Summer Transfer Thread 2015

[JoeBuck]

Good luck Rickie - you deserve a Club that gets the best out of yousse, but that Villa goal and the ensuing celebrations will be always be a rare highlight of an otherwise shite season.

[Ne Moe Imya]

Borini had 392. How fair was that?

 

What is it with this board and the strange cult of Borini that seems to have infected some of its members?

 

Borini is Shite.  With a capital S.  He is nowhere near the quality needed to play for Liverpool.  And no, I'm not talking about the quality needed to play for the dominant Liverpool of the 70's and 80's, I mean that he's not good enough to play for the current Liverpool teams of Brendan Rodgers, the teams that get beat 6-1 by Stoke.

 

"Ooh," they'll go.  "That Rodgers, he's so unfair to poor Borini.  He had a really good season for Sunderland once."  Yes, that brilliant season for Sunderland, how could we all forget?  The season where he scored 4 non-penalty goals while playing almost every single minute for them up front.  What a sensational season that was!

 

I'm sorry, I'm just not having it.  There are, just, so many sticks lying there with which to beat Brendan Rodgers.  Lack of ability to motivate players for big games, atrocious transfers, bizarre favouritism of certain players, etc.  Pick one of them up if you want to beat him.  But please, cease with the "Rodgers is so unfair to Borini" argument.  Borini is rubbish.  He tries sort of hard, but he's just so far short of the quality required it's unreal.

 

To me, Borini will go down in history mostly as the player who we could have inexplicably profited on, but who preferred to sit on the bench (or in the stands) rather than move away from a team he was quite clearly not good enough for.  I have little sympathy for his supposed "harsh treatment."  Let him bugger off to some no-mark Italian club and finish his nondescript career scoring 5 goals a season for them.  You won't catch me shedding any tears.

[Mr T]

What is it with this board and the strange cult of Borini that seems to have infected some of its members?

 

Borini is Shite.  With a capital S.  He is nowhere near the quality needed to play for Liverpool.  And no, I'm not talking about the quality needed to play for the dominant Liverpool of the 70's and 80's, I mean that he's not good enough to play for the current Liverpool teams of Brendan Rodgers, the teams that get beat 6-1 by Stoke.

 

"Ooh," they'll go.  "That Rodgers, he's so unfair to poor Borini.  He had a really good season for Sunderland once."  Yes, that brilliant season for Sunderland, how could we all forget?  The season where he scored 4 non-penalty goals while playing almost every single minute for them up front.  What a sensational season that was!

 

I'm sorry, I'm just not having it.  There are, just, so many sticks lying there with which to beat Brendan Rodgers.  Lack of ability to motivate players for big games, atrocious transfers, bizarre favouritism of certain players, etc.  Pick one of them up if you want to beat him.  But please, cease with the "Rodgers is so unfair to Borini" argument.  Borini is rubbish.  He tries sort of hard, but he's just so far short of the quality required it's unreal.

 

To me, Borini will go down in history mostly as the player who we could have inexplicably profited on, but who preferred to sit on the bench (or in the stands) rather than move away from a team he was quite clearly not good enough for.  I have little sympathy for his supposed "harsh treatment."  Let him bugger off to some no-mark Italian club and finish his nondescript career scoring 5 goals a season for them.  You won't catch me shedding any tears.

 

Sunderland wanted to buy him for something like 14M so they must have been reasonably happy with his output. However, I agree with you on the whole but I think the thing about the minutes Borini got and why it comes across as unfair is that Rodgers signed the guy (without a doubt) and he said Borini would 'excite the fans'. Yet he didn't even give him a chance to produce, 

 

He knew Borini, he had worked with him in the past. Rodgers chose to use the resources and importantly the time of his first transfer window to bring Borini in. Last year even with one of the worst strike force returns ever known to our club he didn't trust Borini to help out. That says a lot about Rodgers: a) judgement of player's attributes and suitability for us; b.) character.. for giving players a fair go when he has bigged them up and brought them in.

[The Maca]

I like lambert. Would have liked him to stay and be a squad player. I'd have him over gobshites like borini and balotelli all day

[Red House]

Lambert was shite for us. He did as much running as Balotelli, and even Borini put in far more of a shift (a bit too much at times) than Lambert ever did us for us. He just gets away with it for some reason because of the boyhood fan shite but the truth is he never showed anywhere near the sort of passion on the pitch as he's been talking about in interviews. In fact, he constantly drove me crazy with the amount of times he got caught offside just because he was too fucking lazy to get back in an onside position. And, for a striker who was meant to be good in the air, he was pretty crap at that too. Good riddance.

[billypilgrimnz]

the plan was to bring him on when were 2-3 nil up and he d get a goal or 2.

 

Problem was we were bringing him on but we weren't 2-3 up.

 

Problem with that strategy is 80% of our squad is more suited for coming on after we a 2-3 up than actually PUTTING us 2-3 up.

 

Even putting that aside, it's ridiculous to actively buy strikers that you don't trust to lead the line in the event of other strikers being out. A decent striker who can do a job of leading the line in the face of injuries is also more likely to be able to come on for the last 10 minutes and maybe score than some old, slow, immobile sentimental purchase.

[The Maca]

Lambert cost 4m and we are getting 3m back

Borini cost 9m and we will lose most of it

Balotelli cost 16m and we will lose all of it

 

He wasn't shite. He wasn't given an opportunity. If he was given starlings game time he would have scored more than 8 goals last season.

Watch the video of villa away - he showed passion mate

[Turkish Delight]

I always thought we bought Lambert for when we were chasing games rather than already winning them. The Plan B to play against packed defences and all that.

 

The problem was that when he came on we'd still carry on with the short passing game that he didn't have the ability or pace to do well at. I think that selling him is the right decision but he really was symptomatic of the buying policy of signing players and then not utilising their strengths.

 

I imagine he will do fairly well for Pulis.

 

[Russ Atmosphere]

I always thought we bought Lambert for when we were chasing games rather than already winning them. The Plan B to play against packed defences and all that.The problem was that when he came on we'd still carry on with the short passing game that he didn't have the ability or pace to do well at. I think that selling him is the right decision but he really was symptomatic of the buying policy of signing players and then not utilising their strengths.I imagine he will do fairly well for Pulis.

Which is why we've just bought the short-passing maestro from Aston Villa.

[RazorBack]

We bought Lambert becase our management is clueless. The same reason we bought Benteke. They're clueless. Neither is as bad as people are saying but we don't know how to use striker who don't know what to do already themselves (like Suarez, Sturridge). Mandžukić is a better player than Benteke and he didn't work out in Atletico. And he's a hard worker, just the likes that Diego Simeone wants. We should've gotten the ones they did. Vietto or Martinez or both and we spent evene more on Benteke than what Martinez cost. And he'd come here for 120k per week. So would Vietto. 

[eeyore]

I'm going to be outright amazed if benteke is anything other than a spectacular car crash

[thompsonsnose]

Lambert, ok player, poorly managed.

[El Rojo]

Borini had 392. How fair was that?

 

Completely unfair on everybody.

 

392 minutes too much.

 

And Rodgers should be caned 392 times for buying him and describing him as 'a real exciting one for the club. He will be terrific, I'm sure. And the supporters will absolutely love him.'

[an tha]

Must have been a sickener for all our strikers sitting watching a non striker who was a shite finisher play up front for most of last season whilst you got a few minutes here and there.

[Boss]

We bought Lambert becase our management is clueless. The same reason we bought Benteke. They're clueless. Neither is as bad as people are saying but we don't know how to use striker who don't know what to do already themselves (like Suarez, Sturridge). Mandžukić is a better player than Benteke and he didn't work out in Atletico. And he's a hard worker, just the likes that Diego Simeone wants. We should've gotten the ones they did. Vietto or Martinez or both and we spent evene more on Benteke than what Martinez cost. And he'd come here for 120k per week. So would Vietto. 

 

I agree, when Rodgers was talking about what Benteke would bring to the club he kept talking about the amount of goals he scored for Villa and the fact he was 4th-5th top scorer in the premier league in the last three years, no analysis on how we'd play him or why we bought him barre some vague reference to counter attack (i don't know about anyone else but usually when i hear counter attack i think pace).

 

Anyone can look at a goal statistic and sign a player, you think he'd learn after seeing target men like Lambert, Carroll and Balotelli fail but he doesn't seem to grasp it. The strikers that make it here are all quick players, with great movement off the ball, good skill, ability to play fast interchange football, clinical finishing and the ability to make runs off the last man. Someone like Lacazette, Vietto, Theo Walcott and Aubameyang, they'd all make it here because they have all those attributes and would compliment the likes of Coutinho, Firmino and Lallana behind them.

 

Signing big battering rams doesn't work, not because the player is shit, just because we're constantly playing to their worst attributes and it exposes their limitations. Benteke will have to be an incredible player to be able to play both styles fluently to the levels expected of him. I wouldn't be surprised if Benteke ends up on the bench within 8 games and Ings becomes our main striker in Sturridge's absence, at which point Brendan needs to fuck off.

[Einch]

Counter attack eh? You need to be able to defend and move the ball quickly. We look like we will concede almost every time we are under a bit of pressure. I hope there is more of a plan than that.

[The Maca]

Boss

That's bullshit. You can't compare benteke to Carroll lambert and balotelli. How is he a battering ram?

You call balotelli a target man ? Have you watched football ?

Benteke will be boss this season and if you think he is just a big battering ram you are wrong

[whistler]

I think Markovic was our best player in that position last season, despite the fact he just shouldn't be playing there.

 

That would mean that the lambasted Markovic wasn't doing too bad a job being played out of position. This just doesn't compute!

[Boss]

Boss

That's bullshit. You can't compare benteke to Carroll lambert and balotelli. How is he a battering ram?

You call balotelli a target man ? Have you watched football ?

Benteke will be boss this season and if you think he is just a big battering ram you are wrong

 

I have my reservations, i hope you're right obviously but i can't see it myself. Balotelli was a target man for us, that's what i meant. He couldn't play the kind of football that's required from our strikers, he couldn't time his runs or use his pace to stretch defences. He played like a big man, coming short to receive the ball and using his strength to hold the ball up before getting fouled, which was about 90% of his game here. The other 10% being, shooting at 35 yards into row Z and mouthing off at players.

[El Dangerous]

I'll never begrudge us signing Lambert as 4th choice striker. Football should have enough room in it for that kind of transfer. Sure it didn't work out but I've got more of a problem with us not signing 2 quality forwards to replace Suarez than us signing a shit 4th choice.

[ben48]

Lambert scores two on West Brom debut,good eh!

[magicrat]

Boss

That's bullshit. You can't compare benteke to Carroll lambert and balotelli. How is he a battering ram?

You call balotelli a target man ? Have you watched football ?

Benteke will be boss this season and if you think he is just a big battering ram you are wrong

 

You can't know Benteke will pull up any trees for us this season. It's fair to say he is going to be better than Lambert and Balotelli but they set the bar incredibly low.

It's a big gamble that he'll settle down and fit into the system . Our defense concerns me much more than Benteke

[Saintslfc13]

I agree, when Rodgers was talking about what Benteke would bring to the club he kept talking about the amount of goals he scored for Villa and the fact he was 4th-5th top scorer in the premier league in the last three years, no analysis on how we'd play him or why we bought him barre some vague reference to counter attack (i don't know about anyone else but usually when i hear counter attack i think pace).

 

Anyone can look at a goal statistic and sign a player, you think he'd learn after seeing target men like Lambert, Carroll and Balotelli fail but he doesn't seem to grasp it. The strikers that make it here are all quick players, with great movement off the ball, good skill, ability to play fast interchange football, clinical finishing and the ability to make runs off the last man. Someone like Lacazette, Vietto, Theo Walcott and Aubameyang, they'd all make it here because they have all those attributes and would compliment the likes of Coutinho, Firmino and Lallana behind them.

 

Signing big battering rams doesn't work, not because the player is shit, just because we're constantly playing to their worst attributes and it exposes their limitations. Benteke will have to be an incredible player to be able to play both styles fluently to the levels expected of him. I wouldn't be surprised if Benteke ends up on the bench within 8 games and Ings becomes our main striker in Sturridge's absence, at which point Brendan needs to fuck off.

 

Spot on. Like everyone I hope Benteke can make it and the fact we all think of him as mainly a target man could be down to the fact that he didn't play for a team that plays like us. My main issue with his signing is that for the money we spent there were options out there that appear to suit us better as well as appear to have more potential upside and more versatility* on the pitch. Another problem I have with this signing is the same one we have with Balotelli in that for me Benteke is always going to need a partner next to him to maximize his effectiveness, again I hope he proves me wrong and that could just be down to Villa's style but I've not really seen much evidence to the contrary (I don't watch much of Belgium though so there's that). I have read some positive things about him being more than just a big man though so let's hope those people are right in their opinions and observations.

 

On the point of stats, whilst I'm not against using stats to justify purchases I think they have to be used in context. For example it's all well and good saying Benteke scored x amount of goals in a weaker team but if that weaker team doesn't play our style then you've only really seen what he can do in a style that's irrelevant to LFC. I'd like to think Rodgers, Gordon, et al factor things like that in when using statistics as scouting tools but signings like this point to the contrary. Transfers are all a bit of a crapshoot but we have to maximize our chances of a player fitting in here by either target players that play in teams that have a similar strategical and tactial approach as our own or targeting players that clearly show the attributes we want for our approach to the game despite being in a team that doesn't play how we do. So far our scouting team and/or Rodgers seem to value "premier league experience" over factors such as I've mentioned above and I think they may have done the same with Benteke.

 

* - Under Rodgers versatility is a double edged sword unfortunately because he's shown that he'll consistently use a versatile player out of his preferred position in hopes that a player he personally seems to prefer gets it together in that position for lengths of time then write the versatile player off as a result of him not always performing at his peak when in his non-preferred role.

 

I know he's not the most popular player on here by a long shot but I think Markovic is a prime example of this. He'd do alright as a wingback for some games, then be shown up as "not really a wingback" against good oppostion. Then when played in his preferred position for the first time in a while he would get hooked at half-time despite him, in my opinion at least, being one of our more positive players on the pitch usually because someone else fucked up in another area of the team and Rodgers chose Markovic to sacrifice in order for a Lucas or a Toure to come on and help the defense.

 

Edit so I don't have to make a whole new post - Another thing on the point of statistics. I do find myself wondering if our management actually analyze our own team statistically as well for anything other than justifying contract offers. A case in point is the whole DM furor we're all well annoyed with, it's pretty clear to most, even people that don't think he's very good that Lucas has a positive impact on our defense and thus us winning or at the worst not losing when played. Most of us know injuries have fucked Lucas and that he therefore cannot be counted on for a full season because he doesn't have the legs for it and he's more likely be injured again at some point. If we were doing some self-reflecting statistically then the only logical conclusion for the staff to make is that we need a DM to make sure our defense doesn't go to shit when our only experienced one isn't available. I know we have Can, but leaving Can as our only cover for Lucas (or vice versa as the case may be) is just plain stupid at this point. He's young, didn't play much in his preferred position and for some likes to get forward a bit too much to be the main option at DM. It can also be argued he has injury concerns as well.

[Paulie Dangerously]

What's this about Sakho asking to leave? Any ITK give an ITK opinion?

[Grinch]

He's threw a strop before when not In the team.  Wouldn't surprise me if Lovren starts the season ahead of him.

 

You couldn't blame Sakho either.  There's zero excuse for that fucking clown even making our bench.