The Banter Thread

[BaZ87]

Brilliant stat if you're retarded. Of Hodgson's 13 wins, 2 were against Rabotnicki, 2 were against Trabzonspor and 1 against Steaua Bucharest.

Unfortunately due to 6 months of Hodgson we were unable to even qualify for the Europa League last season so Dalglish wasn't lucky enough to have games against those sort of sides.

Of Hodgson's 20 league games, we won 7, drew 4 and lost 9. Dalglish's first 20 league games, we won 11, drew 4 and lost 5. We've since won 1 and lost 2.

 

[placeholder]

Brilliant stat if you're retarded. Of Hodgson's 13 wins, 2 were against Rabotnicki, 2 were against Trabzonspor and 1 against Steaua Bucharest.

Unfortunately due to 6 months of Hodgson we were unable to even qualify for the Europa League last season so Dalglish wasn't lucky enough to have games against those sort of sides.

Of Hodgson's 20 league games, we won 7, drew 4 and lost 9. Dalglish's first 20 league games, we won 11, drew 4 and lost 5. We've since won 1 and lost 2.

You could also argue that Hodgson was thrown into a situation with his hands tied in terms of transfers while Dalglish took over a team with new owners and a new level of optimism.

You could further argue that Kenny got 6 months to look at the squad and target players before he moved for anyone in the summer?

I think looking at the form at the start of the season is actually unfair on Hodgson under those circumstances?


Kenny has had an influence that is clearly positive because he has an aura and commands respect, he is also Liverpool to the core. Its what happens when thats no longer enough that will be interesting IMO.

 

[BaZ87]

You could also argue that Hodgson was thrown into a situation with his hands tied in terms of transfers while Dalglish took over a team with new owners and a new level of optimism.

You could further argue that Kenny got 6 months to look at the squad and target players before he moved for anyone in the summer?

I think looking at the form at the start of the season is actually unfair on Hodgson under those circumstances?


Kenny has had an influence that is clearly positive because he has an aura and commands respect, he is also Liverpool to the core. Its what happens when thats no longer enough that will be interesting IMO.

The new owners took over a month or so into the season, while Hodgson was still manager. Hodgson continued to do terribly (in fact we were getting worse) and the majority of the optimism Dalglish received was down to the fact that Hodgson was sacked.

If you look even more closely at our form for the first 20 games and then when Dalglish took over; we were without Torres for the majority of Dalglish's spell (partly down to Hodgson), we were without Gerrard for the majority of Dalglish's spell (our 2 best players) and had ridiculous bad luck with other injuries over the last few months (something we didn't have in the first half of the season), particularly in defense. Yet despite all that, under Hodgson we got 25 points from 20 games (47.5 points if that continued over 38 games (enough to finish 10th)) but got 33 from 18 games under Dalglish (69.6 over 38 games (enough for us to have finished 4th)).

 

[placeholder]

The new owners took over a month or so into the season, while Hodgson was still manager. Hodgson continued to do terribly (in fact we were getting worse) and the majority of the optimism Dalglish received was down to the fact that Hodgson was sacked.

If you look even more closely at our form for the first 20 games and then when Dalglish took over; we were without Torres for the majority of Dalglish's spell (partly down to Hodgson), we were without Gerrard for the majority of Dalglish's spell (our 2 best players) and had ridiculous bad luck with other injuries over the last few months (something we didn't have in the first half of the season), particularly in defense. Yet despite all that, under Hodgson we got 25 points from 20 games (47.5 points if that continued over 38 games (enough to finish 10th)) but got 33 from 18 games under Dalglish (69.6 over 38 games (enough for us to have finished 4th)).

The new influence of ownership only had an effect from the January transfer window though.

Torres was posted missing for both managers to be fair.

Dalglish rescued the situation, the stats dont lie, he proved to be the right man to "steady the ship". I think that was all the owners had him in mind for but he did well enough and had the reputation and fan support to make him the only show in town.

This may prove to be their mistake IMO.

He was given the job because there would have been a riot if he wasnt.

Since then the reality may be the problem. Carroll looks like a "fish up a tree" (copyright Paul Merson, Soccer Sat). Thats not to say he is a bad player but he just doesnt "fit" and for £35m you have to fit and fit quick.

I never rated Adam as ive said before.

Now heres the big one. Im not even half convinced by Suarez now either. The more i see of him, quality player that he is, im getting less convinced.

There seems to be an ever increasing list of reasons every game as to why he didnt score a hat-trick or nick the penalty or missed the chance or whatever. His ability is without question but his mistakes seem to be getting overlooked.

 

[BaZ87]

I don't want to be rude but did you think before you wrote all that?

On one hand you're slating all our transfer dealings but on the other hand you're saying that the turn around in our form was down to the influence of the new ownership in the January transfer window

 

[placeholder]

I don't want to be rude but did you think before you wrote all that?

On one hand you're slating all our transfer dealings but on the other hand you're saying that the turn around in our form was down to the influence of the new ownership in the January transfer window

Not at all.

Last season from the summer on there was a genuine gloom around Liverpool? Yes?

Hodgson was employed by the old owners and given a small budget and quick timescale in which to deal in.

The gloom continued.

New Owners, New optimism and new manager gives the place a lift. Including the spending of money in January.

The whole regime chanced en-masse in January.

There was a whole new feel about Liverpool from Jan onwards? Yes?

Was it the owners?
Was it the return of the King?
Was it spending money?
Was it a combination?

Its no shock there was an upturn in fortune.

If the EXACT SAME two transfer windows had taken place under Hodgson and the old owners i would find it hard to accept it would be met in the same way as it has been under the current owners and KD.

Now what we have is the reality of the situation after the inital influence of change. The owner coughed up the money, it was spent. All that is left now is to judge it on its own merits.

I hope that makes some sort of sense!

 

[Tom84]

Brilliant stat if you're retarded. Of Hodgson's 13 wins, 2 were against Rabotnicki, 2 were against Trabzonspor and 1 against Steaua Bucharest.

Unfortunately due to 6 months of Hodgson we were unable to even qualify for the Europa League last season so Dalglish wasn't lucky enough to have games against those sort of sides.

Wow anyone would think by that that Liverpool didn't lose a game under Dalglish last season

 

[BaZ87]

....Was it the owners?
Was it the return of the King?
Was it spending money?
Was it a combination?....

Well the change in owners happened not long into the season so that wasn't the difference and according to you, we've signed rubbish players so that couldn't have been the difference either. That just leaves the return of the King

Wow anyone would think by that that Liverpool didn't lose a game under Dalglish last season

Only anybody that chose not to read (and quote) the end of the above post where it says Liverpool lost 5 games under Dalglish last season

 

[placeholder]

Well the change in owners happened not long into the season so that wasn't the difference and according to you, we've signed rubbish players so that couldn't have been the difference either. That just leaves the return of the King

Oh well thats fine, he will accept the same responsiblility for the transfer dealings and the current situation too - whatever that turns out to be.

I didnt say you signed rubbish players. I just question if the transfer policy would have been welcomed under the previous ownership and managership.

I think you could make a case for each one of your signings individually but as a combined collection for the combined fee i personally think better business could have been done. Thats just an opinion though.

Its daft to comapre like for like IMO so Carroll doesnt equal Aguero but it does pose the question about whether the best use of £35m is Andy Carroll.

Yes it was the money at the time but how much would you have really lost out by pocketing the Torres money until July?

 

[BaZ87]

You can pick and choose aspects of every managers reign but ultimately only 1 thing matters and that's results. Results were terrible under Hodgson and have improved vastly under Dalglish and that's all that matters to Liverpool fans.

 

[placeholder]

You can pick and choose aspects of every managers reign but ultimately only 1 thing matters and that's results. Results were terrible under Hodgson and have improved vastly under Dalglish and that's all that matters to Liverpool fans.

Yeah of course i get that up to a point.

However at what point does the millions of player transfers that have happened play a part?

KD has spent £100m i think? correct me if im wrong cos im not sure.

What is the expectation of a manager spending that money?

 

[Pigeon_Killer]

Results were terrible under Hodgson and have improved vastly under Dalglish and that's all that matters to Liverpool fans.

This.

If he was winning matches his little league ambitions would've been forgiven. If he was winning matches his league one style football would've been forgiven. If he was winning matches the negativity and defeatist attitude he tried to instil on the club solely to make himself look far better than he actually was would've been forgiven.

As it is, not only will he be remembered as one of the worst managers the club as ever had he'll also be remembered as a massive self centred ****.

 

[BaZ87]

Yeah of course i get that up to a point.

However at what point does the millions of player transfers that have happened play a part?

KD has spent £100m i think? correct me if im wrong cos im not sure.

What is the expectation of a manager spending that money?

Slightly more than that, closer to £110m and brought back in up to £85m (assuming Aquilani plays 25 games and completes his move to Milan). We've now got a squad that's cost in the region of £160m to put together, considerably less than Utd's and I hate to think how much less than Chelsea or City's.

The expectations should be to challenge for a top 4 spot this season I'd say

 

[Stag]

Challenge yes, get there, no.

 

[BaZ87]

Challenge yes, get there, no.

You really think Arsenal can recover from their start and get 4th?

 

[Stag]

No.

 

[placeholder]

Slightly more than that, closer to £110m and brought back in up to £85m (assuming Aquilani plays 25 games and completes his move to Milan). We've now got a squad that's cost in the region of £160m to put together, considerably less than Utd's and I hate to think how much less than Chelsea or City's.

The expectations should be to challenge for a top 4 spot this season I'd say

The context of Chelsea etc is irrelevant TBH.

Yes you have a better squad now but that wasnt the question either for me.

My question was whether each signing was the best use of the money, thats all.

As you say, make the top 4 then i suppose the answer is "yes" but is £100m on the player you bought a good move......I dunno.

 

[BaZ87]

No.

I saw a journo on the Sunday Supplement mention Stoke as a possible contender for 4th but I can't see it I'm afraid.

The context of Chelsea etc is irrelevant TBH.

Yes you have a better squad now but that wasnt the question either for me.

My question was whether each signing was the best use of the money, thats all.

As you say, make the top 4 then i suppose the answer is "yes" but is £100m on the player you bought a good move......I dunno.

Only time will tell whether each signing was the best use of the money. Also you sometimes have to accept that the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. I've said many times that we've overspent on certain players (we've got a couple of bargains too) but we were getting the players the club wanted and that's the most important thing (providing we can afford it).

And seeing as you sort of hinted at it earlier (while pretending not to); £35m on Aguero and £35m on Carroll is not remotely comparable. For a start, without CL football we were never going to be in the market for an Aguero or similar then you have the true costs of the 2 players. When you factor in both players wages over a 5 year contract (~£200k per week compared to ~£80k per week), Aguero's cost £30m more than Carroll and that's before you take into account signing on fees or the knock on effects to the rest of your squads wages when you increase wages of your highest earners.

edit: Bad news for Arsenal: The club have confirmed that Wilshere will have surgery on his ankle on Monday and will be out 'for a period of months'.

 

[placeholder]

And seeing as you sort of hinted at it earlier (while pretending not to); £35m on Aguero and £35m on Carroll is not remotely comparable. For a start, without CL football we were never going to be in the market for an Aguero or similar then you have the true costs of the 2 players. When you factor in both players wages over a 5 year contract (~£200k per week compared to ~£80k per week), Aguero's cost £30m more than Carroll and that's before you take into account signing on fees or the knock on effects to the rest of your squads wages when you increase wages of your highest earners.

Actually i wasnt hinting at it at all! Id just heard it mentioned it on a radio station.

However, if that is the road we are going down for the sake of argument.

Dont sign Carroll and save 6 months of wages.........

Take the £35m into the summer window which is closer now to £40m....


In this summer window, given that Suarez was signed up and Bellamy had arrived also, would you have signed Carroll for £35m?

IMO you dont need a striker that changes your game everytime he plays.

 

[BaZ87]

I'm pretty sure we've had this debate before and as I told you before, rightly or wrongly the club had identified Carroll as their main target to replace Torres (even before they knew he'd leave in January (there was an expectance that he'd leave in the summer)). In hindsight, signing him in January was the wrong decision due to his injury problems however at the time the club (I assume) believed it was worth paying the extra few £m to sign him in January to give him time to settle with this season in mid but also to help us in the run-in of last season.

And £80k per week for 6 months is ~£2m, and while £37m is closer to £40m than £35m is, £37m is still closer to £35m than it is to £40m