can someone honestly explain the signing of Aquilani?

[redrosetints]

He has proved to be very hit and miss in the transfer market, and it's no longer the case that one can defend him by pointing at expensive signings and saying he gets those right.

 

If we are to go forward on such a limited budget (and I don't believe we have a choice barring an angel investor or two), then he either has to improve drastically or we have to consider bringing in someone with a better track record, either to buy the players for him or as a new manager.

 

It's often said that we can't afford to sack Rafa because it would cost £20M. How many more £20M flops can we afford though?

 

Maybe Aquilani will prove not to be a flop in the long term, but I don't see how this season we can call him anything but.

 

Of all the things the manager gets stick for, his transfer record is the most bizarre. Last night we had 2 home grown players, 2 freebies (Degen, Maxi), 2 1.5m players (Ngog, INsua), 4 signings around 5m Skrtel, Reina, Lucas, Agger and 2 on the 10m mark in Kuyt and Babel. Only Mascherano cost a decent fee. Thats a cheap first team for Sunderland, never mind a side trying to play on 4 fronts (er well, 1 or indeed half, for the Europa league).

 

Aquilani was sick, whilst still feeling pain in his ankle and Torres n Johnson are injured.

 

The 20m players will naturally play better, when the other 20m players are on show too. So far have Gerrard, Torres, Aquilani, Johnson and Mascherano taken the field together, i they have have they been fit and in form ?

 

Olivery Kay and Tony Barrett put their names to an article which states we have spent 80m* in the transfer market since Rafa arrived, to be where we have on that money, for me, is an exceptional achievement.

[Trucker Paddy]

He may be a very good player, but its obvious his best position his Gerrards so he's not gona be playing there, so our scouts and Rafa have decide in a 12 month period to buy 2 players for a total of nearly £40m to play in a position were we already have the best player on the planet in that position, all the time were still fucked when our main striker is injured which is alot of the time as the whole team system is based on him and we have nobody else capable of playing in that role, the mind boggles!

[zigackly]

If he's still feeling pain in his ankle, is that because the operation he had has failed?

 

Stu, I'm not arguing that he's bought some decent midrange players, but if they are moved on you have to question whether it's a mistake if we are left with less suitable players as replacements. The point I'm making is that it would appear he's made mistakes at every level, including a couple of £20M players now. Aquilani is looking more and more a mistake, as if we had spent less money or even the same money on a player with a bit less potential who can actually play sometimes then we would undoubtedly be better off than we are now. If redrosetints is correct that his ankle is not right, this makes me question the signing even more, not less!

 

Whichever way you cut it we have paid £20M for a player who has not been available, may not ever be available, and looks very much like a luxury player from what I've seen of him when he is available. What we needed was a midfielder who would be available more often than not with a better passing game than Lucas or Mascherano, if the idea was indeeed to play him behind Gerrard.

 

The jury is still out for me on whether Johnson is a £20M player too, but at least there is some justification for that considering it was the only way to retrieve the money owed us by Pompey.

 

Overall it looks to me like we've gone very much backwards for two seasons in a row. We can afford that even less if we are on a restrictive budget than if we weren't, and I think it's a fair criticism to make.

[Unrighteous]

The 20m players will naturally play better, when the other 20m players are on show too. So far have Gerrard, Torres, Aquilani, Johnson and Mascherano taken the field together, i they have have they been fit and in form ?

 

Err... How about having Gerrard, Mascherano, and Aquilani on the same pitch? Wouldn't that be a start?

 

 

edit: As for the pain still in the ankle, if the operation was a failure, then Aquilani easily one of the worst purchases in club history...

[Stu Monty]

If he's still feeling pain in his ankle, is that because the operation he had has failed?

 

Stu, I'm not arguing that he's bought some decent midrange players, but if they are moved on you have to question whether it's a mistake if we are left with less suitable players as replacements. The point I'm making is that it would appear he's made mistakes at every level, including a couple of £20M players now. Aquilani is looking more and more a mistake, as if we had spent less money or even the same money on a player with a bit less potential who can actually play sometimes then we would undoubtedly be better off than we are now. If redrosetints is correct that his ankle is not right, this makes me question the signing even more, not less!

 

Whichever way you cut it we have paid £20M for a player who has not been available, may not ever be available, and looks very much like a luxury player from what I've seen of him when he is available. What we needed was a midfielder who would be available more often than not with a better passing game than Lucas or Mascherano, if the idea was indeeed to play him behind Gerrard.

 

The jury is still out for me on whether Johnson is a £20M player too, but at least there is some justification for that considering it was the only way to retrieve the money owed us by Pompey.

 

Overall it looks to me like we've gone very much backwards for two seasons in a row. We can afford that even less if we are on a restrictive budget than if we weren't, and I think it's a fair criticism to make.

 

I think you're off the way off the mark mate.

 

I don't see how you can call a player yet to make six starts of a five year contract a failure and keep a straight face, no matter what your first impressions might be. And I think that Johnson is about as good as an attacking full-back as is out there and is young enough to give us plenty of years of service. I think using either as a serious criticism of a transfer policy is poor work.

[Stu Monty]

Err... How about having Gerrard, Mascherano, and Aquilani on the same pitch? Wouldn't that be a start?

 

It would indeed, Lance.

[aws]

Monty ruling this thread. He doesn't know what a penalty is but when he's right he's right.

[Lucky Pierre]

So we can have some quality on the bench?

[zigackly]

I think you're off the way off the mark mate.

 

I don't see how you can call a player yet to make six starts of a five year contract a failure and keep a straight face, no matter what your first impressions might be.

 

It has to be a massive gamble at best to replace a world class midfielder with a player with an injury record longer than Ngog's tackle.

 

We were told this was mitigated by doctors saying they could fix him. That's so far not proved to be the case if he is saying he still has pain in his ankle and doesn't know if he will recover.

 

Every signing is a gamble: two thirds of the season gone, and this one has yet to pay off, when we desperately needed it to, not next season but straight away.

 

I'm amazed you don't see it as at all questionable.

 

Even from a footballing point of view, he was supposed to have been bought to play behind Gerrard. Granted we've not seen a lot of him, but I would hope to have seen at least some small sign of some defensive capabilities if that were the case. The best we can say at the moment is that we might be able to fit him into the team in a more offensive role, at the cost of reconfiguring Gerrard back to a deeper role.

 

I'm not completely writing him off, but the signs are all completely terrible so far. I don't see how it can be painted as anything other than a desperate gamble which hasn't worked at all yet. I'll be happy to eat crow if he turns out to be a brilliant midfielder for us down the line, but so far it's just not worked as intended, and it's hard to see how it will.

[Unrighteous]

I think you're off the way off the mark mate.

 

I don't see how you can call a player yet to make six starts of a five year contract a failure and keep a straight face, no matter what your first impressions might be. And I think that Johnson is about as good as an attacking full-back as is out there and is young enough to give us plenty of years of service. I think using either as a serious criticism of a transfer policy is poor work.

 

Right now, it wouldn't be really wrong to call him a failure with the massive question marks over his fitness.

 

If the ankle pain is bollocks, and the operation was a success, then why isn't he playing?

[zigackly]

Going back to Johnson, I'm not questioning that he looks like a player, although he's not lived up to his first few games. The question was whether he is going to bring enough quality to the team from right back to justify not spending a bit less and buying another attacker, especially a forward, the lack of which has bitten us really hard this season. Spend a bit less on the Alonso replacement and a bit less on the Arbeloa replacement and maybe we could have had better backup than Ngog. Surely you can't question that not having decent backup for Torres has cost us MASSIVELY this season?

[Stu Monty]

It has to be a massive gamble at best to replace a world class midfielder with a player with an injury record longer than Ngog's tackle.

 

We were told this was mitigated by doctors saying they could fix him. That's so far not proved to be the case if he is saying he still has pain in his ankle and doesn't know if he will recover.

 

Every signing is a gamble: two thirds of the season gone, and this one has yet to pay off, when we desperately needed it to, not next season but straight away.

 

I'm amazed you don't see it as at all questionable.

 

Even from a footballing point of view, he was supposed to have been bought to play behind Gerrard. Granted we've not seen a lot of him, but I would hope to have seen at least some small sign of some defensive capabilities if that were the case. The best we can say at the moment is that we might be able to fit him into the team in a more offensive role, at the cost of reconfiguring Gerrard back to a deeper role.

 

I'm not completely writing him off, but the signs are all completely terrible so far. I don't see how it can be painted as anything other than a desperate gamble which hasn't worked so far. I'll be happy to eat crow if he turns out to be a brilliant midfielder for us down the line, but so far it's just not worked as intended at all, and it's hard to see how it will.

 

I do see it as questionable and I do see it as a gamble but, as I've discussed with people before, I think Rafa has taken a chance on the player that he might get if he can get him fit and firing. It will take time to see how that gamble pays off, not a few months. And, if you want someone that will make a top team tick, you're unlikely to be shopping in a big range and you're unlikely to be in the bargain bin.

 

Right now, it wouldn't be really wrong to call him a failure with the massive question marks over his fitness.

 

If the ankle pain is bollocks, and the operation was a success, then why isn't he playing?

 

But why would you make a call now? Any call now is going to be a hugely flawed one and one without much merit. You could call him a failure after his first five minutes on the pitch, it might be true that he's had a bad five minutes but it wouldn't make it any more useful a judgement.

[Stu Monty]

Going back to Johnson, I'm not questioning that he looks like a player, although he's not lived up to his first few games since. The question was whether he is going to bring enough quality to the team from right back to justify not spending a bit less and buying another attacker, especially a forward, the lack of which has bitten us really hard this season. Spend a bit less on the Alonso replacement and a bit less on the Arbeloa replacement and maybe we could have had better backup than Ngog. Surely you can't question that not having decent backup for Torres has cost us MASSIVELY this season?

 

Of course but if one of the best full-backs around is available, and is young, so plenty of long term value, then you have to take him. The sad indictment is that we can't do that and buy back-ups.

 

Welcome to LFC, just like many clubs it's now one in one out.

[zigackly]

I think with two thirds of the season gone Stu, it's really hard to argue that the signing of Aquilani has not cost us hugely. That's a mistake for now, although hopefully it will be redeemed if he's ever fit and we can slot him into the team.

[Unrighteous]

But why would you make a call now? Any call now is going to be a hugely flawed one and one without much merit. You could call him a failure after his first five minutes on the pitch, it might be true that he's had a bad five minutes but it wouldn't make it any more useful a judgement.

 

Because right now, he is a failure. He may not be a failure in a future, but right now, not having a trusted, healthy creative central midfielder is costing us almost as much as not having a solid backup for Fernando Torres.

[Stu Monty]

I think with two thirds of the season gone Stu, it's really hard to argue that the signing of Aquilani has not cost us hugely. That's a mistake for now, although hopefully it will be redeemed if he's ever fit and we can slot him into the team.

 

That's crazy. He's a long-term investment. If we'd got David Villa for £20m and knew he couldn't play till January would that make it a mistake? Of course not, you just accept that for a long-term gain it will mean short term pain.

[King Emlyn]

That's crazy. He's a long-term investment. If we'd got David Villa for £20m and knew he couldn't play till January would that make it a mistake? Of course not, you just accept that for a long-term gain it will mean short term pain.

But he's not David Villa is he?

[Stu Monty]

But he's not David Villa is he?

 

No. That doesn't alter the point though, does it?

[King Emlyn]

No. That doesn't alter the point though, does it?

Yes

[chrisbonnie]

That's crazy. He's a long-term investment. If we'd got David Villa for £20m and knew he couldn't play till January would that make it a mistake? Of course not, you just accept that for a long-term gain it will mean short term pain.

 

sure who, outside of the people that play championship manager had ever heard of him? so yes, it is completly different

 

i started the thread to find out why Rafa bought him, not as a direct dig at the lads ability

 

obviously the lad can play ball, but what exactly do Rafas scouts be watching half the time? and when i say watching with Aquilani, it must have only been tapes, as he barely kicked a ball in anger for them either

 

i really cannot see the logic in signing this lad, i just cant

 

could you imagine what we'd all be saying if ferguson had bought him??

 

we all know it wouldnt be kind, am i right?

[zigackly]

That's crazy. He's a long-term investment. If we'd got David Villa for £20m and knew he couldn't play till January would that make it a mistake?

 

If you bought him and had to take a massive drop in quality in the side until January which contributed hugely to jeopardising your qualification for next years Champions League, and then when he did come back you could hardly ever use him because it he showed no signs of being able to fit into the left wing role you bought him for, and then he said that the injury he had been suffering with for nearly two years was still giving him pain and he didn't know when he would recover, then I reckon questions would have to be asked, yes!

 

Anyway, on another note, what makes you think Aquilani is one of the top two or three players in the world in his position? I can't see the comparison with Villa at all from that regard. No-one thought he was one of the best available when we bought him.

[Dougie Do'ins]

That's crazy. He's a long-term investment. If we'd got David Villa for £20m and knew he couldn't play till January would that make it a mistake? Of course not, you just accept that for a long-term gain it will mean short term pain.

Thats if there is going to be a long term gain Stu. I've said this in another thread today but, given our current financial state I don't think Rafa should have took such a big gamble on a player with such a high price tag and an injury record like Aqualini's. For all the good we've had from him this season we might as well not signed him.

[King Emlyn]

In fairness i don't blame Benitez for the signing. To some extent his hand was forced and he had to roll the dice. We were told the lad would be ready by October. For 20 mill he's been a disaster; i don't apportion any blame but it's turning into a mess, i really don't see how this can be denied.

[KopOut]

very simple explanation.

 

it was a shocking mistake.

[Dougie Do'ins]

In fairness i don't blame Benitez for the signing. To some extent his hand was forced and he had to roll the dice. We were told the lad would be ready by October. For 20 mill he's been a disaster; i don't apportion any blame but it's turning into a mess, i really don't see how this can be denied.

His hand may have been forced into making a signing, but on Aqualini ?