Liverpool FC Forum

by **112-1077774096** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 4:43 am

again we talk about other clubs spending more than us, that's because the price goes up for these clubs. Does anyone think berba us worth more than torres? The price of a player is not as important as the quality. The cost does not mean they are better than a cheaper player (torres as an example). We could have the most expensive player in the world in each position but that is no guarantee of success. It also takes good management

by **bigmick** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:27 am

And then we talk about comparing like with like, whilst comparing points totals and win percentages with eras in which it was two points for a win and one for a draw. In all honesty, we can debate fees and the like all day long but surely everyone accepts that this is the most fundamental change from past managers tenure. In years gone by a draw away was a good result, these days it is so only at a handfull of grounds. The poeple who post these stats up know this, they know that such a modification of the rules would have a profound effect on the way teams approached football matches (it is after all why the change was brought into play in the first place). So why do they persist with comparing the current managers win percentages with managers from decades ago?

When will these people learn? Until any manager of Liverpool Football Club has won the Championship domestically, they are not comparable with the likes of Dalglish and Joe Fagan. Paisley and Shankly? Do me a favour and lets be serious here FFS.

Forget about how many points you got last season. Forget about whether you won or drew at Villa Park last season and whether this seasons result puts you behind or ahead of schedule. Forget about your win percentage compared with a manager who was in charge twenty years ago. I'll tell you the only comparison which matters. You compare yourself and the number of points you've amassed with the other teams which took part in the League that same season. When you've totted all the points up, whoever has the most is crowned the Champions, and they almost always deserve it.

Tompkins talks utter nonsense on occasions, and what makes it worse is that as he's writing it he must know it's utter nonsense. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I couldn't give a feck how many points we get, how many games we win and how many games we lose. As long as at the end of the season it's more than anyone else got, that's all that matters. If we win the title with 78 points we're still the Champions and I personally wouldn't give a feck about the points total. Please though, until we've achived that at the very least once and probably more times than that, lets compare the manager with managers who he stands sensible comparison, ie Houllier, Evans and Sounness.

by **maguskwt** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:47 am

peewee wrote:again we talk about other clubs spending more than us, that's because the price goes up for these clubs. Does anyone think berba us worth more than torres? The price of a player is not as important as the quality. The cost does not mean they are better than a cheaper player (torres as an example). We could have the most expensive player in the world in each position but that is no guarantee of success. It also takes good management

do you think we don't want a player like berbatov? if we bid 20 million for berbatov and man u comes in with 30 million... i wonder which club will get the player? you'll say we can blood the youngsters or we can scout for cheap buys... sure you can... that's just what tomkin's is saying if that's the case then success don't come overnight... and besides isn't benitez already scouting for young talents and investing in them? Isn't our reserves doing great at the moment? the point is that money gives you the financial muscle to compete for the kind of calibre of players that liverpool deserves... the financial muscle that we don't have right now and one wonders why we have all these mediocre players... how many torreses can you find in the world? who only wants to come to liverpool and not go for the highest offer...

by **maguskwt** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 7:01 am

bigmick wrote:If we win the title with 78 points we're still the Champions and I personally wouldn't give a feck about the points total. Please though, until we've achived that at the very least once and probably more times than that, lets compare the manager with managers who he stands sensible comparison, ie Houllier, Evans and Sounness.

I agree with your point about not comparing the manager to the league winning managers... but talk about comparing like for like... houllier, evans and sounness never won the CL... surely benitez should be considered a more accomplished manager than all 3 of them and to compare him to them, maybe with the exception of houllier, is a bit of a disrespect especially, evans and sounness. Houllier, fair enough, won alot of trophies with liverpool... so he's more of a 'sensible' comparison...

by **desmdlow** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 7:59 am

maguskwt wrote:
peewee wrote:again we talk about other clubs spending more than us, that's because the price goes up for these clubs. Does anyone think berba us worth more than torres? The price of a player is not as important as the quality. The cost does not mean they are better than a cheaper player (torres as an example). We could have the most expensive player in the world in each position but that is no guarantee of success. It also takes good management

do you think we don't want a player like berbatov? if we bid 20 million for berbatov and man u comes in with 30 million... i wonder which club will get the player? you'll say we can blood the youngsters or we can scout for cheap buys... sure you can... that's just what tomkin's is saying if that's the case then success don't come overnight... and besides isn't benitez already scouting for young talents and investing in them? Isn't our reserves doing great at the moment? the point is that money gives you the financial muscle to compete for the kind of calibre of players that liverpool deserves... the financial muscle that we don't have right now and one wonders why we have all these mediocre players... how many torreses can you find in the world? who only wants to come to liverpool and not go for the highest offer...

Good example of ther scenario is Riera.. he choose us over everton.. Everton when compared to Man city are analogues to us when compared to man united/chelsea. They cant get whoever they wan cause they dont have th cash... while man city can just waltze in the last day of transfer market to get a 32 million Robinho.. sums it up for me...

by **112-1077774096** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:43 am

desmdlow wrote:
maguskwt wrote:
peewee wrote:again we talk about other clubs spending more than us, that's because the price goes up for these clubs. Does anyone think berba us worth more than torres? The price of a player is not as important as the quality. The cost does not mean they are better than a cheaper player (torres as an example). We could have the most expensive player in the world in each position but that is no guarantee of success. It also takes good management

do you think we don't want a player like berbatov? if we bid 20 million for berbatov and man u comes in with 30 million... i wonder which club will get the player? you'll say we can blood the youngsters or we can scout for cheap buys... sure you can... that's just what tomkin's is saying if that's the case then success don't come overnight... and besides isn't benitez already scouting for young talents and investing in them? Isn't our reserves doing great at the moment? the point is that money gives you the financial muscle to compete for the kind of calibre of players that liverpool deserves... the financial muscle that we don't have right now and one wonders why we have all these mediocre players... how many torreses can you find in the world? who only wants to come to liverpool and not go for the highest offer...

Good example of ther scenario is Riera.. he choose us over everton.. Everton when compared to Man city are analogues to us when compared to man united/chelsea. They cant get whoever they wan cause they dont have th cash... while man city can just waltze in the last day of transfer market to get a 32 million Robinho.. sums it up for me...

would you rather have torres or robhino? Too many mercenaries in the game now mate as robinho shows, its for the money. We compete on salaries but I believe that we dont need to pay over the odds for players.

a little example, let's look at us an manure, let's take gerrard and scholes as home grown, then take mash and alonso and compare them to carrick and Hargreaves, we spent less and have the better players.

by **LegBarnes** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 9:12 am

peewee wrote:
desmdlow wrote:
maguskwt wrote:
peewee wrote:again we talk about other clubs spending more than us, that's because the price goes up for these clubs. Does anyone think berba us worth more than torres? The price of a player is not as important as the quality. The cost does not mean they are better than a cheaper player (torres as an example). We could have the most expensive player in the world in each position but that is no guarantee of success. It also takes good management

do you think we don't want a player like berbatov? if we bid 20 million for berbatov and man u comes in with 30 million... i wonder which club will get the player? you'll say we can blood the youngsters or we can scout for cheap buys... sure you can... that's just what tomkin's is saying if that's the case then success don't come overnight... and besides isn't benitez already scouting for young talents and investing in them? Isn't our reserves doing great at the moment? the point is that money gives you the financial muscle to compete for the kind of calibre of players that liverpool deserves... the financial muscle that we don't have right now and one wonders why we have all these mediocre players... how many torreses can you find in the world? who only wants to come to liverpool and not go for the highest offer...

Good example of ther scenario is Riera.. he choose us over everton.. Everton when compared to Man city are analogues to us when compared to man united/chelsea. They cant get whoever they wan cause they dont have th cash... while man city can just waltze in the last day of transfer market to get a 32 million Robinho.. sums it up for me...

would you rather have torres or robhino? Too many mercenaries in the game now mate as robinho shows, its for the money. We compete on salaries but I believe that we dont need to pay over the odds for players.

a little example, let's look at us an manure, let's take gerrard and scholes as home grown, then take mash and alonso and compare them to carrick and Hargreaves, we spent less and have the better players.

Yep would say same about Babel and Nani to less money more impact so far.

Rafa signings might not look big on paper but they are showing there worth so far this season.

Good point PeeWee.

by **maguskwt** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:25 am

even on salaries we are far behind... chelsea has several players earning 130k to 120k per week, terry, ballack, shevchenko, the mancs have several players earning around 120k, ronaldo, rooney, ferdinand. we probably only have gerrard in that stratosphere and our 2nd highest earner should be far behind. now tell me how did several good players end up in a club like chelsea which doesn't have history? like it or not these footballers are professionals. that means they will look at the financial package. If we can offer a comparable package to those of the mancs and chelsea then we will no doubt get higher calibre players than we have now. then we will have high calibre player who will chose us over the others because they like our history, reputation, the harbor, beatles or whatever. right now in terms of recruiting talents we're not on a level playing field. the selling clubs on the other hand will look at the bids. Like i said tottenham didn't wanna sell berbatov... and lets' say we bid 20 million... they would go 'yeah, feck off, hahaha'... the mancs bid 32 million or whatever, they say ' feck you, you poach our player, but you're lucky cause he wants to go, so whatever, if you donate to our charity we will have a deal'... btw if i'm not wrong masch costs more than carrick or hargreaves... and whether or not who has the better pair if they were playing for us you'd sing a different tune...

by **112-1077774096** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:47 am

well luckily all players dont go purely for the money or we would have no reina, mash, alonso, torres, gerrard, keane,

the point I am making is that more money does not always buy you better players, yes I agree it can buy bigger names but they are not always what's needed. The mancs used to do it mate, in the 80's they would buy expensive players who could not play together and then when they brought their youth through who cost nothing they started to challenge us.

I am not disputing that money is important, but more money is not the be all and end all. You still need to spend your money properley, look at veron as an example

by **Number 9** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 11:18 am

peewee wrote:Too many mercenaries in the game now mate as robinho shows, its for the money. We compete on salaries but I believe that we dont need to pay over the odds for players.

a little example, let's look at us an manure, let's take gerrard and scholes as home grown, then take mash and alonso and compare them to carrick and Hargreaves, we spent less and have the better players.

Holy feck,Christ on a sidecar and all that!

A little slice of positivity from Peewee?
Never seen that one coming,near choked on my coffee! :laugh:

by **maguskwt** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 11:23 am

Number 9 wrote:
peewee wrote:Too many mercenaries in the game now mate as robinho shows, its for the money. We compete on salaries but I believe that we dont need to pay over the odds for players.

a little example, let's look at us an manure, let's take gerrard and scholes as home grown, then take mash and alonso and compare them to carrick and Hargreaves, we spent less and have the better players.

Holy feck,Christ on a sidecar and all that!

A little slice of positivity from Peewee?
Never seen that one coming,near choked on my coffee!

nahhhh... peewee's target is rafa and kuyt... that's all...

by **Number 9** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 11:26 am

Yeah but Rafa bought Alonso and Masch so in a way he has actually said that Rafa done SOMETHING better than Fergie!
I never thought id see the day!

by **112-1077774096** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 11:49 am

pair of b*strds

by **Sabre** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:04 pm

Tomkins have a point when he describes the critics. They do turn around and use the past at will to attack Rafa, the pretty opposite to what he's doing, and in my view, that's not more serious, it's just critics wanting somebody out in a the classic siege pattern -- which I know well since in my country there are a lot of sacking and processes like this.

Some critics fail to see good things of Rafa at the very same extent Tomkins fails to see negatives. Tomkins is not balanced in his views, but is the opposite to Tomkins serious, and balanced? not in my view.

by **metalhead** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 1:40 pm

David Prentice: Rafa Benitez is a master tactician

Sep 19 2008

by David Prentice, Liverpool Echo

WHAT constitutes a master tactician? The ability to make changes to the pattern of a match with influential substitutions is clearly one criterion.

And in Rafael Benitez, Liverpool possess the best Anfield has ever seen.

Ryan Babel’s goalscoring impact against Manchester United last Saturday was the 50th occasion Benitez has brought on a player who has scored.

Even given the increased number of substitutions in modern football, that’s a remarkable record.

To give that stat even greater resonance, on 12 separate occasions Benitez has made substitutions which have led to two or more goals – many from losing positions.

Cynics might suggest that the Reds boss sent out the wrong team in the first place. But I prefer the argument that there aren’t many better coaches in Europe at analysing the flow of a match and making the necessary switches which work.

Remember Olympiakos? Steven Gerrard’s late piledriver is the obvious memory, but without goals from supersubs Mellor and Pongolle that match-winner might have been meaningless.

Then there’s Kewell and Alonso scoring against Charlton to salvage a 2-2 draw, Crouch and Warnock against Fulham, Garcia and Cisse saving a draw at Birmingham, then Alonso and Biscan turning a 2-0 deficit at Fulham into a 4-2 win.

And none of them were even Benitez’s greatest switch.

Arguably the Reds’ manager’s most valuable intervention was the introduction of a player who didn’t score at all – not until a penalty shoot-out anyway.

Vladimir Smicer might have come on and scored in Istanbul, but it was Dietmar Hamann’s half-time introduction which swung the match back Liverpool’s way.

It’s just as easy to make a damaging switch as it is to introduce an effective change – as Sir Alf Ramsey discovered in Mexico, Howard Kendall at Wembley in 1986 and Gerard Houllier in Leverkusen.

But Benitez has, so far, managed to avoid that pitfall.

Even his controversial withdrawal of Steven Gerrard at Goodison Park for showing “too much passion” paid off.

The use of an impact substitute was a tactic whose effectiveness grew only stealthily.

It was first allowed in England in 1965, but only for injuries. Tactical switches were later allowed in 1967, increased to two changes 20 years later then, in 1995, increased to the current limit of three.

Predictably the influence of Anfield substitutes has grown with the times.

Bill Shankly made just 18 scoring switches in nine years, the last – in 1974 – resulting in a last-minute winner from Peter Cormack against Norwich.

Bob Paisley doubled that figure in eight years, but then he could call on the greatest Supersub of them all, David Fairclough, who scored 18 goals after stepping off the bench.

Joe Fagan did it three times, Dalglish 21, Souness 10 and Roy Evans 12, before the folly of a joint management team was exposed.

While Evans and Gerard Houllier argued amongst themselves about which subs to bring on, only Karl-Heinz Rieldle stepped off the bench to score during their joint stewardship.

Left to his own devices, Houllier introduced 40 scoring subs in five years, but that figure has already been eclipsed by Benitez in four years.

The Reds boss may have his faults, but the effective use of substitutes is not one of them.

---------------

I don't think it deserves a thread, so I wanted to stick here. He does show some interesting points and I do agree with him that Benitez is one of the best when it comes tactics and trying to change the game, because he has done it alot of time. Maybe some will beg to differ.

Liverpool FC Forum

Tomkin´s half hour - Latest from jakanory

Who is online