Thiago Alcantara

[Barrington Womble]

11 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

For the type of signing he was, he wasn't even expensive. Do people think you can get an elite Champions League winner on 100k a week and a reasonable fee?

He's not on 100k per week. He's on 200k per week. And we haven't really much had him, because he never plays. He's probably played less than half the games since he's been around. Effectively he costs us 400k per week for when he's actually around. Plus whatever medical costs to get him back out there. He's been as bad a signing as keita and cost about the same per year. 

 

 

[3 Stacks]

Just now, Barrington Womble said:

He's not on 100k per week. He's on 200k per week. And we haven't really much had him, because he never plays. He's probably played less than half the games since he's been around. Effectively he costs us 400k per week for when he's actually around. Plus whatever medical costs to get him back out there. He's been as bad a signing as keita and cost about the same per year. 

 

 

That was my point. Do you think you can sign a player of Thiago's pedigree on a low fee and lowish wages? It's just not possible. The idiots in Manchester paid 70m plus huge wages for Casemiro. 

[joe_fishfish]

He's one of the best midfielders I have ever seen play. He's also been a bad signing.

[TheHowieLama]

Just now, joe_fishfish said:

He's one of the best midfielders I have ever seen play. He's also been a bad signing.

 

Finally.

[SasaS]

Thiago played in about 2 our of every 3 league games until his injury in April or whenever was it. Why are people talking now like he was Arthur Melo or something? He is probably finished now, but he was available before for a decent number of games.

[an tha]

1 minute ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

Not sure why you are working yourself into a lather. It is what happened - whether or not playing the third most minutes upfront for example wasn't a significant contribution is the real question. Don't know who that was.

No one is in a lather i just find it funny that people rush to defend a feller who started less than half the games we played and featured in just a shade over 40% of the mins and call his contribution significant.

 

We all know midfield was a revolving door because we were chocker with injured players - with useless crocks like Keita and Oxlade in squad - an ageing Milner...The only reliable midfielders that season were Henderson and Fabinho. Thiago may well have played the 3rd most mins in midfield that season but that feat didn't even cover half our games/mins.

 

 

 

 

[Red Banjo]

1 minute ago, SasaS said:

Thiago played in about 2 our of every 3 league games until his injury in April or whenever was it. Why are people talking now like he was Arthur Melo or something? He is probably finished now, but he was available before for a decent number of games.

 

Mate come on. He started 14 league games last season, he started 17 the year before that, and he's started 0 this season.

 

Thats 27 starts out of a possible 100.

 

He's a certified bluffer at this point.

[an tha]

13 minutes ago, SasaS said:

Thiago played in about 2 our of every 3 league games until his injury in April or whenever was it. Why are people talking now like he was Arthur Melo or something? He is probably finished now, but he was available before for a decent number of games.

 

He featured in 1 of the first 6.

 

4 of next 5

 

9 on spin

 

So he was on 14/20 which takes us to Feb.

 

Missed next 8

 

Played in next 4 (total across all 4 of 96 mins)

 

Missed last 6

 

 

[Supremolad]

6 minutes ago, Red Banjo said:

 

Mate come on. He started 14 league games last season, he started 17 the year before that, and he's started 0 this season.

 

Thats 27 starts out of a possible 100.

 

He's a certified bluffer at this point.

 

I see you're cleverly limiting it to only "starts". Why not use "appearances" which would take into account games in which he came on as a sub. 

 

I'm not implying that he played in almost every game but by specifically choosing "starts", the analysis of his availability can be easily skewed to make the situation worse than it truly is.

[an tha]

8 minutes ago, Supremolad said:

 

I see you're cleverly limiting it to only "starts". Why not use "appearances" which would take into account games in which he came on as a sub. 

 

I'm not implying that he played in almost every game but by specifically choosing "starts", the analysis of his availability can be easily skewed to make the situation worse than it truly is.

You'd add 4 onto last seasons 14 starts then and a total of an extra 96 mins.

 

Nearly pushes him to featuring in half our league games last season....1,256 mins total, which ironically works out at 14 games worth of mins.

 

He was never an unused sub.

[TheHowieLama]

22 minutes ago, joe_fishfish said:

He's one of the best midfielders I have ever seen play. He's also been a bad signing who may or may not have made a significant contribution.

 

Amended.

[Red Banjo]

1 minute ago, Supremolad said:

 

I see you're cleverly limiting it to only "starts". Why not use "appearances" which would take into account games in which he came on as a sub. 

 

I'm not implying that he played in almost every game but by specifically choosing "starts", the analysis of his availability can be easily skewed to make the situation worse than it truly is.

 

Fine let's go with sub appearances then.

 

There's 13 of them over the 3 seasons. It takes his involvement to a heady 40 games out of a possible 100. With only 27 of those starts, as we've already discussed.

 

I mean I'd argue you'd want more from a player that's getting £800k a month in wages and giving us a 40% availability for the pleasure.

[an tha]

3 minutes ago, Red Banjo said:

 

Fine let's go with sub appearances then.

 

There's 13 of them over the 3 seasons. It takes his involvement to a heady 40 games out of a possible 100. With only 27 of those starts, as we've already discussed.

 

I mean I'd argue you'd want more from a player that's getting £800k a month in wages and giving us a 40% availability for the pleasure.

31 starts....

 

 

We can all cut it up however we like and use starts, appearances, mins, cherry pick comps etc...Ultimately it always ends up in same place - he contributes around 40% or so of the time.

[Red Banjo]

1 minute ago, an tha said:

31 starts....

 

My bad. I've had to drive to fucking Stoke for work all week. I'll blame that.

 

31 is still grim as fuck tho. Fraudulent.

[an tha]

Just now, Red Banjo said:

 

My bad. I've had to drive to fucking Stoke for work all week. I'll blame that.

 

31 is still grim as fuck tho. Fraudulent.

Aye it is a poor return...see edit in post above.

[Barrington Womble]

35 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

That was my point. Do you think you can sign a player of Thiago's pedigree on a low fee and lowish wages? It's just not possible. The idiots in Manchester paid 70m plus huge wages for Casemiro. 

 

You sign players to get on the pitch. If they get on the pitch and perform, the cost almost doesn't matter. Thiago his whole career has consistently failed to do that.  That's what made him a stupid signing and no amount of people wetting themselves over training ground clips or no look passes will change that.

 

What the other fucking crowd waste on players is irrelevant. They waste money everywhere because they're stupid cunts. 

[Dave D]

Im guessing its the football purists that saw something I didnt. A Hollywood pass here and there, a drop of the shoulder.

 

Assists? No

Set Pieces? No

Pace? No

Goals? No 

Fitness? No

Pressing? No

Huge wages? Yep 

[Creator Supreme]

Just seen his latest injury update.

 

I think the phrase rhymes with clucking bell.

[3 Stacks]

15 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

 

You sign players to get on the pitch. If they get on the pitch and perform, the cost almost doesn't matter. Thiago his whole career has consistently failed to do that.  That's what made him a stupid signing and no amount of people wetting themselves over training ground clips or no look passes will change that.

 

What the other fucking crowd waste on players is irrelevant. They waste money everywhere because they're stupid cunts. 

Ok, then simply put, Klopp made a mistake. Agreed.

[Kevin D]

Rushed back too early to try and cover for Szoboszai, who was also rushed back too early. 
 

There’s only one man to blame here.

[Lee909]

3 hours ago, Mook said:

How much are the club paying him this season to come on for 20 minutes in one game,  where he done his best to give a goal away?

 

 

 

10ml roughly 

[VladimirIlyich]

9 minutes ago, Kevin D said:

Rushed back too early to try and cover for Szoboszai, who was also rushed back too early. 
 

There’s only one man to blame here.

I'm getting a bit worried about Szlobbo too. He makes a massive positive difference to our midfield and without him we don't seem to tick as well.

[Red74]

Wouldn't surprise me if he's injured himself doing that embarrassing no look 30 yard pass all the way back to Virgil not long after coming on on Sunday. I was f'king fuming with him doing that and then he goes and does it with every pass afterwards. He's crap at it and he looks like hes got a nervous tic.

 

 

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

Wonder if we will get another 9 minutes out of him before he heads of to Shady Oaks.

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

He’s played or played some part in 67 out of 137 league games we have played since he signed. So he has missed 6 short of two full seasons in just over 3 1/2 seasons with us.