Liverpool FC Team Talk, Gossip, Rumours 2024/25

~Rebel~

Augeo wrote: »

Saw this on facebook and well, we all love some net spend chat :pac:

Premier League top 12 net spends since 2016:
Man City - £561m
Man Utd - £498m
Arsenal - £309m
Chelsea - £262m
Everton - £256m
Aston Villa - £254m
Wolves - £214m
Spurs - £204m
Brighton - £201m
West Ham - £171m
LFC - £120m

Got me thinking though, surely we must have had the ability to spend more than that with all the TV cash & winning the PL and the CL?
In January we were seemingly penniless.

We just built a brand new gigantic state of the art training facility, and a huge extension to the stadium. Coupled with hemorrhaging money every week through lost earnings for the last year.

KevRossi

Agent Coulson wrote: »

I thought Southgate was England manager and Kane was England captain.

Yet it was Hendo that presented Bellingham with his England jersey.



https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/jude-bellingham-england-jordan-henderson-20732033

Hendo has brains, that's why he did it. He's also captain material all day long, which is more than the impression that Harry Kane gives me.

I see Hendo going into a role as 'sporting director' after he's finished in football.

Girly Gal

Augeo wrote: »

Saw this on facebook and well, we all love some net spend chat :pac:

Premier League top 12 net spends since 2016:
Man City - £561m
Man Utd - £498m
Arsenal - £309m
Chelsea - £262m
Everton - £256m
Aston Villa - £254m
Wolves - £214m
Spurs - £204m
Brighton - £201m
West Ham - £171m
LFC - £120m

Got me thinking though, surely we must have had the ability to spend more than that with all the TV cash & winning the PL and the CL?
In January we were seemingly penniless.

Arsenal and Everton really have little to show for all that money. Aston Villa spent a few seasons in the championship as have Wolves and Brighton in that time and they've all comfortably outspent us. It'll be very difficult to sustain that net spend trend and continue to compete for major honours, we will at some stage increase spending in order to stay at the top.

rob316

Augeo wrote: »

Saw this on facebook and well, we all love some net spend chat :pac:

Premier League top 12 net spends since 2016:
Man City - £561m
Man Utd - £498m
Arsenal - £309m
Chelsea - £262m
Everton - £256m
Aston Villa - £254m
Wolves - £214m
Spurs - £204m
Brighton - £201m
West Ham - £171m
LFC - £120m

Got me thinking though, surely we must have had the ability to spend more than that with all the TV cash & winning the PL and the CL?
In January we were seemingly penniless.

According to all the experts (not been smart) our wage bill is outpacing revenue growth and the cost of keeping the squad together is high. There is good bulk of the squad north of 150k a week now or atleast due to be on.

Agent Coulson

Liverpool leading the race for Raphinha is trending all over Twitter in the last hour.

gimli2112

rob316 wrote: »

According to all the experts (not been smart) our wage bill is outpacing revenue growth and the cost of keeping the squad together is high. There is good bulk of the squad north of 150k a week now or atleast due to be on.

That's an unfortunate by-product of success you have to pay the people who brought it to you more.
The net spend table is great and all but really needs to be posted in the general thread to instigate ludicrous debate.

Agent Coulson

TAA out of the Euros 4 to 6 weeks recovery time from a grade 2 tear.

percy007

Agent Coulson wrote: »

TAA out of the Euros.

Gutted for Trent..... Couldn't give a sh1te about England. Nice rest before preseason.

gimli2112

gimli2112 wrote: »

That's an unfortunate by-product of success you have to pay the people who brought it to you more.
The net spend table is great and all but really needs to be posted in the general thread to instigate ludicrous debate.

I don't think I've ever posted in there and can't remember the last time I even viewed it.

~Rebel~

~Rebel~ wrote: »

We just built a brand new gigantic state of the art training facility, and a huge extension to the stadium. Coupled with hemorrhaging money every week through lost earnings for the last year.

What did the training facility cost?
50m?

gimli2112

Augeo wrote: »

I don't think I've ever posted in there and can't remember the last time I even viewed it.

it's grand really if you tip-toe around the mayhem and don't engage with the crazies, much like real life in that regard

Gbear

Looking at net spend in isolation is too simplistic.

We have the 2nd highest wage budget in the league.

Net spend could mean you're not spending much, or it could mean that you're one of the few competent clubs at transfers. I think it's more the latter.

We've bought key players for high fees and we pay them well - Fab, Alisson, Mane, Salah, VVD, Gini, Jota have all been fairly expensive, but importantly, they've been mainstays.

We don't have the luxury of buying 17 fullbacks, but thankfully we haven't had to.

We've also been in a position to give players time to settle. We didn't need to throw Jota, Robbo, Fab in every week, because relegation wasn't on the table, and for the most part the squad has always already been solid enough to not need most of those players to hit the ground running.

Ultimately, if City were to be managed perfectly, yes, we'd be ****ed, but thankfully their transfer business is mostly poor. They get some big hits for huge amounts, but in several positions they've consistently failed to solve their issues in the way we have comprehensively pretty much every time - Alisson, Mane, VVD, Salah, Robbo being probably the best examples.

We saw in the 90s and 00s, where our net spend was higher than Utd. Mostly it just indicated we were treading water and not being effectively developed as a squad.

~Rebel~

Augeo wrote: »

What did the training facility cost?
50m?

Training ground was 50 million, Anfield main stand was close to 100 million, Anfield Road extension that’s due to start is 60 million.

That’s a lot. Not terribly surprising that our transfer spending was a little lower at a time where we’re operating at a substantial loss.

Girly Gal

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Training ground was 50 million, Anfield main stand was close to 100 million, Anfield Road extension that’s due to start is 60 million.

That’s a lot. Not terribly surprising that our transfer spending was a little lower at a time where we’re operating at a substantial loss.

Spurs have built a billion pound stadium, Wolves have also upgraded their stadium and planning to upgrade further, both have still outspent us by a substantial margin, we have done well in the transfer market, but, clubs are starting to wise up to our transfer strategy, we won't be getting 20 million for our deadwood anymore like we did for Solanke from Bournemouth, so our net spend is likely to go up in future.

~Rebel~

I dunno, I’m not bothered about it anyway, I’m happier with our approach than Spurs approach, which has seen them rack up massive debts that’ll need to be serviced for a long time. We’ve spent responsibly, and won the league and champions league in the process. A-OK in my book!

One of the things I’m happiest with about our club these days is that we’re challenging at the top end, while operating as a proper self sustainable well run entity... in this day and age that’s pretty deadly.

Augeo was looking at our net spend, seeing it was comparatively low, and asking where the money was going. The answer is long term infrastructure, and wages to keep a winning squad together.

TitianGerm

Gbear wrote: »

Looking at net spend in isolation is too simplistic.

We have the 2nd highest wage budget in the league.

Net spend could mean you're not spending much, or it could mean that you're one of the few competent clubs at transfers. I think it's more the latter.

We've bought key players for high fees and we pay them well - Fab, Alisson, Mane, Salah, VVD, Gini, Jota have all been fairly expensive, but importantly, they've been mainstays.

We don't have the luxury of buying 17 fullbacks, but thankfully we haven't had to.

We've also been in a position to give players time to settle. We didn't need to throw Jota, Robbo, Fab in every week, because relegation wasn't on the table, and for the most part the squad has always already been solid enough to not need most of those players to hit the ground running.

Ultimately, if City were to be managed perfectly, yes, we'd be ****ed, but thankfully their transfer business is mostly poor. They get some big hits for huge amounts, but in several positions they've consistently failed to solve their issues in the way we have comprehensively pretty much every time - Alisson, Mane, VVD, Salah, Robbo being probably the best examples.

We saw in the 90s and 00s, where our net spend was higher than Utd. Mostly it just indicated we were treading water and not being effectively developed as a squad.

We had the second highest wages because of the bonuses paid for CL, PL, CWC and SC all fell due in the one year.

With the next set of accounts field you can bet we'll drop down the wages chart a bit.

dmigsy

Girly Gal wrote: »

Spurs have built a billion pound stadium, Wolves have also upgraded their stadium and planning to upgrade further, both have still outspent us by a substantial margin, we have done well in the transfer market, but, clubs are starting to wise up to our transfer strategy, we won't be getting 20 million for our deadwood anymore like we did for Solanke from Bournemouth, so our net spend is likely to go up in future.

Brewster says hello.

I do agree that Liverpool could and should be spending more. The owners have at least tripled/quadrupled the value of their original investment in the club and are starting to dilute that shareholding with deals like the RedBird one. Fans should demand that they leave some of those massive profits behind and don't walk away with the lot. Transfer windows like January should not be tolerated. Konate is a good start this window, hopefully a couple more quality additions to come.

~Rebel~

~Rebel~ wrote: »

.....
Augeo was looking at our net spend, seeing it was comparatively low, and asking where the money was going. The answer is long term infrastructure, and wages to keep a winning squad together.

No Augeo was commenting that......
Got me thinking though, surely we must have had the ability to spend more than that with all the TV cash & winning the PL and the CL?
In January we were seemingly penniless.

I'm aware of the stadium investments & wages etc.

As per this comment...

dmigsy wrote: »

Brewster says hello.

I do agree that Liverpool could and should be spending more. .......

I reckon we have more to spend, the Davies bargain bucket scrabble was woeful IMO.

Girly Gal

dmigsy wrote: »

Brewster says hello.

I do agree that Liverpool could and should be spending more. The owners have at least tripled/quadrupled the value of their original investment in the club and are starting to dilute that shareholding with deals like the RedBird one. Fans should demand that they leave some of those massive profits behind and don't walk away with the lot. Transfer windows like January should not be tolerated. Konate is a good start this window, hopefully a couple more quality additions to come.

At the time Brewster seemed like a decent deal for both parties, as he had done well when on loan the season before, so Sheffield United could reasonably have expected a decent return, it certainly hasn't worked out so far. We don't really have anyone with the reputation Brewster had despite not having played in the first team, so can't see us getting mad money for our fringe players. The likes of Keita and Origi if sold came with sizeable fees in the first place and we'll do well to recover their original fees.
I agree about the last January window, we just about got away with it, we were lucky both Leicester and Chelsea's form tailed off towards the end of the season as they focused on the FA cup and CL. It's all fine now that we made top 4, but, I'm sure around mid March they regretted how they handled the January window

Riesen_Meal

https://twitter.com/LFC/status/1400505159852113927?s=20

No word on how bad it really is, worrying....

Gbear

Fieldog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LFC/status/1400505159852113927?s=20

No word on how bad it really is, worrying....

Thought I saw grade 2 tear, 4-6 weeks?

Fitz*

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Liverpool leading the race for Raphinha is trending all over Twitter in the last hour.

Smokescreen for Sancho

Riesen_Meal

Gbear wrote: »

Thought I saw grade 2 tear, 4-6 weeks?

Didn't Hendo end up with something similar at one stage and was out a bit longer than that?

brevity

All the fuss over wether or not he should be picked and he gets injured in a ****ing friendly and misses the whole thing anyway is just what this stupid saga needed.

God I hate international football.

Talisman

Girly Gal wrote: »

At the time Brewster seemed like a decent deal for both parties, as he had done well when on loan the season before, so Sheffield United could reasonably have expected a decent return, it certainly hasn't worked out so far. We don't really have anyone with the reputation Brewster had despite not having played in the first team, so can't see us getting mad money for our fringe players. The likes of Keita and Origi if sold came with sizeable fees in the first place and we'll do well to recover their original fees.
I agree about the last January window, we just about got away with it, we were lucky both Leicester and Chelsea's form tailed off towards the end of the season as they focused on the FA cup and CL. It's all fine now that we made top 4, but, I'm sure around mid March they regretted how they handled the January window

Origi was signed from Lille for €12M. Wolfsburg paid €6M in loan fees so all is good. If he is sold this transfer window then I think the club will have made a profit on him.

Keita was a big hit to the finances and the club committed to paying more for him because of the way they wanted to structure the payments. I can't see him being sold this year so he has another opportunity to deliver on the promise he showed at Leipzig.

atilladehun

dmigsy wrote: »

Brewster says hello.

I do agree that Liverpool could and should be spending more. The owners have at least tripled/quadrupled the value of their original investment in the club and are starting to dilute that shareholding with deals like the RedBird one. Fans should demand that they leave some of those massive profits behind and don't walk away with the lot. Transfer windows like January should not be tolerated. Konate is a good start this window, hopefully a couple more quality additions to come.

How can we spend more. We spend what we have. No one takes money out of the club. We're not in debt and we're one of the best performing clubs of the last few years.

Revenue has increased nearly every single year under the ownership from every source as they build better revenue streams.

The idea that the value of the club has gone up so the owners should spend more money is odd. They're not selling the club. They're not Hicks and Gillet or the glazers. They're a group of investors who really like sports and know they can build better teams through their commercial knowledge. They've had the red Sox for 20 years now. They could well be the owners of Liverpool in 2030 having never cashed in on the clubs. I think that's the most likely scenario.

They've made the club more valuable through their commercial knowledge.

Talisman

Augeo wrote: »

Got me thinking though, surely we must have had the ability to spend more than that with all the TV cash & winning the PL and the CL?
In January we were seemingly penniless.

If you look at the reports regarding agents fees paid by clubs in the Premier League, Liverpool always top the table in terms of fees paid. I suspect the reason is that the agents are incentivized to get the transfer deal done. That may be part of Edwards magic signing players for lower transfer fees but paying a little more to agents.

As for January, the club was in a tough scenario. Konate wasn't available so they were looking at picks further down the list. Schalke wanted to sell Kabak and Edwards was only looking for a loan. The rumors about Caleta-Car began in the second week of January and two weeks later he was on a plane bound for Liverpool only for Marseille to call off the deal because the transfer of the player to replace him had fallen through.

The club found itself in that position because Klopp didn't feel the need to sign a replacement for Lovren last summer. Given the compressed nature of the season it was a stupid mistake especially from somebody so vocal about the welfare of players when fixtures are congested. Hopefully a valuable lesson will have been learned and Klopp will get slapped down for the benefit of the team should the scenario arise again.

gimli2112

all mistakes are stupid with the benefit of hindsight, I'm not saying you're wrong but no-one could have expected VVD and Gomes to have their seasons ended early on and then Matip had a bad injury run (even for him) he probably thought he had enough temporary cover and he hasn't got an infinite money pool, like some.

dogbert27

gimli2112 wrote: »

all mistakes are stupid with the benefit of hindsight, I'm not saying you're wrong but no-one could have expected VVD and Gomes to have their seasons ended early on and then Matip had a bad injury run (even for him) he probably thought he had enough temporary cover and he hasn't got an infinite money pool, like some.

Exactly. I don't think anyone would have thought VVD would get the injury he did from an opposition goalkeeper.

Still can't believe no action was taken against Pickford for such a rash and dangerous challenge.

Talisman

Talisman wrote: »

If you look at the reports regarding agents fees paid by clubs in the Premier League, Liverpool always top the table in terms of fees paid. I suspect the reason is that the agents are incentivized to get the transfer deal done. That may be part of Edwards magic signing players for lower transfer fees but paying a little more to agents..

I’ve never understood why the club has to pay the player’s agent. If the club use an intermediary to negotiate on their behalf, fair enough, but why does the club pay a representative of the player?

dmigsy

atilladehun wrote: »

How can we spend more. We spend what we have. No one takes money out of the club. We're not in debt and we're one of the best performing clubs of the last few years.

Revenue has increased nearly every single year under the ownership from every source as they build better revenue streams.

The idea that the value of the club has gone up so the owners should spend more money is odd. They're not selling the club. They're not Hicks and Gillet or the glazers. They're a group of investors who really like sports and know they can build better teams through their commercial knowledge. They've had the red Sox for 20 years now. They could well be the owners of Liverpool in 2030 having never cashed in on the clubs. I think that's the most likely scenario.

They've made the club more valuable through their commercial knowledge.

Apologists for venture funds retaining more cash at the expense of the club make me laugh. FSG are making a fortune off the back of the club and its fan base. They do a better job of the PR side of things than the Glazers and structured their investment differently but at the end of the day they're in it for the money, just like the Glazers. And just like with the Glazers, the fan base should be holding them to account. As mentioned above, they took over half a billion pounds worth of investment from Redbird. Where's Liverpools portion of that gone/going?

FSG have shown their penny-pinching side a few times, furloughing staff, Super League etc. Don't mistake them for benevolent or altruistic investors. They're ruthless capitalists who'll rinse any investment for every cent they pull from it.

BTW, the benefit of increasing the value of the club is not only realized when you sell it. Increased club value can be used as leverage to raise more and cheaper finance from financial institutions to fund other investments.

dmigsy

dmigsy wrote: »

Apologists for venture funds retaining more cash at the expense of the club make me laugh............

To be fair loads of folk are totally ignorant to the way corporate finance operates....... "we spend what we have" etc. It's like suggesting a country shouldn't borrow any cash as you'd have to pay it back.

Talisman

gimli2112 wrote: »

all mistakes are stupid with the benefit of hindsight, I'm not saying you're wrong but no-one could have expected VVD and Gomes to have their seasons ended early on and then Matip had a bad injury run (even for him) he probably thought he had enough temporary cover and he hasn't got an infinite money pool, like some.

I don't care whether anyone agrees with me or not.

Klopp made the decision to go into the season with one senior central defender that had a fitness level that could be relied upon, two defenders that are injury prone and two defenders with little experience. That was the risk he was willing to take. However when the nightmare scenario unfolded the manager wasn't prepared to trust Phillips and Williams to play in a position for which they are trained to do. Instead he chose the square peg in the round hole option and played our two best midfielders as central defenders - that was a mistake.

It was obvious that it wasn't working and still persisted with it, that by definition is stupidity. Perhaps it was hubris on the part of Klopp, he got away with playing midfielders as fullbacks at Liverpool and Dortmund why not push the boat out a little bit further and have them play as central defenders. I realise that I'm not being kind to him by saying such a thing but honestly I think he needs to actually explain the decision.

When Milner was installed as fullback there were many who claimed he would be shredded. I listened to Klopp at the time and what he had to say made sense - in the Liverpool setup if Milner was repeatedly left isolated then the issue was the midfielders and forwards weren't doing their jobs. So long as the players ahead of him were willing to help out it wouldn't be an issue.

That logic does not appear to have been applied in the decision process that installed Henderson and Fabinho as the central defenders. If they are both missing from midfield then the defenders are going to be exposed. They are the engine of the team, what they do in midfield allows the rest of the players to perform their roles. Milner doesn't have the legs, Thiago didn't have it in his game, Wijnaldum isn't as good and Jones is only learning to play the game at this level. Oxlade-Chamberlain wasn't match fit and served as a cheer leading spectator. Keita was injured.

It was no coincidence that the team righted itself when midfielders were restored to midfield and central defenders despite their lack of experience played in their natural position.

It's all well and good Klopp saying it was his mistake and he takes full responsibility for the decision but that's a BS answer that only leads to questions. What happened to team of people who are there to support the manager? Did they all succumb to some spell where they ignored what they were seeing on the pitch? Was Klopp not willing to listen to alternative view points?

Talisman

Talisman wrote: »

............

It was no coincidence that the team righted itself when midfielders were restored to midfield and central defenders despite their lack of experience played in their natural position.............

I was surprised in here recently, someone reckoned it wasn't at all that simple that with Fabinho in midfield we went on our decent run over the last 10 games of the season, baffling IMO that folk can't see something so simple.

There doesn't need to be a public airing of the whys etc etc though IMO.

dmigsy

Talisman wrote: »

I don't care whether anyone agrees with me or not.

Klopp made the decision to go into the season with one senior central defender that had a fitness level that could be relied upon, two defenders that are injury prone and two defenders with little experience. That was the risk he was willing to take. However when the nightmare scenario unfolded the manager wasn't prepared to trust Phillips and Williams to play in a position for which they are trained to do. Instead he chose the square peg in the round hole option and played our two best midfielders as central defenders - that was a mistake.

It was obvious that it wasn't working and still persisted with it, that by definition is stupidity. Perhaps it was hubris on the part of Klopp, he got away with playing midfielders as fullbacks at Liverpool and Dortmund why not push the boat out a little bit further and have them play as central defenders. I realise that I'm not being kind to him by saying such a thing but honestly I think he needs to actually explain the decision.

When Milner was installed as fullback there were many who claimed he would be shredded. I listened to Klopp at the time and what he had to say made sense - in the Liverpool setup if Milner was repeatedly left isolated then the issue was the midfielders and forwards weren't doing their jobs. So long as the players ahead of him were willing to help out it wouldn't be an issue.

That logic does not appear to have been applied in the decision process that installed Henderson and Fabinho as the central defenders. If they are both missing from midfield then the defenders are going to be exposed. They are the engine of the team, what they do in midfield allows the rest of the players to perform their roles. Milner doesn't have the legs, Thiago didn't have it in his game, Wijnaldum isn't as good and Jones is only learning to play the game at this level. Oxlade-Chamberlain wasn't match fit and served as a cheer leading spectator. Keita was injured.

It was no coincidence that the team righted itself when midfielders were restored to midfield and central defenders despite their lack of experience played in their natural position.

It's all well and good Klopp saying it was his mistake and he takes full responsibility for the decision but that's a BS answer that only leads to questions. What happened to team of people who are there to support the manager? Did they all succumb to some spell where they ignored what they were seeing on the pitch? Was Klopp not willing to listen to alternative view points?

There's a bit of revisionism going on here. The team was top of the league at the turn of the year. There was plenty of evidence that that Klopp's approach in selecting Henderson and Fabinho at CB was working. Not many were calling for Phillips or Williams to be installed at that stage. Many were calling for better signings at CB to be made in Jan as no-one (Klopp nor fans) trusted Phillips or Williams at that stage.

PS I love the opening line to your post. I might start it using as my email sig in work

Damien360

Every single PL club has debts but it’s how it got loaded on to the accounts is what matters.

Liverpool got the benefit of the low interest rates that were passed to the owners. The club was bought with no doubt some kind of leveraged debt but it wasn’t loaded on like the glazers did at Utd. We had the glazer model attempt with Hicks and we all saw how that nearly destroyed the club. FSG have been here a long time and haven’t done the Oligarch system of wanting instant success. It’s been a slow build. When they do move on, the club will have the foundations to be safe. Mind you, the club could be sold to someone like the glazers and then we will in trouble within a decade of that occurring.

With regard to the Super League, that was a balls up. I do think some of the reasons attempted joining is damned if you do and especially damned if you don’t. It’s a concept designed to save Barca, Real and Juve from masses of debt and try catch up with the PL model. That’s not a good model as it is for the benefit of 20 clubs at the detriment of all others below them. Not that different from the Super League so !

Gbear

dmigsy wrote: »

There's a bit of revisionism going on here. The team was top of the league at the turn of the year. There was plenty of evidence that that Klopp's approach in selecting Henderson and Fabinho at CB was working. Not many were calling for Phillips or Williams to be installed at that stage. Many were calling for better signings at CB to be made in Jan as no-one (Klopp nor fans) trusted Phillips or Williams at that stage.

PS I love the opening line to your post. I might start it using as my email sig in work

If Henderson hadn't been injured, it's all but certain that Klopp would've continued to play Fabinho at CB instead of Williams.

Things turned around roughly when Fabinho moved back to the middle.

It wasn't Fabinho and Henderson in defence that was the issue. It was what we were missing in midfield.

Imo, Klopp took a bit longer to change it than necessary. However, it came good anyway, and the end of the season was superb.

MD1990

6 wrote: »

Things turned around roughly when Fabinho moved back to the middle.

It wasn't Fabinho and Henderson in defence that was the issue. It was what we were missing in midfield.

Imo, Klopp took a bit longer to change it than necessary. However, it came good anyway, and the end of the season was superb.

He did.

But Phillips and Williams had very little experience training with the 1st team last few years since both were out on loan last season.

Klopp probably saw them in training in October & thought they were not ready.
Although Phillips was very good against West Ham at home & didnt play again for another 2 months.

Agent Coulson

Not bad stats from the two center backs that finished the season for Liverpool compared to a center back a lot called the player of the year.

Potential Underachiever

Those defensive stats are clearly useless. Unless we think it proves Rhys Williams is better than Dias? Duels, tackles etc etc it's mainly waffle tbh, the eye test is all you can go on, Williams is running in treacle, he's been skint countless times, probably got away with alot of terrible defending, you won't find that in the stats though.

Fitz*

MD1990 wrote: »

He did.

But Phillips and Williams had very little experience training with the 1st team last few years since both were out on loan last season.

Klopp probably saw them in training in October & thought they were not ready.
Although Phillips was very good against West Ham at home & didnt play again for another 2 months.

That West Ham team basically played to suit Philips, oddly enough. Long lofted balls in the air, instead of quick passes in behind him. There was plenty space too.

We often give Klopp the benefit of the doubt when he doesn't drop a player straight into the team and instead lets them grow into the squad and how the team plays etc - Fabinho, Ox, Robbo for example. That way the players are not rushed in when they are not ready etc. How come he does not get the same benefit of the doubt when he did this with Philips & Williams?

Should the CB injury crisis have overruled his traditional method to introducing new players? Perhaps, yes. But I am not one for questioning Klopp's high level ideology generally so I won't start now. Yes, he can make mistakes with team line ups, set ups, subs etc but generally I do think he get's it right. He made a decision midseason with an unprecedented CB issue and he will live by his decisions. He had to think on the spot, in the middle of a very somber time in his personal life. His decisions got us on back on a big winning run at the end of the season and secured top 4, which is somewhat of a reward after a poor season.

Agent Coulson

https://twitter.com/RedBullUK/status/1400738548484030465?s=20

45 Minute video in link.

Trent Alexander-Arnold is one of the world's best footballers. But can vision training help him become even better? Sports vision expert Dr. Daniel Laby creates numerous challenges to test the theory.

https://www.redbull.com/ie-en/films/trents-vision

Agent Coulson

https://twitter.com/dmlynch/status/1400789570661359619?s=20

gimli2112

I hate the way that's phrased, there's only one priority and he has a beard and comes from Egypt

dmigsy

gimli2112 wrote: »

I hate the way that's phrased, there's only one priority and he has a beard and comes from Egypt

Yeah, signing this guy up would be pretty cool

dmigsy

dmigsy wrote: »

Yeah, signing this guy up would be pretty cool

Mentality Honey Monsters

martyos121

gimli2112 wrote:

I hate the way that's phrased, there's only one priority and he has a beard and comes from Egypt

For sure, Salah's our best player and probably the best in the league if I'm being honest.

Having said that, if I could only give one player a new contract in the summer, it'd be Fabinho and I wouldn't have to think very hard over it. We can score goals without Salah, it's much more difficult but it's possible and we have Jota now too so there's depth up front.

The second half of the season has proven that we absolutely can't compete at the highest level without at least one of Fabinho or Hendo in midfield, and that frightens me a bit as they do both pick up injuries every season.

rob316

gimli2112 wrote: »

That's an unfortunate by-product of success you have to pay the people who brought it to you more.
The net spend table is great and all but really needs to be posted in the general thread to instigate ludicrous debate.

If the wage bill stagnated with transfer fee net spend I'd say, ya they are been tight but the wage bill has gotten bigger and bigger. FSG have also built a new main stand and training complex. Ya we'll sack off Gini, Origin and Shaq this summer maybe but new contracts for Fabinho, Alisson, TAA, will cost more.

Its not fantasy football, its a club that stands on its own too feet and can't get an airline to sponsor a 200m transfer kitty.

Talisman

dmigsy wrote: »

There's a bit of revisionism going on here. The team was top of the league at the turn of the year. There was plenty of evidence that that Klopp's approach in selecting Henderson and Fabinho at CB was working. Not many were calling for Phillips or Williams to be installed at that stage. Many were calling for better signings at CB to be made in Jan as no-one (Klopp nor fans) trusted Phillips or Williams at that stage.

There's no revisionism - Henderson was first selected at centre back on January 4th. As a pairing Matip & Fabinho worked, Williams & Fabinho had issues, Phillips & Fabinho worked, Henderson & Fabinho killed the midfield.

Game 15 (Dec 27): Matip & Fabinho started against WBA. Liverpool were 1-0 against WBA when Matip went off injured around 60 minutes. Williams was his replacement and looked nervous. Allardyce introduced Matheus Pereira and Charlie Austin, their equaliser came from Pereira's cross. From what we have see of the pair since, Nat Phillips was the better suited defender for that game.

Game 16 (Dec 30): Phillips & Fabinho started against Newcastle. Phillips handled himself well and showed awareness to compensate for his lack of pace. He didn't look out of place as a defender.

Game 17 (Jan 4): Fabinho & Henderson were the chosen pairing, Williams and Phillips were back on the bench. There were plenty of people who had the WTF thought when the lineup was announced. It took Southampton 2 minutes to score and it was game over. Liverpool dropped to third in the table.

Game 18 (Jan 17): Henderson & Fabinho vs Man Utd. I expected a blood bath but for whatever reason they didn't try to exploit the weakness in our team and were content to let us pass it around.

Game 19 (Jan 21): Matip & Fabinho vs Burnley. Matip wasn't supposed to be ready to return but he played because Henderson was unavailable. Fabinho picked up an injury and played on. Liverpool lost and dropped to fifth in the table.

Game 20 (Jan 28): Matip & Henderson vs Tottenham. Matip got injured again and Phillips was the replacement. At least one lesson appeared to have been learned, Phillips is a better choice than Williams.

By the end of January it was clear that of the available options that Nat Phillips was the best available defender. Yet he was dropped so an unfit Fabinho could partner Henderson against Man City and the loanee Kabak partnered Henderson against Leicester in the following game.