January 2019 Transfer Thread

[thegreatelephant]

36 minutes ago, Ne Moe Imya said:

You think it's hypocritical to say "we will sell to other clubs when they want to be dumb, but we don't want to be dumb ourselves"?

 

Because I think it's brilliant. One of the easiest ways for us to compete with the clubs who have more money than us is to figure out edges in the market, and one of the most obvious is to reduce injuries. You reduce injuries 1)by training smarter and 2)by buying fewer players with a history of the kind of injuries that increase the odds of future injuries.

 

did I say Southampton were dumb? they got a quality player, probably their best chance of staying up. we get big money, which i said was good.

 

we have not yet got Fekir, a player Klopp wanted over trying to low-ball once more. in my opinion, that is dumb. not having a target is not brilliant. i'd have preferred the player here as would Klopp probably. i'd argue he couldn't give a monkey's about using the logic you have shoehorned in to make your point. compelling as it is.

 

you stick to your view which is fine. i'll stick to mine.

 

 

 

[Captain]

I'm not sure the funds were available for both Fekir and Becker. And if they weren't, we did the right deal.

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, RobbieOR said:

I'd be surprised if we signed anybody. 

Not a chance we'll sign anyone, which is a shame as 2 or 3 additions we'd have a good squad capable of  competing in multiple competitions  

[Pidge]

1 hour ago, thegreatelephant said:

we then proceeded to want top dollar for Ings with his worse knee injury record which struck me as hypocritical.

 

I'm sure the club would argue that Ings' injury has been correctly rehabilitated, something we disagreed on with Fekir.

[Carvalho Diablo]

I've watched Fekir a fair bit since we've been linked, but although he definitely possesses the wicked free kicks, long strikes and creativity which our midfield lacks, I'm still not convinced tbh. Not so much with the lad's injury history but rather by his relative lack of pace, fitness, sharpness. Not at all certain that Fekir is suited to the PL and far from convinced that he'd cunt the mustard in Kloppo's gonzo pressing machine.

[Bjornebye]

29 minutes ago, Carvalho Diablo said:

I've watched Fekir a fair bit since we've been linked, but although he definitely possesses the wicked free kicks, long strikes and creativity which our midfield lacks, I'm still not convinced tbh. Not so much with the lad's injury history but rather by his relative lack of pace, fitness, sharpness. Not at all certain that Fekir is suited to the PL and far from convinced that he'd cunt the mustard in Kloppo's gonzo pressing machine.

I don't get why everyone is so worked up about him either. decent enough played yes but if it was him or Alisson then we have defo got the right man. By a country fucking mile. 

[TheHowieLama]

THE BENCH!!

[Barrington Womble]

9 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

I don't get why everyone is so worked up about him either. decent enough played yes but if it was him or Alisson then we have defo got the right man. By a country fucking mile. 

If we wanted fekir, it suggests we knew we were short in that position and we've not really filled the gap. Alisson is doing great, but considering how much money we raise from selling players, from champions league runs etc, I don't think it's too unreasonable to think we could have done both positions. 

[skend04]

We need a creative player in midfield, someone to link up with the forwards, it's a pretty glaring hole. Whether we'll buy him or not in January is another thing.

[JustTosh]

13 hours ago, Captain said:

I'm not sure the funds were available for both Fekir and Becker. And if they weren't, we did the right deal.

Hi.

 

That's exactly my thoughts. Kloppo initially wanted to stick with Karius. Got his sense back ant brought in Allison. No funds available for Fekir.

 

 

 

 

[sh#t waffle]

Is it worth giving Alisson a try in the midfield three? We've been sorely lacking in superfluous Cruyff turns since Lallana got crocked.

[magicrat]

15 hours ago, Barry Wom said:

Not a chance we'll sign anyone, which is a shame as 2 or 3 additions we'd have a good squad capable of  competing in multiple competitions  

Seems to be a recurring theme at every transfer window. Owners just not quite ballsy enough with the budget. Fekir a good example

[JagSquared]

5 minutes ago, magicrat said:

Seems to be a recurring theme at every transfer window. Owners just not quite ballsy enough with the budget. Fekir a good example

To be fair 2-3 for a good squad is a great improvement on 2-3 for a good first team.

 

its prob been slower than I would have liked but we are getting there.

[El Rojo]

13 minutes ago, magicrat said:

Seems to be a recurring theme at every transfer window. Owners just not quite ballsy enough with the budget. Fekir a good example

Compare our starting line up and bench now to Klopp’s first game in charge, though. Notwithstanding the Coutinho-shaped hole behind the front three, a lot of great, sensible work has been done. We’re better everywhere (again, Coutinho’s position excepted). 

[Joey8FrogsLegs]

18 hours ago, thegreatelephant said:

 

did I say Southampton were dumb? they got a quality player, probably their best chance of staying up. we get big money, which i said was good.

 

we have not yet got Fekir, a player Klopp wanted over trying to low-ball once more. in my opinion, that is dumb. not having a target is not brilliant. i'd have preferred the player here as would Klopp probably. i'd argue he couldn't give a monkey's about using the logic you have shoehorned in to make your point. compelling as it is.

 

you stick to your view which is fine. i'll stick to mine.

 

 

 

 

If the club, including Klopp, decide not to go through and pay a very high fee due to the medical record/state of a player, then I’m not only fine with it, I’m very happy about it. In my view that’s acting in a responsible way.

 

The above being my general view, on the specific case of Fekir I don’t have the required information, nor the medical knowledge probably, to hold a qualified opinion.

[RobbieOR]

We'd have signed both if Fekir's knee wasn't dodgy. Fairly convinced of that. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Owners not ballsy enough with transfers kitty? Not got a good squad. Fucking hell, boys. You’re taking the piss. 

[LF:D]

Think people are being a tad rash in judging our team this season, in terms of creativity.  

 

Lots of craving for Fekir, or regretting not getting him in the summer.  But even if Fekir (or a different creative player) did sign in the summer.  It's unlikely Klopp would have started them against City, Napoli or Chelsea anyway.

 

He's not starting Fabinho, Shaqiri or Keita.  He's didn't start Robertson or Ox, for a fair while after they joined too.

 

To play in our front six, you really have to adjust to our intensity & Klopp needs to trust those players defensively.  He tried Shaqiri in the No 10 position a few weeks ago against Southampton.  He looked boss in possession.  But without the ball we looked vulnerable & he changed it at half time.  

 

In these big games, it seems to me he doesn't trust Fabinho, Keita or Shaqiri without the ball - yet.  We've seen glimpses why, such as Keita's defending vs Hazard's goal in the league cup or stats showing how often he's been beaten by opposition players or lapses of concentration.  

 

People can moan about our lack of creativity in CM.  But against the top sides Klopp is going to want to trust the midfield defensively & that's why Henderson, Milner & Wijnaldum have been playing.  A clean sheet vs the Champions, smashing PSG, a draw vs Chelsea & nearly a draw at Napoli (poor performance all round) - shows without the ball we're very good in that CM area.

 

I expect Keita, Fabinho & Shaqiri will be seen more, just like Ox & Robertson were last season & I think that's the time to judge our CM creativity.  If we had Fekir, I don't think he'd have started those games.  We could sign someone in January, but they won't start immediately either, they'd need to adapt.

 

Lallana staying fit is probably our best answer until Keita & Shaqiri can be trusted more without the ball. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 minutes ago, LF:D said:

Think people are being a tad rash in judging our team this season, in terms of creativity.  

 

Lots of craving for Fekir, or regretting not getting him in the summer.  But even if Fekir (or a different creative player) did sign in the summer.  It's unlikely Klopp would have started them against City, Napoli or Chelsea anyway.

 

Why not? He did with Mane, Salah, Alisson and Van Dijk. In fact, he did with Keita too. I would suggest what he does is looks at the player and sees how they adapt, how much they're needed, etc. Then he can make a decision on how quickly to introduce them. Keita showed that he isn't quite up to it tactically, so then it was a slower introduction. It's not as simple as saying he wouldn't play.

[LF:D]

1 minute ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Why not? He did with Mane, Salah, Alisson and Van Dijk. In fact, he did with Keita too. I would suggest what he does is looks at the player and sees how they adapt, how much they're needed, etc. Then he can make a decision on how quickly to introduce them. Keita showed that he isn't quite up to it tactically, so then it was a slower introduction. It's not as simple as saying he wouldn't play.

I mean if they are ready & fully adapted - sure.  But I think midfield is probably the hardest position to do that in for Klopp given the demands.

 

Also Fekir wouldn't have had a full pre season, unlike Mane & Salah did when they joined.  A GK doesn't need to adapt.  Easier for a CB too I think.  

 

Maybe Fekir would instantly get it & then yes it's possible.  But I think it's unlikely, especially with what we're seeing with other signings who haven't had a pre season or adjusting time.  He tried with Keita & if he struggled.

 

It's unlikely Fekir would have started I think.  

[Numero Veinticinco]

Yet another thing we can disagree on (and several others things in that post), I guess. Good times. 

[LF:D]

10 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Yet another thing we can disagree on (and several others things in that post), I guess. Good times. 

What makes you so certain Fekir would have started? 

[Numero Veinticinco]

6 minutes ago, LF:D said:

What makes you so certain Fekir would have started? 

I'm not certain. I think he would have been given a big chance, though. I'm convinced he'd have been given at least the same chance as Keita, who started our first two or three. How it would have gone from there would, I suspect, have depended on how well he adapted. I happen to think it would have been very well. 

[LF:D]

Just now, Numero Veinticinco said:

I'm not certain. I think he would have been given a big chance, though. I'm convinced he'd have been given at least the same chance as Keita, who started our first two or three.

I agree, he'd have had chances - I'm just not convinced he'd have adapted straight away like others have struggled to do so.

[Bjornebye]

I'd rather we brought in Ramsey on a free in January than forked out for Fekir. 

 

Sell Sturridge and sign a boss striker with the Sturridge/Fekir money.