PODCAST: Kelleher the hero as Reds advance, plus CL Draw reaction and what's going on with FSG?

Bang on - better the devil you know.

These owners are the envy of English football.  Do they do my head in?  Yes, because I can't help but feel this could have been a golden age for a generational manager if they'd have dipped into their pockets a couple more times than they did.

But maybe it is a golden age.  And it was the synergy of the ownership and manager that made it happen.

We'll only know this if they sell, of course, but the thought that we could look back and pine for FSG worries me too much to want them to sell.

Something I really wanted to say but it slipped my mind while I was talking and then I never revisited it, is that when people say they want owners who will invest in the team, there's a distinction that needs making here.

You can't throw loads of your own money in to buy players. That's the whole purpose of FFP. If someone wants FSG out because they aren't bankrolling spending or "putting their hand in their pockets" and they want owners who will do that, I just don't get that at all because it makes us no better than the cheating cunts at City. I want to win, but I want to win properly. I don't want to use the editor in Footy Manager.

If someone is pissed off with FSG because they think they are holding back on money the club has earned and they aren't spending it on transfers (which I'm sure is what Razor is saying above), that's a different argument entirely. I don't think it's as simple as that (as I said on the pod Klopp plays  a big part in that too) but I might be wrong and it's definitely a discussion worth having. 

I just can't get on board with wanting super rich owners who will bankroll signings by ploughing their own money in. Any owner who does that is a) breaking the rules and b) most likely doing it for some ulterior motive (ie sportswashing).

It's a rare occasion when I have to explain a pop culture reference rather than having it explained to me. 

2 hours ago, dave u said:

Something I really wanted to say but it slipped my mind while I was talking and then I never revisited it, is that when people say they want owners who will invest in the team, there's a distinction that needs making here.

 

You can't throw loads of your own money in to buy players. That's the whole purpose of FFP. If someone wants FSG out because they aren't bankrolling spending or "putting their hand in their pockets" and they want owners who will do that, I just don't get that at all because it makes us no better than the cheating cunts at City. I want to win, but I want to win properly. I don't want to use the editor in Footy Manager.

 

If someone is pissed off with FSG because they think they are holding back on money the club has earned and they aren't spending it on transfers (which I'm sure is what Razor is saying above), that's a different argument entirely. I don't think it's as simple as that (as I said on the pod Klopp plays  a big part in that too) but I might be wrong and it's definitely a discussion worth having. 

 

I just can't get on board with wanting super rich owners who will bankroll signings by ploughing their own money in. Any owner who does that is a) breaking the rules and b) most likely doing it for some ulterior motive (ie sportswashing).

 

 

Yes that is correct. But correcting glaring weakness at CB in 2019/20 and an injury crisis in midfield this summer is not a big step for me. Especially as we were in prime position for back to back titles in 19/20 and have now fallen further behind financially since. The 19/20 situation is something I just cant shake off given what has happened since.

24 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Yes that is correct. But correcting glaring weakness at CB in 2019/20 and an injury crisis in midfield this summer is not a big step for me. Especially as we were in prime position for back to back titles in 19/20 and have now fallen further behind financially since. The 19/20 situation is something I just cant shake off given what has happened since.

I agree, but how much of it is Klopp's choice and how much is it the owners telling him there's no money to spend?

So for example, when Lovren left did Klopp choose to wait until he could get the player he wanted (Konate) or did he want to buy someone and was told he couldn't?

To me, that was Klopp taking the chance that he had enough cover until he could get who he wanted. Then Virg gets wiped out and the others all go down too. 

I don't know though, but that's kind of the point I made on the pod. None of us know if its Klopp's doing or if he's constantly being told he can't spend. My guess it's a bit of both but mostly it has been Klopp not wanting to settle for secondary or tertiary targets.

He did that in the early years, but the level of the team wasn't as high then so it's easier. Since we became good all he talks about is how hard it is to find better players than those he has.

I think klopp knows how limited his budget is but won't publicly declare he needs players because he doesn't want to shit on the lads he has. If we signed tchoumeni I don't believe we would of signed Darwin. The budget of one went on the other. When we got down to the bare bones I think it was telling that klopp said "I wish FSG would take more risks"that suggests to me Klopp knows and works within the restrictions that have been set but he finds them difficult sometimes.  He not a cheque book manager, he's also not a man to put others down to ease the pressure on his own position. On Klopp I can believe he  much to to blame in us keeping hold of players we probably should let go but I just don't see him being the reason for our not spending.

1 hour ago, Agt Provocateur said:

It's a rare occasion when I have to explain a pop culture reference rather than having it explained to me. 

Would you mind explaining that cricket reference too? That may as well have been in Japanese. 

Just now, Bobby Hundreds said:

I think klopp knows how limited his budget is but won't publicly declare he needs players because he doesn't want to shit on the lads he has. If we signed tchoumeni I don't believe we would of signed Darwin. The budget of one went on the other. When we got down to the bare bones I think it was telling that klopp said "I wish FSG would take more risks"that suggests to me Klopp knows and works within the restrictions that have been set but he finds them difficult sometimes.  He not a cheque book manager, he's also not a man to put others down to ease the pressure on his own position. On Klopp I can believe he  much to to blame in us keeping hold of players we probably should let go but I just don't see him being the reason for our not spending.

 

Something I hadn't considered before this pod was the amount of work we do before signing a player and how that correlates with replacing a player. I have said previously that Klopp won't force a player out because he's too sound for his own good but you when consider the process of buying the player in the first place then I'm convinced that Klopp takes any failure (Naby I'm looking at you) as a slight on himself and the wider team. If Naby is shit it's the processes fault and Naby is blameless. Klopp is the smartest guy I know, there is no way he believes Naby is good enough or doesn't need replacing, he will just think he needs to work harder to make up for the mistake of signing him in the first place and honor the contract in the meantime. 

1 hour ago, No2 said:

Would you mind explaining that cricket reference too? That may as well have been in Japanese. 

This time last year (exactly a year today in fact) I suffered from kidney failure caused by kidney stones blocking my right kidney. I had to have 3 operations to get sorted and my already high weight piled on. So I joined a cricket team and lost 4 stones and had a good season. 

Good discussion - particularly about FSG. My take is that they do agree a fairly mean budget with Jurgen but he gets more of a buzz out of achieving success on that basis than he would if he had unlimited funds. As a general approach, he’d prefer to wait for the right player and manage with his existing squad rather than rush to the market and panic buy. He also seems to respect contracts and is loathe to try and force players out. Sometimes  this approach fails ( e.g. last summer) but usually it’s worked for us. 
I really hope that FSG are just selling a slice because there aren’t many benevolent multi- billionaires knocking around and I’m near certain that any new owner will either be sports-washing or will end up being far worse than FSG. 

When Wales knock England out of the WC, I’m expecting Jules on a Podcast Special.  

Enjoyed the podcast, especially the FSG bit.

A lot of points discussed that I’ve made down the years (albeit in a less snidely manner than I do). 

I’ve got to the vets having listened up to what I reckon must roughly be the end of the Real Madrid chat, so will listen to the rest in a bit, but wanted to jump in on the Kelleher chat with 2p worth.

Dan said “why not?” To his own question of should we give him some time in the CL or the odd league game, and for me there’s a very strong answer to why not, in that it’s rare to see such harmony between a group of keepers, to the point where Allison is supportive of Kelleher playing in every game of both domestic cups. That’s presumably a promise made to Kelleher but it also relies on good will from Ali, and taking some of his other games off him too could well erode some of that good will, even though Ali is one of the nicest blokes in the world, obviously.

Also, he’s still a kid in keeper terms and has never been sent on loan yet. I don’t know how long he’s got on his contract but make sure it’s at least 5 years, and start to let him go and play on loan. Build his contract with a load of incentives so if he comes back and starts to play for us, he earns more with game time, and if 2 or 3 years from now Ali is still the best, maybe its time to let him go, but he can and see through a few more years on our books yet still,

5 hours ago, Agt Provocateur said:

 

This time last year (exactly a year today in fact) I suffered from kidney failure caused by kidney stones blocking my right kidney. I had to have 3 operations to get sorted and my already high weight piled on. So I joined a cricket team and lost 4 stones and had a good season. 

Don't think that's what he was asking, Dan!

Think he meant the reference to an umpire talking to the bowler.

6 hours ago, No2 said:

Would you mind explaining that cricket reference too? That may as well have been in Japanese. 

So, when a bowler is coming into bowl he can remove the bails from the stumps if he sees the batsman at the non-striker's end has dragged his bat out of the crease. He would be run out, officially. However, it's the gentlemanly thing to do to mention it to the batsman before actually doing it. "Watch your crease..." 

So not the umpire then. I knew at the time I didn't have a fucking clue what you two were on about. 

"Stupida game"

10 minutes ago, dave u said:

 

Don't think that's what he was asking, Dan!

 

Think he meant the reference to an umpire talking to the bowler.

Ha ha I just gave him rep because the answer was even more confusing than the cricket reference and I couldn't be dealing with that.

When Dan said “no respect to Nottingham Forest, but…” was there even one person listening who didn’t say out loud what Dave and Chris did about us just losing to them? I laughed there. 
 

And a big round of applause to Chris on his soliloquy on FSGs ownership. He said exactly how I feel about them. I hope those comments get as wide an audience as possible as they are important I think. 
 

One thing I think that isn’t touched on much is I reckon there’ll be a lot more money available once all those massive and major infrastructure projects are done by the end of this season. A significant moment I feel. 
 

10 minutes ago, Chris said:

 

So, when a bowler is coming into bowl he can remove the bails from the stumps if he sees the batsman at the non-striker's end has dragged his bat out of the crease. He would be run out, officially. However, it's the gentlemanly thing to do to mention it to the batsman before actually doing it. "Watch your crease..." 

Is the non striker cheating in that scenario? Sounds like it's within the rules but he's risking a bowler doing a sneaky one on him. That goalkeeper was breaking rules 

2 minutes ago, No2 said:

Is the non striker cheating in that scenario? Sounds like it's within the rules but he's risking a bowler doing a sneaky one on him. That goalkeeper was breaking rules 

Definitely not cheating, but you're taking a risk for sure. Not that much different to trying to steal a base in baseball. You want to be getting a decent leap if you're planning a quick single.

7 minutes ago, dave u said:

So not the umpire then. I knew at the time I didn't have a fucking clue what you two were on about. 

 

"Stupida game"

 

Ok, it wasn't a very good analogy from me. What you want from me? Jules is the analogy guy. 

2 minutes ago, Chris said:

 

Definitely not cheating, but you're taking a risk for sure. Not that much different to trying to steal a base in baseball. You want to be getting a decent leap if you're planning a quick single.

I'm out, I'm not this one any time soon, especially as you're throwing baseball in there.

Great pod again. Crikey, Dave and chris said virtually word for word what I think about FSG! Jurgen isnt the type of manager to go spending like a kid in a sweetie shop. I think he prefers to manage a small squad so he can keep all the players happy and grow the loyalty between him the coaching staff and the players.

I just say be careful what you wish for.

8 hours ago, dave u said:

 

I agree, but how much of it is Klopp's choice and how much is it the owners telling him there's no money to spend?

 

So for example, when Lovren left did Klopp choose to wait until he could get the player he wanted (Konate) or did he want to buy someone and was told he couldn't?

 

To me, that was Klopp taking the chance that he had enough cover until he could get who he wanted. Then Virg gets wiped out and the others all go down too. 

 

I don't know though, but that's kind of the point I made on the pod. None of us know if its Klopp's doing or if he's constantly being told he can't spend. My guess it's a bit of both but mostly it has been Klopp not wanting to settle for secondary or tertiary targets.

 

He did that in the early years, but the level of the team wasn't as high then so it's easier. Since we became good all he talks about is how hard it is to find better players than those he has.

He's also made the point that we can't get transfers wrong.

And that makes the most sense to me. FSG, and any business owners worth their salt, hate paying salaries for useless employees.

But to sell is the method, but most peo0le don't seem to understand what that actually means.

They give him a salary budget and of he makes the wrong signings, we're stuck with them until we sell someone to fee up the wages.

Otherwise, their whole business model gets out of hand. And that's how most businesses fail. Too much expenditure on too many commitments.

Enjoyed the listen and agreed with the FSG opinions too. I think we all agree that the purse strings could be loosened a bit more, but as custodians, they have fucked up on numerous occasions, however they have rowed back and apologised every time when called on it. 

Better the devil you know is definitely my sentiment but if they stay and keep the net spend at approx £30m pa, we are in serious danger of drifting out of top 4 and that's even prior to Klopp leaving