Lazar Marković (RW) to anyone

gr_sounder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
2,448
Likes
2,109
He's got talent - when he was signed plenty at the club were very excited by his potential. Hard to know whether his lack of progression was down to mismanagement by the club in the first couple of years or a lack of application by the player.

He needs a fresh start and the opportunity to play in his best position. Under the right circumstances he *could* be an excellent signing for you (he's still young enough to turn it around) but the worry would be that he just doesn't have the right mentality to succeed at the highest level.

In hindsight his move to Liverpool was probably even more detrimental to him than it was for us.
I completely agree with paragraph 2, and I guess 3 as I read it again, but I'm always baffled when people talk of Markovic and wonder whether mismanagement by the club during the first season or two could be the reason he is the player he is today.

I just really don't get trying to put this on the club so if anyone can explain it to me, I'd be very grateful. I'm not trying to have a go at you Kopstar, nor am I trying to denigrate Lazar (who I think is a good player for the Championship in England or one of many lesser leagues and that's not a terrible thing)... but I see this comment a lot and I truly don't understand why people keep mentioning it.

Lazar was signed from Benfica prior to the 2014/15 season... in mid-July, and he had plenty of time to meet and train with the club prior to the season starting. At the time he was 20 years old, and had just had 2 good seasons albeit in poor leagues. As an 18 year old he scored 13 goals in 46 matches for Partizan. Great numbers for an 18 year old, even if in a poor league. As a 19 year old he moved up a level of competition by playing for Benfica and scored 5 goals in 26 matches. Not a bad outlay, but not exactly unheard of in Portugal even for someone under the age of 20. After that he was signed by Liverpool as a potential star in the making, definitely not someone that was a can't miss player.

The first year at age 20, he was kept on the team, given chances, and he played a total of 34 appearances, scoring 3 goals but was obviously not ready for a full time starting role, so it was determined to send him out on loan to Fenerbahce for 15/16. This is a team that finished 2nd in their league to Besiktas, had players like Robin van Persie, and was relatively close to Serbia. He couldn't hold down a spot there, making only 20 appearances and scoring twice.

The next season (age 22) he was loaned out again, this time back to Portugal, a league familiar to him, but was now with Sporting CP. Unfortunately that loan didn't work out, as he only managed 6 matches in the league and 14 overall in the first half of hte season, and scored 2 goals. He was recalled to try and get him a better loan and was sent to Hull where he playes another 14 matches and scored 2 more.

Last season he got no matches with a real team in large part because when he was with Anderlecht, his conditioning was so poor.

So the club tried: keeping him and seeing if he was ready to blossom, sending him to a good team in Turkey, sending him back to Portugal and even a low level Premier League team.

So I ask... where is the possible mismanagement by Liverpool FC in all this? Isn't the much more likely scenario that he failed to make a mark in each of these locations because he wasn't good enough (whether that is skill, physical ability, or mental)?
 

Kopstar

★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
9,849
Likes
19,270
I completely agree with paragraph 2, and I guess 3 as I read it again, but I'm always baffled when people talk of Markovic and wonder whether mismanagement by the club during the first season or two could be the reason he is the player he is today.

I just really don't get trying to put this on the club so if anyone can explain it to me, I'd be very grateful. I'm not trying to have a go at you Kopstar, nor am I trying to denigrate Lazar (who I think is a good player for the Championship in England or one of many lesser leagues and that's not a terrible thing)... but I see this comment a lot and I truly don't understand why people keep mentioning it.

Lazar was signed from Benfica prior to the 2014/15 season... in mid-July, and he had plenty of time to meet and train with the club prior to the season starting. At the time he was 20 years old, and had just had 2 good seasons albeit in poor leagues. As an 18 year old he scored 13 goals in 46 matches for Partizan. Great numbers for an 18 year old, even if in a poor league. As a 19 year old he moved up a level of competition by playing for Benfica and scored 5 goals in 26 matches. Not a bad outlay, but not exactly unheard of in Portugal even for someone under the age of 20. After that he was signed by Liverpool as a potential star in the making, definitely not someone that was a can't miss player.

The first year at age 20, he was kept on the team, given chances, and he played a total of 34 appearances, scoring 3 goals but was obviously not ready for a full time starting role, so it was determined to send him out on loan to Fenerbahce for 15/16. This is a team that finished 2nd in their league to Besiktas, had players like Robin van Persie, and was relatively close to Serbia. He couldn't hold down a spot there, making only 20 appearances and scoring twice.

The next season (age 22) he was loaned out again, this time back to Portugal, a league familiar to him, but was now with Sporting CP. Unfortunately that loan didn't work out, as he only managed 6 matches in the league and 14 overall in the first half of hte season, and scored 2 goals. He was recalled to try and get him a better loan and was sent to Hull where he playes another 14 matches and scored 2 more.

Last season he got no matches with a real team in large part because when he was with Anderlecht, his conditioning was so poor.

So the club tried: keeping him and seeing if he was ready to blossom, sending him to a good team in Turkey, sending him back to Portugal and even a low level Premier League team.

So I ask... where is the possible mismanagement by Liverpool FC in all this? Isn't the much more likely scenario that he failed to make a mark in each of these locations because he wasn't good enough (whether that is skill, physical ability, or mental)?
I think blame lies with both parties but when you consider Liverpool just as one party rather than a collective of competing interests, opinions views etc it becomes difficult.

I think Markovic was ultimately badly advised or was misled by the club. If I was advising a young player my principal concern would be does the club have a clear and realistic plan for his development? What is his path to the first team? Where do they see him playing? Will he be given time to adapt? What is the club's long-term plan for him?

If he wasn't told any of that or was told he'd be shunted around positions, taken in and out of the team and probably loaned out for lengthy periods then he was badly advised to join us. If, however, Rodgers managed to persuade him that he had full confidence in his ability, would have patience to develop him and play to his strengths, trusted him etc then that quite clearly wasn't borne out. Rodgers made it clear very early on that he did not have full confidence in Markovic and I rarely recall him ever giving him a run in a position he was familiar with. In his first season he was given 30 minutes or more in a match 12 times in the league. In those 12 appearances he played RW (2), LW (1), LM (3), AM (2), RM (3) and Second Striker (1). He scored 2 goals in the 2 matches he played in his best position (AM). No goals and 1 assist in the other 10. He completed 90 minutes only 3 times.

After scoring 2 goals in 2 games when played as an Attacking Midfielder (in wins over Sunderland and Spurs) Rodgers never played him in that position again. In any competition.

My personal view is that things *could* have worked out differently had he been managed better in his early years with us. Who knows whether his mentality was always questionable or whether this was something that developed as a result of disillusionment with how he was treated? Constantly been shunted around, taken in and out of the team, dropped when he did actually perform well and then loaned out to a foreign league after his first year with us must have had an impact on him.
 

SirBillShankly

Joe and Holly's Dad.
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
8,650
Likes
7,171
Damn! I'm gonna his fighting spirit, win at all costs mentality, determination and aggression.

Reminded me of Suarez in many ways. Will be a massive loss. Totally gutted that's he's leaving us and almost impossible to replace. A once in a lifetime player :J
 

gr_sounder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
2,448
Likes
2,109
I think blame lies with both parties but when you consider Liverpool just as one party rather than a collective of competing interests, opinions views etc it becomes difficult.

I think Markovic was ultimately badly advised or was misled by the club. If I was advising a young player my principal concern would be does the club have a clear and realistic plan for his development? What is his path to the first team? Where do they see him playing? Will he be given time to adapt? What is the club's long-term plan for him?

If he wasn't told any of that or was told he'd be shunted around positions, taken in and out of the team and probably loaned out for lengthy periods then he was badly advised to join us. If, however, Rodgers managed to persuade him that he had full confidence in his ability, would have patience to develop him and play to his strengths, trusted him etc then that quite clearly wasn't borne out. Rodgers made it clear very early on that he did not have full confidence in Markovic and I rarely recall him ever giving him a run in a position he was familiar with. In his first season he was given 30 minutes or more in a match 12 times in the league. In those 12 appearances he played RW (2), LW (1), LM (3), AM (2), RM (3) and Second Striker (1). He scored 2 goals in the 2 matches he played in his best position (AM). No goals and 1 assist in the other 10. He completed 90 minutes only 3 times.

After scoring 2 goals in 2 games when played as an Attacking Midfielder (in wins over Sunderland and Spurs) Rodgers never played him in that position again. In any competition.

My personal view is that things *could* have worked out differently had he been managed better in his early years with us. Who knows whether his mentality was always questionable or whether this was something that developed as a result of disillusionment with how he was treated? Constantly been shunted around, taken in and out of the team, dropped when he did actually perform well and then loaned out to a foreign league after his first year with us must have had an impact on him.
I hear what you're saying, but I really still don't see how you get to a conclusion that the club is somehow at fault for mismanaging him.

When he was bought, he was kept with the first team, he didn't have a "path to the first team"... he was ON the first team. He played more during 2014/2015 than I would have expected. That said, the team was limited. The midfield had Gerrard (35 yo), but a developing Coutinho, Henderson, and young Sterling as well as a Lallana in his prime. The front line had Sturridge and ..... well it had Sturridge. That season Markovic competed with the likes of Borini, Balottelli, Lambert, and Ibe for attacking roles. This was not exactly a hard team to find playing time with.

Markovic was very vocal about blaming Rodgers for his failing to become a standout Liverpool player. He claims it was a not a good relationship, blah blah... but why do we take his word that it was Rodgers fault and not his own? In hindsight, Rodgers was exactly right not to be confident in Lazar's ability ---- because Lazar's own performances showed that he wasn't to be trusted to deliver. Lazar simply wasn't good enough at the time to be a player we relied upon to get results. Of course the player is going to say that. The problem with Lazar's commentary (to me) is that his situation didn't improve under any of the other managers he played for.
Was it Brendan's fault or Liverpool's fault that he failed at Sporting CP a year after Rodgers was replaced with Klopp?
Who's fault was it that he wasn't ready to play at Anderlecht?
Lazar also blamed Klopp for not playing him enough and stunting his career which I think is hilarious. Do we really think that Klopp isn't a good identifier or talent to be nurtured?
Who's opinion would you put more stock in.... Klopp or Markovic?

I don't know why you think Lazar's best position is as an attacking mid... he has played most of his career as a winger. That's what he played at Benfica before we bought him, and that's where we expected him to play. He was never intended to be an AM.

You point out he was used as a RW, LW, AM, RM, LM and second striker. From a positional sense, 2nd striker and AM are almost the same thing as are LM/LW, RM/RW. The contrasting roles/responsibilities in those titles are often meaningless, just determining how much defensive responsibilities you have. Is Mane a winger or a forward? Is Robertson a FB or a wingback? In the end it doesn't matter what you call it, but rather how you play in the match. Liverpool is built up largely now on players that can fulfill different roles. It's not a rarity to have a winger play on either side or both.

Regardless, you view his moving around to mean the team didn't know how to use him properly or was stifling his growth. I view it as they kept trying things to find someplace he was useful.

You wrote: "Constantly been shunted around, taken in and out of the team, dropped when he did actually perform well and then loaned out to a foreign league after his first year with us must have had an impact on him." How is this different from any other marginal player to have ever played the game? This is what you do with marginal players, you move them around and try to find a way for them to develop or best use their talents. And remember, one of the loans was to a league where he had already played and performed well enough to get us to sign him for his potential.

In the end, it comes down to the following for me.
If Lazar had failed to produce under Rodgers or simply his time at Liverpool, then I could accept that maybe the club were to blame and that Markovic was mismanaged.
But that's NOT the case.
Lazar has failed to find his form and develop as a player under multiple managers, in multiple leagues. When I look at this the much more logical answer lies that he just wasn't as good as we/he thought he was, rather than all the managers and teams and leagues failed him. He simply is a limited player and he could be successful with a lesser team in a lesser league if he finds the right club and player. This isn't an insult to him, it's just pointing out reality - and I'd love my realityto be that I could play for a decent team in Sweden or Belgium or in the 2nd/3rd highest level in England, Spain, Italy.
 

lfc.eddie

"¿Plata... O Plomo?"
Joined
Sep 18, 2006
Messages
49,983
Likes
37,106
Lazar has failed to find his form and develop as a player under multiple managers, in multiple leagues.
Maybe he's not as good of a player as the club initially made him out to be when we bought him? Luis Alberto didn't do much with us, became integral part at Lazio in Serie A. Suso didn't cut it with us, became lynchpin of some sort for AC Milan. Those two are prime example of Markovic might just be a little overrated or we purchased him based on some shoddy rating from some journo calling him the next Ronaldo. For me if he's any good, his loan spell would have turned into a permanent move long time ago.
 

Caradoc

Y Goeden Bywyd
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
8,110
Likes
12,381
I hear what you're saying, but I really still don't see how you get to a conclusion that the club is somehow at fault for mismanaging him.

When he was bought, he was kept with the first team, he didn't have a "path to the first team"... he was ON the first team. He played more during 2014/2015 than I would have expected. That said, the team was limited. The midfield had Gerrard (35 yo), but a developing Coutinho, Henderson, and young Sterling as well as a Lallana in his prime. The front line had Sturridge and ..... well it had Sturridge. That season Markovic competed with the likes of Borini, Balottelli, Lambert, and Ibe for attacking roles. This was not exactly a hard team to find playing time with.

Markovic was very vocal about blaming Rodgers for his failing to become a standout Liverpool player. He claims it was a not a good relationship, blah blah... but why do we take his word that it was Rodgers fault and not his own? In hindsight, Rodgers was exactly right not to be confident in Lazar's ability ---- because Lazar's own performances showed that he wasn't to be trusted to deliver. Lazar simply wasn't good enough at the time to be a player we relied upon to get results. Of course the player is going to say that. The problem with Lazar's commentary (to me) is that his situation didn't improve under any of the other managers he played for.
Was it Brendan's fault or Liverpool's fault that he failed at Sporting CP a year after Rodgers was replaced with Klopp?
Who's fault was it that he wasn't ready to play at Anderlecht?
Lazar also blamed Klopp for not playing him enough and stunting his career which I think is hilarious. Do we really think that Klopp isn't a good identifier or talent to be nurtured?
Who's opinion would you put more stock in.... Klopp or Markovic?

I don't know why you think Lazar's best position is as an attacking mid... he has played most of his career as a winger. That's what he played at Benfica before we bought him, and that's where we expected him to play. He was never intended to be an AM.

You point out he was used as a RW, LW, AM, RM, LM and second striker. From a positional sense, 2nd striker and AM are almost the same thing as are LM/LW, RM/RW. The contrasting roles/responsibilities in those titles are often meaningless, just determining how much defensive responsibilities you have. Is Mane a winger or a forward? Is Robertson a FB or a wingback? In the end it doesn't matter what you call it, but rather how you play in the match. Liverpool is built up largely now on players that can fulfill different roles. It's not a rarity to have a winger play on either side or both.

Regardless, you view his moving around to mean the team didn't know how to use him properly or was stifling his growth. I view it as they kept trying things to find someplace he was useful.

You wrote: "Constantly been shunted around, taken in and out of the team, dropped when he did actually perform well and then loaned out to a foreign league after his first year with us must have had an impact on him." How is this different from any other marginal player to have ever played the game? This is what you do with marginal players, you move them around and try to find a way for them to develop or best use their talents. And remember, one of the loans was to a league where he had already played and performed well enough to get us to sign him for his potential.

In the end, it comes down to the following for me.
If Lazar had failed to produce under Rodgers or simply his time at Liverpool, then I could accept that maybe the club were to blame and that Markovic was mismanaged.
But that's NOT the case.
Lazar has failed to find his form and develop as a player under multiple managers, in multiple leagues. When I look at this the much more logical answer lies that he just wasn't as good as we/he thought he was, rather than all the managers and teams and leagues failed him. He simply is a limited player and he could be successful with a lesser team in a lesser league if he finds the right club and player. This isn't an insult to him, it's just pointing out reality - and I'd love my realityto be that I could play for a decent team in Sweden or Belgium or in the 2nd/3rd highest level in England, Spain, Italy.

I’ve said my piece too many times on this issue to repeat it all again so I’ll try to précis it down a bit this time. Kopstar pretty much sums up my view in his post. Markovic left Benfica with a big reputation (their supporters were gutted when I spoke to some of them in Lisbon shortly after he signed for us); now he’s leaving Anfield for what €3million? Rodgers had form for pissing players around - namely the ‘committee’ signings that he didn’t want - and for playing young players out of position.

Unfortunately for Markovic, he fell into both categories. Rodgers not surprisingly wrecked the confidence of some of these players in the process, Markovic being one of them. And for what? Just to play the big man and satisfy his ego! LFC has been a nightmare for the lad; I wish him well for the future and hope he doesn’t come back and bite us on the arse a couple of years down the line. Too many Rodgers rejects/victims are doing well away from Anfield for it to be a coincidence. By the time Klopp took over the damage was already done and the exit door the only option for them.

Just my opinion. I’m not going to allow myself to be dragged into a debate. I’m sticking with the above.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
3,300
Likes
2,677
£3m seems like a deal given his performances over the last three or four years!

Worst. Transfer. Ever. Congrats Lazar!

(You had such a cool name too. So effortlessly shit though!)
 
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
3,300
Likes
2,677
50% sell on clause is actually amazing. Whether it's on full fee or just profit on any future fee. Could see a team like Newcastle or Sevilla buying him for 10/15 million in a couple of years unless he really bombs over there.
The sell on is great brucey bonus if he turns it round but @gr_sounder has said about all the managers thatve tried and failed with him.

Be interesting to know how long a deal hes been offered. If he fails in Belgium hell be heading for obscurity in Portugal, at best. He wouldn't cope with the athleticism of the Major League or Ausi, Chinese, Japanese leagues. League Un? Greece? Russia? Serbia? Italian Seria B? Everton?
 

Red over the water

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
704
Likes
1,223
We fired the Lazar!

I was excited about his signing and I thought he would do well for or us, but it wasn’t to be. £3M or whatever, plus the loan fees we’ve had, means the loss isn’t as bad as it might have been, and if he finds his groove and gets another big move, the sell on clause we’ve inserted should see us get a few bob. Oh well, you win some you lose some.

Perhaps a bit too timid for the Prem, and when here he was played out of position in the few games he got and never really got it going. Since then we’ve come on leaps and bounds as a team, so he seems further away than ever.

Good luck to the fella.
 

Nikola

Mediocre outcome is the probable outcome.
Admin
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
17,520
Likes
10,682
I was going to warn people not to count their chickens, I feared this would happen. This is the unflushable turd that's going to stick around for one more season and pick up the wages he's never going to get again. Not sure if I should blame the club for not doing their due diligence properly or him for effectively retiring from high-level football at this age. Liverpool wasted as much money on him and Balotelli as it took to buy Salah. Even Downing was sold for some money and offered at least some decent performances towards the end of his Liverpool career. Joint worst signing Liverpool have made since I remember, maybe even the single worst.
 

Red over the water

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
704
Likes
1,223
Well, I thought this was done!

Ridiculous it’s dragged on like this. Should have sold him to Watford about three years ago when they came knocking. Don’t know why it fell through this time, probably a combination of wages and maybe him being worth even less in January. He was a bright young player and needs to play to try to get his career going again. Can’t believe he’s still here!
 

OCred

Active Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2017
Messages
132
Likes
203
£3m seems like a deal given his performances over the last three or four years!

Worst. Transfer. Ever. Congrats Lazar!

(You had such a cool name too. So effortlessly shit though!)
Hmmmm, i suppose this could be considered one of the worst recent transfers, think we bought him for 20 mil, dunno about all the loan fees, but you might want to remember that guy Balotelli. Now to me he was the worst recent transfer though cant recall how much he was 10, 15 ,20 mil and the fact we were happy for him to just go someplace was so worthwhile, we never cared that he went for free. I mean who the hell would pay for that headcase anyways. More talented than Lazar, yes, but no one was as lazy as him. Borini wasnt exactly great either but we got a little back for him. Still cant get over the away leg at Real, with genius Rogers deciding to go with a new look team where Borini was our striker, and Gerrard on the bench. Dunno which was worse for Stevie, that game or the 3-3 home tie to Palace or the 6-1 away thumping at Stoke. Not exactly a good sending off for Captain Stevie. Oh how this game can be so cruel.
 

PaulRoJo

Supporter since 1990 still waiting for the league
Joined
Jul 12, 2017
Messages
280
Likes
278
The insertion of 'Slavic' is hurtful and insulting, while have nothing to do with what has led Markovic not to develop as a footballer. It comes off as bigotry. Don't do it again.
Should be singled out for special treatment at training. A repeated message of fuck off in January you slovenly slavic shit followed by unrelenting bullying would have done the trick in days gone by. Luckily for him (and everyone really) we have evolved since then.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ahmed Hussain

Sad guy with no life :(
Joined
Jul 10, 2017
Messages
782
Likes
1,259
The guys stock has fallen so much. Was brought for around £24 million. Was about to be sold for £2.9 million. Waste and a half.
 



ILLOK

In the Danger Zone.
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
14,741
Likes
25,672
To be fair I would definitely stay at the team paying me big money and knowing that I have zero playing responsibility. That is a quite a good deal he has got himself.
At 24, when you already have enough money to set you up for life?

I wouldn't. Go elsewhere, prove yourself and ultimately end up earning more anyway.
 

Sweeting

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
7,385
Likes
6,588
At 24, when you already have enough money to set you up for life?

I wouldn't. Go elsewhere, prove yourself and ultimately end up earning more anyway.
One more year of big money then he can go and do that, with the added benefit of a signing on fee.

Plus he probably has no intention of ever proving himself, and seemingly has little interest in football at all. Maybe that is his big issue.
 
Last edited:

Gazmaninaus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
1,099
Likes
622
He will go next year but I cannot see a sign on bonus for a player with zero football in the last 4 years. Combined with the fact his last loan Manager said he wasn’t fit. Poor attitude player.