Merson: Liverpool could drop to fourth this season without reinforcements 

I'd be absolutely shocked if United or Chelsea got anywhere near us.

6 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Pundits are a joke now, it's largely due to the proliferation of click-bait 'journalism'. It's designed to get shared on social media and create arguments rather than debate. 

This is why all the "PC gone mad" hysteria prior to the announcement of Sky's new Saturday line-up was so laughable.  It's not as if they were getting rid of skilled professionals from a job only skilled professionals could do. Any mug can sit there and spout barely-informed bollocks, so the world won't end if the next mug in the chair is black or a woman. 

24 minutes ago, an tha said:

I'd be surprised to see us finish 4th but let's face it 2nd, 3rd or 4th is the same really....only 1st matters.

 

Worries me massively only having the 3 senior centre halves given Matip's injury record - i know some point to Fabinho playing there, but him doing so weakens our midfield options and i am never a fan of shoehorning in players to play out of position.

 

It feels a bit risky and unnecessarily so IMO.

i agree only 1st that matters, but merson isn't really saying that is he, he's saying no investment will mean we finish 4th. he even mentions how fucked we will be if we lose our full backs, not even considering we've actually bought a back up one! 

i know what you're saying about the 4th choice centre back. personally i think it swings both ways. i am not really into buying random squad players like that greek fella we had years ago who's name escapes me. i think fabinho at centre back is probably better than just about anyone we could bring in as 4th choice. You're right it weakens us in midfield, but Jones will contribute more than lallana last year, milner won't get pulled into full back jobs as we have 2 for both position, so it's less of an issue if henderson or gini play the 6 for me - and who knows we may get thiago yet. that's not to say i wouldn't be interested if we were to buy someone good who could keep gomez and matip out of the team, but i think fabinho would be a better choice than picking up this years equivalent of steven caulker.  

10 minutes ago, RobbieOR said:

I'd be absolutely shocked if United or Chelsea got anywhere near us.

Both these clubs for some reason seem to be regarded as the Crown jewels by most of these idiots who hold them both in far higher esteem than the facts support, there always seems to be genuine astonishment when they get turfed out of European competitions for instance.

Would genuinely be interested to know what foreign pundits and fans think about them, arsenal and spurs. Not much I suspect.

3 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

i agree only 1st that matters, but merson isn't really saying that is he, he's saying no investment will mean we finish 4th. he even mentions how fucked we will be if we lose our full backs, not even considering we've actually bought a back up one! 

 

i know what you're saying about the 4th choice centre back. personally i think it swings both ways. i am not really into buying random squad players like that greek fella we had years ago who's name escapes me. i think fabinho at centre back is probably better than just about anyone we could bring in as 4th choice. You're right it weakens us in midfield, but Jones will contribute more than lallana last year, milner won't get pulled into full back jobs as we have 2 for both position, so it's less of an issue if henderson or gini play the 6 for me - and who knows we may get thiago yet. that's not to say i wouldn't be interested if we were to buy someone good who could keep gomez and matip out of the team, but i think fabinho would be a better choice than picking up this years equivalent of steven caulker.  

Fair.....Gomez is not exactly what i would call dead reliable either though.

We may get away with it - me personally would like to see someone brought in.

Feels to me that if we did and if we had better forward cover we would be set really fair.

3 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Both these clubs for some reason seem to be regarded as the Crown jewels by most of these idiots who hold them both in far higher esteem than the facts support, there always seems to be genuine astonishment when they get turfed out of European competitions for instance.

 

Would genuinely be interested to know what foreign pundits and fans think about them, arsenal and spurs. Not much I suspect.

Chelsea is in part because of who manages them despite looking like a Liverpool 2013/14 tribute band. United are the same but they're always going to be completely overrated because of who they are and the interest they generate but in reality they both have poor managers spending money on good players in positions they don't need. We had a great forward lime but needed a spine. Klopp bought that spine. Both of those teams have good forwards but seem to be buying more good forwards. That'll be the difference at the end of the season.

Hope everyone else keeps underestimating us too.

Its a little bit similar to United under Ferguson, whereby every year it would be 'someone else's year' - whether that someone else was us or others like Arsenal/Newcastle/Leeds etc. But come the end of the season the points were still on the board, and United more often than not were coming out on top regardless of the summer activity.

Quoting from the below: "Liverpool have at last completed the transfer of Senegal striker El-Hadji Diouf ... The club wanted to tie-up the deal with his former team Lens before the end of the World Cup, suspecting that his price might go through the roof after a successful tournament ... Diouf, who made the World Cup All-Star team after helping Senegal progress to the quarterfinals, met his new team-mates at Melwood for his first training session this morning."

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2002/jul/16/newsstory.sport8

That was the summer we were bigged up for signing Diao, Diouf, Alou Diarra and Bruno Cheyrou. All very well regarded young players. Worked out well for us then, didn't it? The odds are far more in the favour of our tried-and-tested recipe continuing than these complete squad overhauls at other clubs bearing fruit.

42 minutes ago, an tha said:

Fair.....Gomez is not exactly what i would call dead reliable either though.

 

We may get away with it - me personally would like to see someone brought in.

 

Feels to me that if we did and if we had better forward cover we would be set really fair.

gomez is not reliable - for sure he will pick up injuries. i think if we don't sign a centre back we will 100% see fabinho start games there this season. there's just no evidence on the fitness of matip and gomez to suggest otherwise. but i can deal with fabinho playing there say 5 or less times. Then if it's only that number, would a 4th choice be beneficial? And if it was long term, say a run of 10 or 12 games, would you want a pretty limited centre back playing 12 matches? It's a gamble whichever way we do it I think, but klopp has shown pretty capable of managing these types of situations in the squad. 

As for the forward cover, the word you use "better" is key for me. Assuming Minamino can do some type of job covering firmino, we maybe just need someone with a bit of pace to cover the other 2. Origi we know what he offers and it's not great, but I don't see us doing anything there unless we sell Divvie. If we were to do something there without selling him, surely we'd have gone for Werner. I agree though, someone with a bit more hunger than origi is what we need as backup to salah and mane.  

41 minutes ago, RobbieOR said:

 

Chelsea is in part because of who manages them despite looking like a Liverpool 2013/14 tribute band. United are the same but they're always going to be completely overrated because of who they are and the interest they generate but in reality they both have poor managers spending money on good players in positions they don't need. We had a great forward lime but needed a spine. Klopp bought that spine. Both of those teams have good forwards but seem to be buying more good forwards. That'll be the difference at the end of the season.

Chelsea have brought in Thiago Silva - I know he's old, but he will bring know how. And they've brought in Chilwell. The midfield 2 they had out on Monday of Jorginho and Kante is pretty decent combo defensively. I think you are underestimating what they have done in the window to be honest.  

2 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

gomez is not reliable - for sure he will pick up injuries. i think if we don't sign a centre back we will 100% see fabinho start games there this season. there's just no evidence on the fitness of matip and gomez to suggest otherwise. but i can deal with fabinho playing there say 5 or less times. Then if it's only that number, would a 4th choice be beneficial? And if it was long term, say a run of 10 or 12 games, would you want a pretty limited centre back playing 12 matches? It's a gamble whichever way we do it I think, but klopp has shown pretty capable of managing these types of situations in the squad. 

 

As for the forward cover, the word you use "better" is key for me. Assuming Minamino can do some type of job covering firmino, we maybe just need someone with a bit of pace to cover the other 2. Origi we know what he offers and it's not great, but I don't see us doing anything there unless we sell Divvie. If we were to do something there without selling him, surely we'd have gone for Werner. I agree though, someone with a bit more hunger than origi is what we need as backup to salah and mane.  

 

Chelsea have brought in Thiago Silva - I know he's old, but he will bring know how. And they've brought in Chilwell. The midfield 2 they had out on Monday of Jorginho and Kante is pretty decent combo defensively. I think you are underestimating what they have done in the window to be honest.  

The forwards on paper are an improvement on what they had obviously but they'll still be all over the place. Buying 5 good players is not really a guarantee to success unless you can manage them properly and I don't think they have that under Lampard.  

Just now, RobbieOR said:

 

The forwards on paper are an improvement on what they had obviously but they'll still be all over the place. Buying 5 good players is not really a guarantee to success unless you can manage them properly and I don't think they have that under Lampard.  

i am not saying lampard is coach of the year or anything and it is tough bringing in so many players. but the kids did well enough last year that they don't have to drop them all in in 1 go. and from a defensive organisation perspective, that's what Silva should help bring. I am not saying they're going to be amazing, but I wouldn't rule it out either. By any measurement they've bought well and every player they've bought is an improvement on the player who filled the shirt last year. 

I hate saying it and i hope i am wrong but i think Chelsea are real title challengers....the kids they have will all come on this season - they have added real quality and in Pulisic they have a real potential superstar, i think he is and will be that good.

It'll be a lot close this year with probably four sides topping 80 points. We just have to make sure we're the one that tops 90. 

7 hours ago, Alex_K said:

We'll win the league by 10 points. The team will be stronger this season than ever before. People still seem not to have clocked that this City side are hugely on the wane. Last season was not a freak.

Not sure about 10 points but am surprised that I never see any real journalistic interest in City's dreadful effort last season. It seems to be basically shrugged off by Laporte, bad luck and dipping after a couple of excellent years. I have not seen any analysis of them losing a lot of their best players pretty quickly. Any side would miss Kompany, Fernandinho, Silva and Sane, with Aguero ageing and getting injured regularly. None of the newbies have yet come close to what those guys offered.

34 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Not sure about 10 points but am surprised that I never see any real journalistic interest in City's dreadful effort last season. It seems to be basically shrugged off by Laporte, bad luck and dipping after a couple of excellent years. I have not seen any analysis of them losing a lot of their best players pretty quickly. Any side would miss Kompany, Fernandinho, Silva and Sane, with Aguero ageing and getting injured regularly. None of the newbies have yet come close to what those guys offered.

Well, we won last season by 18 points, and that's after basically throwing the towel in from the Palace game onwards with 7 fixtures to play.

So there are a couple of ways of looking at it. Was it a freak points tally from ourselves, never-to-be-performed again? 97 points the season before suggests not - our consistency puts us in that realm, not a freak run of results. OK - so has our squad aged or diminished to suggest we can't hit the 90s three times on the trot? Not at all - quite the opposite. The majority of the side should be hitting their prime. Others are years from it.

Well then, could City match it? I mean they could, sure, having shown the ability to hit late 90s before. But has their squad aged or diminished? Well yes, far more than ours. Half the starting 11 from their 100 pts season are either not at the club (Kompany; Silva; Sane) or riddled with age/injuries beyond recognition - that is if they can even get on the pitch (Aguero; Fernandinho - even Otamendi with 34 league appearances that season).

I'll call it "Firmino Syndrome" - it was well-evident that Bobby hasn't been scoring for going on 2 years now but it was actually when he was statistically at his worst that everyone took on the mantle of praising him as our most vital player. Now all of a sudden its flipped right the other way with people falling over themselves to criticise. I suspect we'll see a similar lurch in perspective on City, where the bandwagon goes from "wow, what a deep and star studded squad" to "actually, this team of mostly-old-men is pretty fucked for the style of football Guardiola wants from them". I just don't see how with this squad they vastly improve on last season's efforts. Let's watch.

16 minutes ago, Alex_K said:

Well, we won last season by 18 points, and that's after basically throwing the towel in from the Palace game onwards with 7 fixtures to play.

 

So there are a couple of ways of looking at it. Was it a freak points tally from ourselves, never-to-be-performed again? 97 points the season before suggests not - our consistency puts us in that realm, not a freak run of results. OK - so has our squad aged or diminished to suggest we can't hit the 90s three times on the trot? Not at all - quite the opposite. The majority of the side should be hitting their prime. Others are years from it.

 

Well then, could City match it? I mean they could, sure, having shown the ability to hit late 90s before. But has their squad aged or diminished? Well yes, far more than ours. Half the starting 11 from their 100 pts season are either not at the club (Kompany; Silva; Sane) or riddled with age/injuries beyond recognition - that is if they can even get on the pitch (Aguero; Fernandinho - even Otamendi with 34 league appearances that season).

 

I'll call it "Firmino Syndrome" - it was well-evident that Bobby hasn't been scoring for going on 2 years now but it was actually when he was statistically at his worst that everyone took on the mantle of praising him as our most vital player. Now all of a sudden its flipped right the other way with people falling over themselves to criticise. I suspect we'll see a similar lurch in perspective on City, where the bandwagon goes from "wow, what a deep and star studded squad" to "actually, this team of mostly-old-men is pretty fucked for the style of football Guardiola wants from them". I just don't see how with this squad they vastly improve on last season's efforts. Let's watch.

 

Excellent post that , its like it's been forgotten how good we were last season and city couldn't get near us because they had an off season 

It's gonna be a really unpredictable season this for all the big sides. At the back end of last season I think a lot of sides were in shell shock with everyone involved just trying to make it to the end.

But we may not realistically have crowds back in stadia for the rest of the season and that will have a massive impact on the concept of home and away, as well as 'smaller' teams feeling overrawed.

I reckon that's why Leeds were so at it against us, they didn't give a fuck as there was no crowd, not atmosphere, no reason to be afraid, just 11 lads vs 11 lads. May as well have been down the park.

A lot of games this season will come down to who just wants it the most, there'll be some mad results and a lot of the big sides who are considered a 'scalp' will be in for some rough rides.

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

It's gonna be a really unpredictable season this for all the big sides. At the back end of last season I think a lot of sides were in shell shock with everyone involved just trying to make it to the end.

 

But we may not realistically have crowds back in stadia for the rest of the season and that will have a massive impact on the concept of home and away, as well as 'smaller' teams feeling overrawed.

 

I reckon that's why Leeds were so at it against us, they didn't give a fuck as there was no crowd, not atmosphere, no reason to be afraid, just 11 lads vs 11 lads. May as well have been down the park.

 

A lot of games this season will come down to who just wants it the most, there'll be some mad results and a lot of the big sides who are considered a 'scalp' will be in for some rough rides.

That works both ways though. The tougher away games won't be as tough. 

The lack of atmosphere is my biggest worry.  I can see a few of the games we won at the death last season ending in draws. But bearing in mind we got to 99 even with us coasting the last seven games I see no reason why we shouldn't top 90 even in empty stadiums. 

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

It's gonna be a really unpredictable season this for all the big sides. At the back end of last season I think a lot of sides were in shell shock with everyone involved just trying to make it to the end.

 

But we may not realistically have crowds back in stadia for the rest of the season and that will have a massive impact on the concept of home and away, as well as 'smaller' teams feeling overrawed.

 

I reckon that's why Leeds were so at it against us, they didn't give a fuck as there was no crowd, not atmosphere, no reason to be afraid, just 11 lads vs 11 lads. May as well have been down the park.

 

A lot of games this season will come down to who just wants it the most, there'll be some mad results and a lot of the big sides who are considered a 'scalp' will be in for some rough rides.

• Liverpool 3-Wigan 2 (08/09)
• Norwich 3-Man City 2 (19/20)
• West Ham 3-Arsenal 2 (05/06)
• Burnley 1-Man United 0 (08/09)
• West Brom 3-Arsenal 2 (10/11)

All of the above being promoted teams either beating eventual title winners /2nd place teams, or running them close in harum-scarum high scoring games. Those are just a few examples - am sure there's a number more. Wouldn't read anything into that Leeds game - certainly wouldn't assume its indicative of some new trend when its not really that unusual. We'll see where we are by October.

Literally the easiest opinion a pundit could have. "They haven't spent in two summers, I think that might cost them, you know". Pure genius there. 

2 hours ago, Alex_K said:

• Liverpool 3-Wigan 2 (08/09)
• Norwich 3-Man City 2 (19/20)
• West Ham 3-Arsenal 2 (05/06)
• Burnley 1-Man United 0 (08/09)
• West Brom 3-Arsenal 2 (10/11)

All of the above being promoted teams either beating eventual title winners /2nd place teams, or running them close in harum-scarum high scoring games. Those are just a few examples - am sure there's a number more. Wouldn't read anything into that Leeds game - certainly wouldn't assume its indicative of some new trend when its not really that unusual. We'll see where we are by October.

November is the new October!

We opened the season last year with a home game against the team that won the Championship and scored four times against them.

Big difference was that whereas Norwich only scored once, they probably could have scored three as I recall, and Leeds scored with all three shots they had.

Given what happened to Norwich, I’d be more worried if I were a Leeds fan than we should be about our team.

I think we could have bought a couple of players, maybe even should have bought players, but although we have, currently, only bought one, I will give Klopp the benefit of any doubt regarding what he can continue to get out of the squad and his ability to make them go again.

18 points at a canter is going to have to take some serious dropping off on our part, and serious improvement by one of the challengers, to stop us winning it again.

Few will recall what Merson has to say should we be top in May next year.

The biggest drop from one season to next i can recall recently is Chelsea...won title in 15 with 87 pts, finished 10th in 16 with 50.

We're doomed.