by Effes » Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:15 pm
Leonmc0708 wrote:GYBS wrote:Effes wrote:So, this will give us the opportunity to play Riera on the left and Babel on the right of a 4-4-2?
why play babel on the right when he has spent his entire career playing as a left sided forward ?and definatly not as a right winger or right mid as thats not his game .
IT may be something to do with the fact he is right footed ?
by account deleted by request » Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:18 pm
by GYBS » Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:19 pm
Effes wrote:Leonmc0708 wrote:GYBS wrote:Effes wrote:So, this will give us the opportunity to play Riera on the left and Babel on the right of a 4-4-2?
why play babel on the right when he has spent his entire career playing as a left sided forward ?
IT may be something to do with the fact he is right footed ?
I'm quite sure the "transition" to the right wouldn't be too hard to ask of him.
by Effes » Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:18 pm
GYBS wrote:Effes wrote:Leonmc0708 wrote:GYBS wrote:Effes wrote:So, this will give us the opportunity to play Riera on the left and Babel on the right of a 4-4-2?
why play babel on the right when he has spent his entire career playing as a left sided forward ?
IT may be something to do with the fact he is right footed ?
I'm quite sure the "transition" to the right wouldn't be too hard to ask of him.
But he isnt the type of player that takes people on going on the outside - he has modelled his play on the way henry drifts out left then cuts in onto his right with devasting pace and shot . has done it to great effect for ajax holland and us . perfect for the left role or centre role in a 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 but not 4-4-2
by GYBS » Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:26 pm
Effes wrote:GYBS wrote:Effes wrote:Leonmc0708 wrote:GYBS wrote:Effes wrote:So, this will give us the opportunity to play Riera on the left and Babel on the right of a 4-4-2?
why play babel on the right when he has spent his entire career playing as a left sided forward ?
IT may be something to do with the fact he is right footed ?
I'm quite sure the "transition" to the right wouldn't be too hard to ask of him.
But he isnt the type of player that takes people on going on the outside - he has modelled his play on the way henry drifts out left then cuts in onto his right with devasting pace and shot . has done it to great effect for ajax holland and us . perfect for the left role or centre role in a 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 but not 4-4-2
With his pace you think he can't "take people on"?
I dont buy into that - I think it's a weakness when a player
can only cut in rather than go on the outside.
He's a better option than Kuyt on the right in a 4-4-2.
by LFC2007 » Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:49 pm
bigmick wrote:Right so after a bit of consideration. This notion of a budget is one I'd stick to, everyone to a lesser or greater extent has to work within one. I would concede though that in the case of Barry it does appear that while the money does seem to have been available (which would have meant we'd spent around 50 million in the Summer after the signings of Keane, Ngog, the goalie whose name escapes me and Dossena) the board actually pulled the plug on the deal as they judged the price to be too steep. Now whoever is advising the owners (and I assume they are acting under advice) is hardly being outlandish in their assessment of the situation. Most people on here think the price is too steep for a player of Barry's age, and the fact the board agree is probably an indication that they are working to a slightly different agenda than Rafa.
By that I mean this. Most people are of the view I think that if we don't at least launch a credible challenge this season the manager will go. Some of us even think that he should go if it doesn't come to pass. I would guess that Rafa knows it as well, hence the reduction in rotation which we are seeing and will continue to see, the reduction in "options" and "possibility" players, and the attempts to buy genuine first team players who are based over here. None of that I would argue with, but clearly Rafa is gambling everything on buying Keane for a top endish 20 million, and attempting to buy Barry for the kind of fees bandied about. The board I suppose have to take a slightly longer term view. It's all very well Rafa spunking 40 mill on two players in their late twenties as one last gamble, but I do think it's legitimate to reign him in just a fraction, which is what appears to have happened.
As for the "down trodden" bit, my post was in response to various others bemoaning the fact that the manager is unable to get his primary targets all the time. My point is, very few managers can. Those of us who have been critical of the manager though do sometimes get the feeling that people sometimes look for excuses somewhat when it comes to assessing him. If it's not being unlucky, it's the fixture list, the referees, some emails, lack of cash or inability to buy primary targets. I think this is the reason for my initial post, an attempt to keep the discussion real visa vis what we do and don't do in the transfer market. It's probably worth remembering that we pipped Everton to Riera's signature, the same team we spent most of last season tussling with in the league. They've signed one bloke on a free so far, as well as selling Andy Johnson for over 10 million. Winning the Premiership certainly isn't easy, but finishing and being miles better than teams like that ought to be, as should at some stage launching a challenge. Anyway, I don't quite share your confidence that should Rierra be a flop people won't bang on about him not being a first choice, but we'll see. There is also the argument that if we didn't waste untold funds buying and aquiring various naer do wells which either aren't good enough or will never be good enough or haven't started shaving yet we'd have more money to spend on primary targets but that's another question.
All in all though, it's not easy to buy first teamers for 5 million, particularly not when you buy three or four of them. Better to just buy the one player and kind of concentrate your resources I reckon.
As for alternatives, well not seeing much football these days it's not an easy question to answer. Wide midfielders for under 10 million, (I say wide because left midifelders are rare indeed and because any wide midfielder of any note is better than Kuyt). Someone mentioned Peterson from Blackburn, I think he's better than Riera. I also think Sean Wright Phillips would be a decent buy, Aaron Lennon from Tottenham. I think Gareth Bale will be an excellent player for them this season and for many more, and I think Theo walcott will make a footballer although maybe cost more than 10. I like Kieran Richardson at Sunderland and think he would be a player in a good team, while as has been mentioned Arteta is capable of much better than where he is. Abroad there's no doubt hundreds of players, you just need to find one with ersehole for it, which I don't think Rierra has.
. Almost everyone called that one wrong, including some very well known Kuyt-bashers, and includng Stu I might add.
by account deleted by request » Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:54 pm
JoeTerp wrote:s@int wrote:How will Babel ever get a game on the right when we have Kuyt playing there?
drop Kuyt to right back
How would we ever win the league without Kuyts goals though by bunglemark2 » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:00 pm
by Number 9 » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:08 pm
LFC2007 wrote:bigmick wrote:Right so after a bit of consideration. This notion of a budget is one I'd stick to, everyone to a lesser or greater extent has to work within one. I would concede though that in the case of Barry it does appear that while the money does seem to have been available (which would have meant we'd spent around 50 million in the Summer after the signings of Keane, Ngog, the goalie whose name escapes me and Dossena) the board actually pulled the plug on the deal as they judged the price to be too steep. Now whoever is advising the owners (and I assume they are acting under advice) is hardly being outlandish in their assessment of the situation. Most people on here think the price is too steep for a player of Barry's age, and the fact the board agree is probably an indication that they are working to a slightly different agenda than Rafa.
By that I mean this. Most people are of the view I think that if we don't at least launch a credible challenge this season the manager will go. Some of us even think that he should go if it doesn't come to pass. I would guess that Rafa knows it as well, hence the reduction in rotation which we are seeing and will continue to see, the reduction in "options" and "possibility" players, and the attempts to buy genuine first team players who are based over here. None of that I would argue with, but clearly Rafa is gambling everything on buying Keane for a top endish 20 million, and attempting to buy Barry for the kind of fees bandied about. The board I suppose have to take a slightly longer term view. It's all very well Rafa spunking 40 mill on two players in their late twenties as one last gamble, but I do think it's legitimate to reign him in just a fraction, which is what appears to have happened.
Ok, since we can agree that the money to sign Barry was available, and he appeared to be our no. 1 transfer target very early on in the summer, and since it had been widely reported that the fee was agreed, only for us to do a U-turn on the basis that he isn't worth the money, I pose the following questions...
Is it acceptable for the board to sanction a deal for Robbie Keane at over £20m, and reject the Barry deal on this 'value for money basis'? Are these 'advisers' fit to assess the value to the team Barry would have? Would you be happy for the owners to sanction a deal for someone who you consider 'worth £18m', or who they consider 'worth £18m'?
If Rafa's 'second choice' was David Silva at £18m, and the board sanctioned a deal for him, would you happy with that state of affairs?
No, definitely 100% categorically no f*cking way, in my opinion. Yes, it is their legal right to do so, but is that how you want the club run?
It's the principle of the board - and in effect just the owners - rejecting a deal based on what they perceive to be 'too high' a price. If owners end up rejecting potential deals on the basis that they do not value 'x' player at 'x' amount - assuming it is within the confines of a budget agreed with the manager who is reasonable - it is fundamentally negative for the game in my opinion. If the £18m falls within an agreed budget, it should be Rafa's decision as to who he signs, as he is best placed decide - being manager of the team, working with the team, selecting the team etc.. Otherwise in effect, you have a continental-type system, where there is no manager, simply a head-coach, with decisions on signings being made at a higher level. In my opinion, and this will never change, the board, the owners, whomever is in charge should be there to set a budget, the manager should work within that budget and sign who he feels necessary to improve the chances of success at the club. Every manager will at some point have to justify a prospective signing to the board. I don't know the procedure, but it probably involves a combination of stat's, videos, scout reports, character references etc.. Along with this, the manager will probably have to justify exactly how he feels 'x' player will improve their chances of success. Is the improvement in the squad brought by 'x' player worth the likely fee? He will have to make a justification of this sort for each signing, and only if a manager takes it to the very extreme and tries to justify the unjustifiable e.g. £18m on James Milner, should the board potentially reject a deal outright. Only absolute wrecklessness should be severely questioned, and if it ever got to that stage, the board would have more sense to sack him. It is however incredibly unlikely to ever happen in our case, as Rafa is a reasonable person, a manager with a good track record, and in spite of one or two relatively (relative to our budget) expensive signings which haven't made the requisite impact, he's done ok. Though errors in signings are par for the course with any manager, and that is the risk boards, owners, those in charge take when taking the decision to employ 'x' manager or keeping them on - see comments the owners made about Rafa after Klinsmann-gate as evidence of apparent 'support'. Now, I don't see in any way, shape or form how the board could consider the signing of Barry absolute wrecklessness, and if they did, they'd have some trouble explaining - at least to me - how the Robbie Keane deal could be sanctioned. Indeed, every pundit I've ever seen, read or heard considers Barry to be proven premiership quality, and more to the point; many would consider him more than adequate to make the requisite impact on our team. It would be very difficult to make the argument that spending £18m on Barry would constitute absolute wrecklessness. Justifiably they could argue he is; 'Not quite what we need', 'A decent player', 'An average player' even, but these comments fall well outside the remit the board should have in determining who we sign. If it got to the 'wreckless' stage the board would have more sense to sack him (why employ someone who would consider making such an outrageous move in the transfer market?). You can argue that because the current owners didn't recruit Rafa, they have the right to install their own man, after doing their own research - which they do. But why not do it sooner rather than later?
Why should their remit be so limitied? Because you could argue that tens of signings are unreasonable e.g. the signing of Keane, e.g. the signing of Babel, e.g. the signing of Cavalieri. The remit must be clear, and that is why the signing of Barry should categorically be sanctioned - if indeed the fee for him falls within an agreed budget.As for the "down trodden" bit, my post was in response to various others bemoaning the fact that the manager is unable to get his primary targets all the time. My point is, very few managers can. Those of us who have been critical of the manager though do sometimes get the feeling that people sometimes look for excuses somewhat when it comes to assessing him. If it's not being unlucky, it's the fixture list, the referees, some emails, lack of cash or inability to buy primary targets. I think this is the reason for my initial post, an attempt to keep the discussion real visa vis what we do and don't do in the transfer market. It's probably worth remembering that we pipped Everton to Riera's signature, the same team we spent most of last season tussling with in the league. They've signed one bloke on a free so far, as well as selling Andy Johnson for over 10 million. Winning the Premiership certainly isn't easy, but finishing and being miles better than teams like that ought to be, as should at some stage launching a challenge. Anyway, I don't quite share your confidence that should Rierra be a flop people won't bang on about him not being a first choice, but we'll see. There is also the argument that if we didn't waste untold funds buying and aquiring various naer do wells which either aren't good enough or will never be good enough or haven't started shaving yet we'd have more money to spend on primary targets but that's another question.
What you see as 'excuses,' I see as reasons. It sure as sh!t isn't a coincidence in my book that the teams that spend the most amounts of money tend to be the teams that are most successful. Yes, we've spent a lot, but not as much as the Manc's and nowhere near as much as Chelsea, and under very different circumstances too. Compare our wage bill relative to turnover to Arsenal or Man U's, and account for the fact that they all generate more revenue than us because they have much larger stadia, and you'll see that we're competing in a league of our own. That is to say, if we had as large a stadium as Arsenal (which would bridge the revenue gap), we would have the lowest wage/turnover ratio. That suggests to me that we're in a different financial league, and our difficulties in trying to sign the very best players may be partly because of this.
All in all though, it's not easy to buy first teamers for 5 million, particularly not when you buy three or four of them. Better to just buy the one player and kind of concentrate your resources I reckon.
On a few occasions we've spent money on players who haven't turned out to be good enough or aren't quite of the right quality, but in some instances we've had to buy players in order to fill roles (Pennant, Bellamy), whilst having this necessity to sell prior (Cisse, Baros) to buying, and also accounting for the 'Parry factor'. Again, I'm not saying these are excuses, I am saying they are reasons to be reasonable.As for alternatives, well not seeing much football these days it's not an easy question to answer. Wide midfielders for under 10 million, (I say wide because left midifelders are rare indeed and because any wide midfielder of any note is better than Kuyt). Someone mentioned Peterson from Blackburn, I think he's better than Riera. I also think Sean Wright Phillips would be a decent buy, Aaron Lennon from Tottenham. I think Gareth Bale will be an excellent player for them this season and for many more, and I think Theo walcott will make a footballer although maybe cost more than 10. I like Kieran Richardson at Sunderland and think he would be a player in a good team, while as has been mentioned Arteta is capable of much better than where he is. Abroad there's no doubt hundreds of players, you just need to find one with ersehole for it, which I don't think Rierra has.
I wouldn't go near Lennon, or Bale, and Pedersen offers crossing ability and a cultured left peg, but not much else. Richardson is decent but not good enough. SWP is a better shout in my view, but would they sell to us, and for under £10m? I don't think Riera is good enough either, I think he's average, but the Arteta's and Young's are few and far between, IMO, and perhaps he has improved his game, and his attitude significantly at Espanyol? So, whilst I can agree that we could do better than Riera, how much better? We've seen how very good players at other clubs can be average with us...Benayoun was one of West Ham's best players, Pennant - Birmingham's best player, Bellamy - Blackburn's best player, Kuyt - Feyenoord's best player, Gonzalez - Sociedad's best player (I think).
After one set of signings a couple of seasons ago, everyone was very happy with our business - shortly after we signed Kuyt in fact, and for a continued period after that - he was "potentially better than Fowler", "the new Mark Hughes" "top class....end of" "Rafa's best buy", etc.. and indeed "If this blokes not a top-class player then I know absolutely nothing about football whatsoever"
by account deleted by request » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:09 pm
by GYBS » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:11 pm
by account deleted by request » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:28 pm
GYBS wrote:But barry cant play wide left - so would be wasted 18 mil for another cm . only reason t get barry is if we got the exact same money we would spend on barry for xabi - if xabi stays no need for barry and definatly not for a wide left role .
by lakes10 » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:31 pm
by GYBS » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:34 pm
s@int wrote:GYBS wrote:But barry cant play wide left - so would be wasted 18 mil for another cm . only reason t get barry is if we got the exact same money we would spend on barry for xabi - if xabi stays no need for barry and definatly not for a wide left role .
Barry has played more at Left midfield than he has in a central midfield role..... his first cap for England was also as a left midfielder. So who's to say where and in what role Rafa would play him ? He is a good player in both positions and would have added to our quality (imo).
Return to Liverpool FC - General Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 46 guests
