between 5-10m. I don't think it excuses signing a bad player just because they were cheap. 1 or 2 such signings fine, but there were too many under Benitez, and when you add them all up a lot of money was wasted. Aquilani and Keane were very bad buys too at premium fees of course, which makes them even harder to forgive.

I do understand analogies by the way. United had to make changes to their squad every year too you know, if not I'm sure they'd still be playing the team of 1999. Sure they had a better 'car' when Benitez took over at Liverpool, but both clubs changed lots of 'parts' over those 6 years, paying similar sums of cash in the process. Yet the gap was never closed, and was actually wider by the time he left.

Will I Amnt

monkey9 wrote: »

Rafa was a very good and successful Liverpool manager. That's why these kind of threads exist and thrive. If he had failed as Liverpool manager, he would have been forgotten about long ago!!

You're some man, Rafa. Fair play!

:pac:

cournioni

... and nothing to do with managerial expertise and players ability. Well that's Rafa fcuked then isn't it?

iregk

Just thinking about this yesterday. Has football become that boring and that non eventful that as soon as someone says anything other than the usual monotone cliches it gets termed as a rant?

T-K-O

iregk wrote: »

Just thinking about this yesterday. Has football become that boring and that non eventful that as soon as someone says anything other than the usual monotone cliches it gets termed as a rant?

It has, Sky Sports News are now advertising his next press conference like a Harry Potter movie.

LuckyLloyd

iregk wrote: »

Just thinking about this yesterday. Has football become that boring and that non eventful that as soon as someone says anything other than the usual monotone cliches it gets termed as a rant?

Yeah it's a testament to the 'say a lot, tell nothing' nature of the modern football press cycle. There's never been more saturation of coverage - more interviews, press conferences, articles, etc - and never been less interesting things actually said by players and managers.

I find the type of stories put out before big games quite hilarious really. "Manager X demands performances ahead of crunch clash" is based off a quote that was as inane as 'I think this is a vital fixture and we'll need to be at our best if we want to succeed. Somehow that becomes an article. Awful stuff to be honest.

Gbear

messinkiapina wrote: »

You can pick a stat out to make any manager look better than they actually are, kind of like how you can make Andriy Voronin look good in a 3 minute youtube clip.

So your ill-informed biases are right - the facts are wrong?
Rafa's win percentage over the course of about 350 games is in no way comparable to a cherry picked selection of highlight reels. It's the complete opposite.

messinkiapina wrote: »

The real measure of how good a team actually is lies in where they finish in the league. We never looked like winning the league under him and that's the bottom line. Benitez' league finishes were 5th, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 2nd, 7th. Houllier finished 7th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th, 4th. Evans finished 4th, 3rd, 4th, 3rd. So Benitez didn't really improve upon what either of them did. Unlike those two though, he left a bit of a mess behind for his successor. And yes, Hicks and Gilette were obviously a big factor in that, but Benitez wasn't entirely blameless. That should be easy enough for anyone who isn't part of the cult of Rafa to realise.

Never? Including when we were actually on top of it? And that isn't necessarily a stick to beat Benitez with unless you have a seriously simplistic view of what success is. You don't judge relegation fodder's managers by how many leagues they've won.
Winning the league with a team as poor as Liverpool is a far superiour acheivement than doing it with a team like Utd that have been there by default for 10 years (at the point Benitez took over).
Liverpool came within 4 pts of Utd in 08/09 with a far inferior squad.

And the league has gotten progressively more difficult over the past 10 years. In the 90's there was the occasional splash made by the likes of Blackburn but with Abramovich the game changed, as it did again when City were bought.

messinkiapina wrote: »

I'm not impliclty suggesting that I expect perfection from any manager (no idea how you drew that conclusion), I'm explicitly stating that I think Benitez is an over-rated manager. That doesn't mean I think he's terrible, it means I think he's gotten a lot more credit than he deserves for his performance as a manager (from Liverpool fans anyway).

What you're doing is ignoring the general performance of Rafa - excellent - and getting bogged down in trivial failings - the occasional ****up in the tranfer market, the odd wacky substitution.

messinkiapina wrote: »

But his time at Liverpool is littered with poor signings that cost between 5-10m. I don't think it excuses signing a bad player just because they were cheap. 1 or 2 such signings fine, but there were too many under Benitez, and when you add them all up a lot of money was wasted. Aquilani and Keane were very bad buys too at premium fees of course, which makes them even harder to forgive.

Littered? Care to name them?
I can think of one glaringly obvious one - Pennant.
There were a couple of others that weren't obviously silly signings which ultimately didn't work out - Morientes and Babel.
I've already addressed the Keane signing - we made most of the money back and little was said when Harry Redknapp did the same manoeuver a couple of years later.
And the Aquilani signing was against the backdrop of having no cash flow and Roma still owed us some money. It wasn't "What £20m midfielder do you want", it was "from which of the clubs that owe us money do you want a midfielder that they'd be willing to sell for a very small down payment?".

messinkiapina wrote: »

I do understand analogies by the way. United had to make changes to their squad every year too you know, if not I'm sure they'd still be playing the team of 1999. Sure they had a better 'car' when Benitez took over at Liverpool, but both clubs changed lots of 'parts' over those 6 years, paying similar sums of cash in the process. Yet the gap was never closed, and was actually wider by the time he left.

This is really simple.
Utd had a very good squad that they could tweak a bit here and there.
Liverpool had a terrible squad that needed a complete overhaul.
On what planet does spending the same money on each mean that Liverpool end up on top?

Neil3030

When reading the title of this thread, does anyone imagine Scooby Doo trying to say "Rafa's Pants"?

GavRedKing

Neil3030 wrote: »

When reading the title of this thread, does anyone imagine Scooby Doo trying to say "Rafa's Pants"?

I do now.

messinkiapina

Gbear wrote: »

So your ill-informed biases are right - the facts are wrong?
Rafa's win percentage over the course of about 350 games is in no way comparable to a cherry picked selection of highlight reels. It's the complete opposite.

My original point was that Benitez style of play meant we failed to beat weaker teams consistently enough to win the league. There is no arguing with that fact, the stats support it entirely. Some people still won't accept it though because they are blind when it comes to Rafa. Love is blind I guess.

Gbear wrote: »

Never? Including when we were actually on top of it? And that isn't necessarily a stick to beat Benitez with unless you have a seriously simplistic view of what success is. You don't judge relegation fodder's managers by how many leagues they've won.
Winning the league with a team as poor as Liverpool is a far superiour acheivement than doing it with a team like Utd that have been there by default for 10 years (at the point Benitez took over).
Liverpool came within 4 pts of Utd in 08/09 with a far inferior squad.

A lot of teams top the league at some point without ever winning it, there are no medals for that, nor should there be. That's just more trying to give Benitez more credit than he's actually due.

Liverpool came within 4 points of United in 08/09 because they took 14 points against the top 4, whereas United only took 5 points against the four. That means that United took 13 points more than Liverpool did against the lesser teams that year, my entire argument supported by facts. Bear in mind that that was the closet we ever got to United under Benitez, the stats were worse than that in every other season.

Gbear wrote: »

Littered? Care to name them?
I can think of one glaringly obvious one - Pennant.

Aquilani, Keane, Morientes, Sissoko, Pennant, Babel, Dossena, Riera, Josemi, Nunez, Mark Gonzales, Paletta, Kronkamp, Leto, Cavalieri, Kyrgiakos, Zenden, Vorynin, Degen. Look at his dealings in his last 2 seasons in particular, those were a complete disaster and resulted in his leaving a mess of a squad behind for his successor.

He signed a whole bunch of ordinary players. It would be a lot easier to pick out the good players he signed. Top quality players he signed would be Alonso, Torres, Reina, Agger, Mascherano. Decent signings, Lucas, Crouch, Kuyt, Bellamy, Arbeloa, Skrtel. The rest were either meh or just plain bad. Given the volume of players he signed, his hit to miss ratio was very sub par for a supposedly top class manager. Again, his dealings in the last couple of seasons were abysmal and set the club back years, we haven't recovered since.

Gbear wrote: »

This is really simple.
Utd had a very good squad that they could tweak a bit here and there.
Liverpool had a terrible squad that needed a complete overhaul.
On what planet does spending the same money on each mean that Liverpool end up on top?

By your logic if Brendan Rogers finishes this season 30 points behind United, and both us and United spend 30M each summer for the next 6 years, then it would be reasonable for us to still finish 30 points behind United in 2019. That makes no sense.

Hulk Hands

messinkiapina wrote: »

Unlike those two though, he left a bit of a mess behind for his successor. And yes, Hicks and Gilette were obviously a big factor in that, but Benitez wasn't entirely blameless. That should be easy enough for anyone who isn't part of the cult of Rafa to realise.

This is exactly why I can never understand the Rafa love-in. It's understandable that after the disasters that were Hodgson and Daglish, that Liverpool fans will think back fondly Rafa's time when they were a top 4 club. However, the legacy left by H&G and Rafa's time has set the club back years. Granted it's a lot to do with the owners, but Rafa has to shoulder some of the blame for the poor quality and ageing squad he passed onto the other managers and the distinct lack of youth players coming through

aramush

messinkiapina wrote: »

My original point was that Benitez style of play meant we failed to beat weaker teams consistently enough to win the league. There is no arguing with that fact, the stats support it entirely. Some people still won't accept it though because they are blind when it comes to Rafa. Love is blind I guess.

Our love for him is very much justified. Rafa consistently got us into the Champions League, all our managers since then have failed to do that. He also built a squad, eventually, to challenge for league honours. If he was backed in the summer of 2009, which he wasn't because of that big mess the Americans got us and left us in, then we would have won that league in 2010, I am very much confident of that.

Hulk Hands wrote: »

This is exactly why I can never understand the Rafa love-in. It's understandable that after the disasters that were Hodgson and Daglish, that Liverpool fans will think back fondly Rafa's time when they were a top 4 club. However, the legacy left by H&G and Rafa's time has set the club back years. Granted it's a lot to do with the owners, but Rafa has to shoulder some of the blame for the poor quality and ageing squad he passed onto the other managers and the distinct lack of youth players coming through

Complete nonsense, just look what he did with the academy for a start.

Sgt Pepper 64

Oh god, as feared, this has descended into a debate by liverpool fans who love to drag up the past!

mike65

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

Oh god, as feared, this has descended into a debate by liverpool fans who love to drag up the past!

You have no past!

But you are right, this thread should be about the ongoing dysfunctional clusterfvck that is the Chelsea hierarchy.

deisedevil

aramush wrote: »

Our love for him is very much justified. Rafa consistently got us into the Champions League, all our managers since then have failed to do that. He also built a squad, eventually, to challenge for league honours. If he was backed in the summer of 2009, which he wasn't because of that big mess the Americans got us and left us in, then we would have won that league in 2010, I am very much confident of that.



Complete nonsense, just look what he did with the academy for a start.

Would have won the league? Liverpool were 24 points away from winning the league that season compared to 4 the year before! The 20 point difference can't be blamed on just the yanks. He lost Alonso but spent over 40 million that summer so there's no excuses for being 23 points down from the previous season.

aramush

deisedevil wrote: »

Would have won the league? Liverpool were 24 points away from winning the league that season compared to 4 the year before! The 20 point difference can't be blamed on just the yanks. He lost Alonso but spent over 40 million that summer so there's no excuses for being 23 points down from the previous season.

We didn't spend anywhere near 40million, Portsmouth still owed the club a lot for Crouch, that went towards Johnson. The owners didn't invest any money to spend that summer, they couldn't. I think if we had got in Barry instead of Aquilani and strengthened at the back and in other areas we would have closed the gap. Alas, it wasn't to be.

bullvine

aramush wrote: »

We didn't spend anywhere near 40million, Portsmouth still owed the club a lot for Crouch, that went towards Johnson. The owners didn't invest any money to spend that summer, they couldn't. I think if we had got in Barry instead of Aquilani and strengthened at the back and in other areas we would have closed the gap. Alas, it wasn't to be.

Aye, 23 points behind Man United who finished second in 2010, the same Man United who sold the world player of the year at the time.

Gbear

messinkiapina wrote: »

My original point was that Benitez style of play meant we failed to beat weaker teams consistently enough to win the league. There is no arguing with that fact, the stats support it entirely. Some people still won't accept it though because they are blind when it comes to Rafa. Love is blind I guess.

No they don't because far more important than any fanciful notion of Rafa's "style" was the lack of options up front which we simply couldn't afford.

messinkiapina wrote: »

A lot of teams top the league at some point without ever winning it, there are no medals for that, nor should there be. That's just more trying to give Benitez more credit than he's actually due.

You're completely underplaying how good a job it took to get Liverpool from being an awful team at the end of Ged's reign to challenging for trophies under Rafa.

messinkiapina wrote: »

Liverpool came within 4 points of United in 08/09 because they took 14 points against the top 4, whereas United only took 5 points against the four. That means that United took 13 points more than Liverpool did against the lesser teams that year, my entire argument supported by facts. Bear in mind that that was the closet we ever got to United under Benitez, the stats were worse than that in every other season.

As I've already explained Utd had more firepower. Ferguson isn't some magical fairy who waves his wand and his teams become more attacking - he's loaded his teams with firepower because Utd have the financial clout to be able to do so, particularly since they've almost always been working from a strong base. It doesn't diminish what Ferguson did but he couldn't have done the same job with Coventry or Sligo FC.

messinkiapina wrote: »

Aquilani, Keane, Morientes, Sissoko, Pennant, Babel, Dossena, Riera, Josemi, Nunez, Mark Gonzales, Paletta, Kronkamp, Leto, Cavalieri, Kyrgiakos, Zenden, Vorynin, Degen. Look at his dealings in his last 2 seasons in particular, those were a complete disaster and resulted in his leaving a mess of a squad behind for his successor.

I've never argued that all of Benitez' signings were good - but most of those you've mentioned didn't fall into the 5-10m bracket and as such, fall into the bargain bin hailmary bracket because we couldn't afford better.
Sissoko was sold at a profit, Leto wasn't given a work permit and went on to do fairly well in Greece, Degen, Voronin, Zenden were free transfers, Riera did ok, Nunez was all we could get from Madrid after Owen shafted us, Kyrgiakos did a good job for what we paid.

Go get some points of your own and stop making mine for me.

messinkiapina wrote: »

He signed a whole bunch of ordinary players. It would be a lot easier to pick out the good players he signed. Top quality players he signed would be Alonso, Torres, Reina, Agger, Mascherano. Decent signings, Lucas, Crouch, Kuyt, Bellamy, Arbeloa, Skrtel. The rest were either meh or just plain bad. Given the volume of players he signed, his hit to miss ratio was very sub par for a supposedly top class manager. Again, his dealings in the last couple of seasons were abysmal and set the club back years, we haven't recovered since.

His dealings? I think you're confusing his dealings with those of Hodgson and Commolli/Dalglish.

messinkiapina wrote: »

By your logic if Brendan Rogers finishes this season 30 points behind United, and both us and United spend 30M each summer for the next 6 years, then it would be reasonable for us to still finish 30 points behind United in 2019. That makes no sense.

No I'm not saying that. That isn't what Rafa did.
He spent similar amounts and made up quite a bit of ground. We didn't spend enough to be able to make up all the ground unless Rafa's management was literally perfect.

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

Oh god, as feared, this has descended into a debate by liverpool fans who love to drag up the past!

It's not my fault people keep peddling uninformed bull**** about Rafa.

I make no apologies for liking the man or fighting his corner.

This is pertinent to the discussion because it's about how good a manager Rafa is or isn't and the merits of what he said in that context.

messinkiapina

Gbear wrote: »

You're completely underplaying how good a job it took to get Liverpool from being an awful team at the end of Ged's reign to challenging for trophies under Rafa.

Houllier left behind a much better squad of players for Rafa than Rafa did for his successor.

Gbear wrote: »

As I've already explained Utd had more firepower. Ferguson isn't some magical fairy who waves his wand and his teams become more attacking - he's loaded his teams with firepower because Utd have the financial clout to be able to do so, particularly since they've almost always been working from a strong base. It doesn't diminish what Ferguson did but he couldn't have done the same job with Coventry or Sligo FC.

Ferguson hasn't always had a world class squad, probably not since the Scholes-Giggs-Keane-Beckham era actually, but he has a horrible knack of creating teams where the whole is much greater than the sum of their parts. That's because he is a great manager, much as I hate to admit it. Some peope say we had the 'best midfield in the world' at the time. He paid big money for Robbie Keane and Fernando Torres and decent sums for Kuyt and Babel. I think that's a pretty good backing in terms of cash spent on firepower.

Gbear wrote: »

I've never argued that all of Benitez' signings were good - but most of those you've mentioned didn't fall into the 5-10m bracket and as such, fall into the bargain bin hailmary bracket because we couldn't afford better.

Being cheap is no excuse for buying a player who isn't up to it. Everyone signs a few duds, but Benitez bought more than his fair share of crap. If he had spared some of the money he frittered away on all those waste of space signings he mighn't have needed to play the poor mouth so much.

As for free transfers, you do realise that some of those guys were paid big wages, which lessened our remaining transfer funds significantly.

Gbear wrote: »

His dealings? I think you're confusing his dealings with those of Hodgson and Commolli/Dalglish.

Well that might be one thing we can agree on. Liverpool is a club that has been mismanaged by several managers in succession. I'm not including Rogers in that since it's too early to make a fair assessment on him.

Gbear wrote: »

No I'm not saying that. That isn't what Rafa did.
He spent similar amounts and made up quite a bit of ground. We didn't spend enough to be able to make up all the ground unless Rafa's management was literally perfect.

But he didn't make up any ground, not in the Premier League. His finishes were no better than Evans or Houllier. The difference when Evans and Houllier left, they didn't leave a mess of a squad behind them.

Hulk Hands

aramush wrote: »

Our love for him is very much justified. Rafa consistently got us into the Champions League, all our managers since then have failed to do that. He also built a squad, eventually, to challenge for league honours. If he was backed in the summer of 2009, which he wasn't because of that big mess the Americans got us and left us in, then we would have won that league in 2010, I am very much confident of that.

Ah seriously!

How much do you think he would have had to be supported by to make up the 24 points between Liverpool that year and the top? Keep Alonso, and 300 million maybe? And they all fit in and settle straight away?

Just because Liverpool finished second in 09 doesnt mean they were the second best team around then. United and Chelsea were head and shoulders above the rest in those times. Chelsea imploded in 09, so somebody had to finish second. The year after, normality was restored and they were well ahead of Liverpool. Watch what happened Liverpool in '10 when they had a normal amount of injuries. The whole thing fell apart because the squad was paper thin. The year before they got away with it with only Gerrard and Torres having any trouble. Benitez was given support, but it wouldve taken a hell of a lot more than normal support to make that Liverpool squad a consistent title challenger, never mind winners

Hulk Hands

Gbear wrote: »

As I've already explained Utd had more firepower. Ferguson isn't some magical fairy who waves his wand and his teams become more attacking - he's loaded his teams with firepower because Utd have the financial clout to be able to do so, particularly since they've almost always been working from a strong base. It doesn't diminish what Ferguson did but he couldn't have done the same job with Coventry or Sligo FC.

You do know that Liverpool have outspent United since the PL began yeah? If Ferguson bought all that firepower, and Benitez spent more than Ferguson did over that period, then why couldn't Benitez do the same? It has nothing to do with money and everything to do with how the manager sets his teams up. Benitez set up a good first 11 who could perform in big games. Ferguson set up his teams to win leagues

rossie1977

Hulk Hands wrote: »

but Rafa has to shoulder some of the blame for the poor quality and ageing squad he passed onto the other managers and the distinct lack of youth players coming through

ageing squad.. liverpool first team squad the day rafa left on june 2 2010, average age just over 26

reina age 27

glen johnson age 25
agger age 25
skrtel age 25
aurélio age 30
kyrgiakos age 30
carragher age 32
martin kelly age 20

gerrard age 30
aquilani age 24
riera age 27
benayoun age 30
maxi 29
lucas 23
mascherano 25
ryan babel 23

torres 26
kuyt 29
N'Gog 21

aramush

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Ah seriously!

How much do you think he would have had to be supported by to make up the 24 points between Liverpool that year and the top? Keep Alonso, and 300 million maybe? And they all fit in and settle straight away?

Just because Liverpool finished second in 09 doesnt mean they were the second best team around then. United and Chelsea were head and shoulders above the rest in those times. Chelsea imploded in 09, so somebody had to finish second. The year after, normality was restored and they were well ahead of Liverpool. Watch what happened Liverpool in '10 when they had a normal amount of injuries. The whole thing fell apart because the squad was paper thin. The year before they got away with it with only Gerrard and Torres having any trouble. Benitez was given support, but it wouldve taken a hell of a lot more than normal support to make that Liverpool squad a consistent title challenger, never mind winners

A midfield trio of Mascherano, Alonso and Gerrard, along with one of the best strikers in world football (at the time) suggests otherwise!

CSF

rossie1977 wrote: »

ageing squad.. liverpool first team squad the day rafa left on june 2 2010, average age just over 26

reina age 27

glen johnson age 25
agger age 25
skrtel age 25
aurélio age 30
kyrgiakos age 30
carragher age 32
martin kelly age 20

gerrard age 30
aquilani age 24
riera age 27
benayoun age 30
maxi 29
lucas 23
mascherano 25
ryan babel 23

torres 26
kuyt 29
N'Gog 21

When you look at it there, I really don't think it looks that bad aside from LB and the wide positions. Even if Rafa did have a disastrous final season, I still feel it was the 2 lads who came after him who did the real damage.

padd b1975

aramush wrote: »

A midfield trio of Mascherano, Alonso and Gerrard, along with one of the best strikers in world football (at the time) suggests otherwise!

A cracking midfield no doubt, Torres at the peak of his powers.....

Still only good enough for second place.

darced

This post has been deleted.

Hulk Hands

aramush wrote: »

A midfield trio of Mascherano, Alonso and Gerrard, along with one of the best strikers in world football (at the time) suggests otherwise!

So they were better than Chelsea, a team who won the league 3 times during that era, made a champions league final and were robbed out of getting to another one? Seriously?

Xavi6

Lol :pac:

Ardent

The indignity of being sacked so shortly into the role of interim manager. But it's Benitez we're talking about here - it's hard to feel sorry for him.

niallo27

What is it about the man that gets everyone talking though, everyone has to have an opinon on him. 20 pages on here already about him.

JaMarcus Hustle

niallo27 wrote: »

What is it about the man that gets everyone talking though, everyone has to have an opinon on him. 20 pages on here already about him.

Don't read too much into it. George Bush is the most googled US President in history.

aramush

Hulk Hands wrote: »

So they were better than Chelsea, a team who won the league 3 times during that era, made a champions league final and were robbed out of getting to another one? Seriously?

League table did not lie my friend.

NukaCola

Where can i read about Rafa's rants?

doc_17

Rafa is on Football Focus today. Should be a good one.

Of course Rafa spoke out, but this "Rafa's Rant" talk of him having some sort of meltdown is just the dumb, narrative driven tripe that we have come to expect from the English tabloid industry or the 24 hour "Let's find something to talk about" Sky Sports News type platforms. It reminds me of Paul Scholes in a way. It's not that he can't tackle, it just that at times he doesn't choose to. But the narrative is "Paul Scholes can't tackle ha ha". One of the finest midfielders is history wouldn't play there for so long at the highest level in the English game if he couldn't mix it a bit.

I generally don't bother watching post match interviews but the odd time I do all I see is managers deflecting or engaging in hyberole. Good to see honesty

LuckyLloyd

Why are Utd fans so invested in arguing that Rafa didn't actually do well during his time at Liverpool? Always something that's puzzled me.