Liverpool FC Forum

[parchpea]

We are finding it difficult to guess which players may or may not be possibles as we really have no clue of the exact position financially. We hear of a debt of around £20m. Its likely to be at least that if not more. I for one do not know how this affects the overall position of the club. I mean is that debt normal amongst most clubs in our divison. Will it hamper the kind of player that we can bid for. These are questions that can only be answered by the people within Anfield. Its unfortunate, but they play it so low key its as if they dont exist at all. I know they dont want to give too much away publicly but perhaps they could give us some idea of where we stand in January and beyond. Clubs like Chelsea and Man Utd are often pretty open about what the position is. I feel there is room for improvement in this area.

[The_Rock]

have to say if we sold gerrard for even 40 million, it would breakdown to something like :

10 million - cash up front.
1 million every month for 12 mths - 12 million
10 million after 50 league games
8 million after 50 league goals


Gerrard is very impt for us. But no player is bigger than the club. If rafa decides to sell gerrard i will support him. Hell i even supported houllier when he sold my 2nd fav player of all time, robbie fowler (after ian rush).

But lets just wait and see what happens in january. David Moores is very good in raising money (and better in blowing it away  ). Even if he managed to raise just 10 million, rafa will probably get a good striker & defender with it.

[jim_morrison_supported_liverpool]

have to say if we sold gerrard for even 40 million, it would breakdown to something like :

10 million - cash up front.
1 million every month for 12 mths - 12 million
10 million after 50 league games
8 million after 50 league goals


Gerrard is very impt for us. But no player is bigger than the club. If rafa decides to sell gerrard i will support him. Hell i even supported houllier when he sold my 2nd fav player of all time, robbie fowler (after ian rush).

But lets just wait and see what happens in january. David Moores is very good in raising money (and better in blowing it away  ). Even if he managed to raise just 10 million, rafa will probably get a good striker & defender with it.

why did you support Houllier when he sold Fowler? you havent always got to show blind faith you know. that decision was harsh on Fowler (and a wrong decision) and was made cos he wanted to play "the lump" instead, who was sh*te. same with Gerrard. i like benitez and support him totally but if wanted to sell Gerrard i would not like it.

[The_Rock]

Support as in, i did not voice out against the fowler move. I honestly thought at the moment that 11 million was good business as fowler was getting into more & more trouble than scoring goals for us. Houllier then went and got anelka. And i was

I thought houllier was building a professional club with players who had a professional attitude (similar to arsenal). Now if you see my last hundreds of posts, you will know how i feel about houllier.

But to put things in perspective. I support liverpool, not owen, not fowler and not gerrard. If Rafa thinks the way to move forward is selling gerrard (for whatever reason), i will support him (ie...not voice out against his decision). He is the manager. He knows how to bring this sucess to this club. If he brings sucess, i don't give a damn who he sells.

[115-1073096938]

who has EVER  won the prem playing like that?

and Duff would be nowhere near as effective in a Houllier team. it didnt cater for attacking  mids as they had no support, and whenever they received the ball, we'd been fannying around with it that much that the other team had alltheir players back behind the ball, and the attacking mids would have nowhere tot go, with no attacking momentum, thats why all our attcking mids have always looked poo. Smicer would have been good at a team like Arsenal. this is also why people like Kewell lost their form, and Litmanen never looked as effevtive as we knew he was.

you've said before "look at Greece at Euro 2004. one off man, totally. we dont want a one off team. playing like that gets you so far. cant you see thats why we went stale? we'd reached our peak and there was nowhere else left to go.

Rubbish.

Absoloute rubbish. If you have the players to play a certain way you play that way. You don't fanny around trying to play "attacking football" and "pass and move" with players who aren't technically gifted and particularly mobile.

You play to your strengths. ALWAYS TO YOUR STRENGTHS.

Blackburn won the league playing a counter attacking game with two wingers who could carry the ball and supply a superb strikeforce. They didn't have world class players, yet they won the league. Liverpool finished above sides who played fanny football playing defensively aswell.

If you have Hyypia, Henchoz, Babbel and Carragher for a backline you'd be ****** insane to play a high line, by your theory tho, that makes them bad players because they are better at defending deep??

A quality play is a quality player and if you have 11 quality players that suit a particular system NO MATTER WHAT THAT SYSTEM IS you'll win more games than you lose.

Look at wimbledon, they had a style and introduced ****** players into it but played them to there strengths, imagine Vieira instead of Ekouku, or Keane instead of Jones, and Adams instead of Chris Perry, are you telling me these players wouldn't improve there team because of the way they played? Get ****** real!!!

[banana]

Winning the league in 1994 was much easier than doing it now. And english football was in a much weaker position. English teams got hammered in europe. This is no loger the case. There is a net influx of foreign talent making the league more competetive, and making english teams capable of doing well in european competitions. Back then only old retirees came (Vialli 32, Gullit 34 etc...)  to england, now we see up and coming potential superstars wanting to play here (ronaldo, alonso...). ANd the game is also much faster and physical, we can not afford to concede goals just because we lack pace or strenght in the back four. If Blackburn managed to win games 10 years back with a slow backline is small consolation and totally irrelevant. If you wan't to win games and entertain the crowd you have to take chances and push the backline a bit forward. Unless you are happy to end up fighting for scraps falling from the big teams (Chelsea, Man U, Arsenal) tables. We should not have to hide deep into our own half just to accomodate our slow defenders. And BTW STU the quote of yours is not Houllier's. It is a cliche that has been said 1000's of times and made famous by a guy that died in the 70s.

[spud]

Good thread.

I rate Malbranque highly and think he would be a good signing.  He's just come back from injury.

Anyway, none of us know.  I heard a rumour today that we've made an enquiry about Robert of NUFC.  This doesn't please me since he's another Kewell.

[Redrider]

A quality play is a quality player and if you have 11 quality players that suit a particular system NO MATTER WHAT THAT SYSTEM IS you'll win more games than you lose.

In that case why would you advocate selling Gerrad, one of the few quality players that we have.

[crazyhorse]

Good thread.

I rate Malbranque highly and think he would be a good signing.  He's just come back from injury.

Anyway, none of us know.  I heard a rumour today that we've made an enquiry about Robert of NUFC.  This doesn't please me since he's another Kewell.

Robert??

God, he is a frustrating player. Can be world class, but the trouble wth him is he is a lazy git.

I would not like us to sign him. Kieron Dyer would be a good bet if we are shopping in the North East..

[spud]

Good thread.

I rate Malbranque highly and think he would be a good signing.  He's just come back from injury.

Anyway, none of us know.  I heard a rumour today that we've made an enquiry about Robert of NUFC.  This doesn't please me since he's another Kewell.

Robert??

God, he is a frustrating player. Can be world class, but the trouble wth him is he is a lazy git.

I would not like us to sign him. Kieron Dyer would be a good bet if we are shopping in the North East..

Neither for me.

The rumour mill is rife.

[XSD]

Kieron Dyer would be a good bet if we are shopping in the North East..

Kieron Dyer a good bet?
What Kieron Dyer have you been watching?

[kenco]

food for thought,stew.it was worth the thread.you've got them thinking.nice one.

[crazyhorse]

Get him fit and full of confidence and Kieron Dyer is a good utility player. He has had a bad 18 months but is a potential star.

[A.B.]

He has had a bad 18 months but is a potential star.

We don't need another Harry Kewell.

[jim_morrison_supported_liverpool]

who has EVER  won the prem playing like that?

and Duff would be nowhere near as effective in a Houllier team. it didnt cater for attacking  mids as they had no support, and whenever they received the ball, we'd been fannying around with it that much that the other team had alltheir players back behind the ball, and the attacking mids would have nowhere tot go, with no attacking momentum, thats why all our attcking mids have always looked poo. Smicer would have been good at a team like Arsenal. this is also why people like Kewell lost their form, and Litmanen never looked as effevtive as we knew he was.

you've said before "look at Greece at Euro 2004. one off man, totally. we dont want a one off team. playing like that gets you so far. cant you see thats why we went stale? we'd reached our peak and there was nowhere else left to go.

Rubbish.

Absoloute rubbish. If you have the players to play a certain way you play that way. You don't fanny around trying to play "attacking football" and "pass and move" with players who aren't technically gifted and particularly mobile.

You play to your strengths. ALWAYS TO YOUR STRENGTHS.

Blackburn won the league playing a counter attacking game with two wingers who could carry the ball and supply a superb strikeforce. They didn't have world class players, yet they won the league. Liverpool finished above sides who played fanny football playing defensively aswell.

If you have Hyypia, Henchoz, Babbel and Carragher for a backline you'd be ****** insane to play a high line, by your theory tho, that makes them bad players because they are better at defending deep??

A quality play is a quality player and if you have 11 quality players that suit a particular system NO MATTER WHAT THAT SYSTEM IS you'll win more games than you lose.

Look at wimbledon, they had a style and introduced ****** players into it but played them to there strengths, imagine Vieira instead of Ekouku, or Keane instead of Jones, and Adams instead of Chris Perry, are you telling me these players wouldn't improve there team because of the way they played? Get ****** real!!!

STU  you're so naive man.

the way you put it, its as if the players are there in the first place, and "thats your lot, now get the best out of them by playing to their strengths. that is wrong. the theory comes first, and then you buy your players according to your theory/philosophy.

Houllier CHOSE to play football like that, and bought the players to fit the style. similarly, benitez CHOOSES HIMSELF that he will play differently, and so will buy the players in order to do this, and will nurture the existing ones into his philosophy LIKE WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN THIS SEASON.

the philosophy comes before the players stu, you dont have your players and then mould your philosophy around them. Houllier spent 120 million. are you telling me he was forced to play the type of football we did becoz it was the strength of the personnel? F*ck off stu THATS RUBBISH.

In the Greece team, yes, you have got to play to your strengths becoz you cant buy players. the same with Wimbledon, do you really think if Wimbledon had money they would still choose to play that game?  exactly.