Lazar Marković (RW) to anyone

cynicaloldgit

Total Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
3,201
Likes
6,408
I confidently predict that he will score a hat trick against PSG at Anfield, after Spurs have crocked our front three in the match before our Champions League opener.

Remember: you read it here first.
 

Red Ted

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
421
Likes
618
I knew was a shithouse lightweight pretty much straight away, you could just see he wasn't up to it at all, physically & mentally.

Also remember Rodgers harping on about & praising his character because he let someone take his seat on a plane, yeah right, typical Rodgers mumbo jumbo.
 

Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
3,827
Likes
5,448
Don't know but i found it on FB so shared it on here.
Shit. It is lol


Following comments

"Fifteen-time Champions League winners Wolverhampton Wanderers are said to be interested. "
"Meanwhile Jose Mourinhio demands respect for his 3 titles as he hobbles out of the press conference as QPR manager "
"Arsene Wenger in his fourth spell as Arsenal manager seems interested "
 

kiwiredman

This is my serious face
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Messages
445
Likes
456
No time for this guy at all. Goes to show the quality of the man if he can’t be fucked reaching personal terms.
Complete lightweight, pip hearted lazy areshole. Can’t wait for him to never be associated to Liverpool again.
 

i_still_miss_fowler

Open Your Eyes Morty!
Moderator
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
6,774
Likes
9,734
It’s a similar story to Origi.

You can have all the talent and physical attributes, but lack the right mentality and you will never make it.

This is what frustrates the hell out of fans. I have very little respect or sympathy for any player with no desire to actually play. While I think there is credence to argument about Rodgers failure to nurture him. The lack of desire though squarely puts the blame of Lazars shoulders.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
10,572
Likes
6,921
It’s a similar story to Origi.

You can have all the talent and physical attributes, but lack the right mentality and you will never make it.

This is what frustrates the hell out of fans. I have very little respect or sympathy for any player with no desire to actually play. While I think there is credence to argument about Rodgers failure to nurture him. The lack of desire though squarely puts the blame of Lazars shoulders.
Maybe on this one Rodgers was right all along? Many fans disliked the manager deciding early that he wasn't much cop and wanting rid but Klopp made the same decision without using him in a single competitive game. Many of the managers he's been on loan to have had absolutely no intention of attempting to try and turn the loan permanent despite being in less competitive leagues. The only manager that's been tempted was Silva after a 6 month loan. Basically since we purchased him he's been under 6 managers only one has wanted to keep him (we think). It's always been painted as Rodgers being unreasonable bombing him out so fast for being a transfer committee signing forced on him. But maybe he just made the right decision on this one and it's more in line with the case of Balotelli?
 

GaryBarlow99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
332
Likes
424
He is a hypocrite. He recently moaned about us pricing him out of a move and when we agree a deal for almost 10 times less than we paid for him he doesn't want to take a drop in wages. I would be happy paying him off and letting him piss off somewhere else.
 

Arminius

FSG PR plant
Moderator
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
20,067
Likes
22,233
It’s a similar story to Origi.

You can have all the talent and physical attributes, but lack the right mentality and you will never make it.

This is what frustrates the hell out of fans. I have very little respect or sympathy for any player with no desire to actually play. While I think there is credence to argument about Rodgers failure to nurture him. The lack of desire though squarely puts the blame of Lazars shoulders.
Positionally, it is even worse than Origi. For what he does, Origi is still on the rising slope, that type of forward really doesn't peak before 26. Markovic is a year older playing a speed position. He isn't going to get any faster than he is now, he is in his prime years. Equally, Origi doesn't seem to be reluctant to go somewhere he can get the playing time he needs.
 

The Elusive 19th

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
4,207
Likes
3,155
Ings in a Origi / Markovic body would be a pretty decent second choice I think. Some people got a broken body and still have the desire. Some people are gifted and just don't care.
For Markovic I think it's his pace (when he was very young) that should have made him think he doesn't need to put full effort and still do better than others, which has continued till date
 

redbj

hurry up, July 1st, let's get the show on the road
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
17,077
Likes
12,889
Ings in a Origi / Markovic body would be a pretty decent second choice I think. Some people got a broken body and still have the desire. Some people are gifted and just don't care.
For Markovic I think it's his pace (when he was very young) that should have made him think he doesn't need to put full effort and still do better than others, which has continued till date
It’s a fairly common situation, not just in football either, but in life.

Would Ings have the additude and application if he just coasted to this point in his career injury free. Maybe. Maybe not.

Sometimes ( not always) the injury early in the career maketh the man.

Stevie g is a classic example of this.....very early growing pain type injuries I think ( speculate) helped him become the player he was, where as Mickey Owens meteoritic rise to stardom and relevant injury free run saw him really struggle later in his career when faced with real injury dramas.
 

i_still_miss_fowler

Open Your Eyes Morty!
Moderator
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
6,774
Likes
9,734
Maybe on this one Rodgers was right all along? Many fans disliked the manager deciding early that he wasn't much cop and wanting rid but Klopp made the same decision without using him in a single competitive game. Many of the managers he's been on loan to have had absolutely no intention of attempting to try and turn the loan permanent despite being in less competitive leagues. The only manager that's been tempted was Silva after a 6 month loan. Basically since we purchased him he's been under 6 managers only one has wanted to keep him (we think). It's always been painted as Rodgers being unreasonable bombing him out so fast for being a transfer committee signing forced on him. But maybe he just made the right decision on this one and it's more in line with the case of Balotelli?
That’s a fair argument. But what I would say generally there is a defined window that players break through. Typically it’s limited and can be a real make or break. The wrong manager can ruin a career before it starts and it’s something they never recover from. Miss that window and you are playing catch-up (ie confidence in big games, tactical and team play, upping your game playing with best)

Who could have been another Balotelli just a waste of space from day one. But equally could have been another Suso who was destined down a Pacheco route if he had stayed. As bad as Flanagan’s career ended here, it took a healthy dose of good fortune for him to be given a chance (nearly shipped off to Bolton).

With Markovic there is always the question what if. Perhaps. Different manager a different time there would be a chance. But it would take a manager like Klopp who could nurture him before it was too late.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
10,572
Likes
6,921
That’s a fair argument. But what I would say generally there is a defined window that players break through. Typically it’s limited and can be a real make or break. The wrong manager can ruin a career before it starts and it’s something they never recover from. Miss that window and you are playing catch-up (ie confidence in big games, tactical and team play, upping your game playing with best)

Who could have been another Balotelli just a waste of space from day one. But equally could have been another Suso who was destined down a Pacheco route if he had stayed. As bad as Flanagan’s career ended here, it took a healthy dose of good fortune for him to be given a chance (nearly shipped off to Bolton).

With Markovic there is always the question what if. Perhaps. Different manager a different time there would be a chance. But it would take a manager like Klopp who could nurture him before it was too late.
Except Klopp seemed to take one look at him and decide "not for me" and hasn't even tried him in a single competitive game. I think this is a case of people being too reluctant to admit when Rodgers got something right. It's Ok, at the time, to have disagreed with the managers decision, but think the attitude of the player since shows some major concerns. In hindsight I can't see how anyone can still disagree with the decision of "not good enough/wrong attitude" that was seemingly made back then.
 

redbj

hurry up, July 1st, let's get the show on the road
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
17,077
Likes
12,889
Except Klopp seemed to take one look at him and decide "not for me" and hasn't even tried him in a single competitive game. I think this is a case of people being too reluctant to admit when Rodgers got something right. It's Ok, at the time, to have disagreed with the managers decision, but think the attitude of the player since shows some major concerns. In hindsight I can't see how anyone can still disagree with the decision of "not good enough/wrong attitude" that was seemingly made back then.

If you give enough monkeys enough typewriters soon enough you’ll get a word typed.


Rodgers was right with Markovic.
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
11,305
Likes
10,805
It’s a fairly common situation, not just in football either, but in life.

Would Ings have the additude and application if he just coasted to this point in his career injury free. Maybe. Maybe not.

Sometimes ( not always) the injury early in the career maketh the man.

Stevie g is a classic example of this.....very early growing pain type injuries I think ( speculate) helped him become the player he was, where as Mickey Owens meteoritic rise to stardom and relevant injury free run saw him really struggle later in his career when faced with real injury dramas.
While it might happen in some circumstances, i dont think it is widely applicable. In most cases the attitude will inform their recovery from injury, as does the type of injuries. Markovic, if suffering the same injuries as Stevie or Ings early in his career, may very well just have been one of those players who we'd be saying was really talented but never made it because he was blighted by injuries. I think he lacks the mental application of those three players you mentioned.
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
11,305
Likes
10,805
Except Klopp seemed to take one look at him and decide "not for me" and hasn't even tried him in a single competitive game. I think this is a case of people being too reluctant to admit when Rodgers got something right. It's Ok, at the time, to have disagreed with the managers decision, but think the attitude of the player since shows some major concerns. In hindsight I can't see how anyone can still disagree with the decision of "not good enough/wrong attitude" that was seemingly made back then.
Brendan only just got him. Klopp has had the advantage of time to assess the player. He was younger and could have been considered more easily mouldable. Also, the team was crying out for pace, so he could have been accomodated, even if only for that season. I think it was said at the time by Rory Smith, or one of the other reliable's that Markovic was doing Brndan's head in and had burnt him out. But i cant help but feel if you are shunting him around he is having to learn a lot more than if you are focusing him on one specific role within the side it is an issue for him.
 

i_still_miss_fowler

Open Your Eyes Morty!
Moderator
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
6,774
Likes
9,734
Except Klopp seemed to take one look at him and decide "not for me" and hasn't even tried him in a single competitive game. I think this is a case of people being too reluctant to admit when Rodgers got something right. It's Ok, at the time, to have disagreed with the managers decision, but think the attitude of the player since shows some major concerns. In hindsight I can't see how anyone can still disagree with the decision of "not good enough/wrong attitude" that was seemingly made back then.
In short the politics at the time meant there were certain players Rodgers had little incentive in putting the extra work to succeed. That’s why doubts will remain.

As I said in my original post the player has to take the majority of blame. However we will never know how he would have progressed if he had stayed put or played under a different manager when he arrived.

Klopp not playing him now is irrelevant. Boat has sailed. Take Solanke. Klopp is willing to give him a chance now. If he is playing like he is now at 24 he would not get a look in.
 



redbj

hurry up, July 1st, let's get the show on the road
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
17,077
Likes
12,889
Solankes a shit example though, as arminus will testify, that type of striker won’t peak until mid to late twenties.

It’s almost like we’re placing TOO much faith in him TOO early.

Your point is still relevant though.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
10,572
Likes
6,921
If players have the right work ethic, attitude and commitment Klopp will at least try and work with them regardless of what went on before he arrived. Klopp isn't going to care about how well a player got along with a previous manager or how well they were performing previously. Just look at Moreno and Lovren for examples of players people thought would be done by now but Klopp seems to have ignored all that.

The 3 most telling points for me regarding Markovic are; 1: Klopp hasn't had any time for him at all. 2: He turned up for his last loan not fit enough to play. 3: He couldn't agree personal terms for this move.

Think his head just isn't right and it's incredibly frustrating for us and the club.
 

Noo Noo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2014
Messages
2,103
Likes
1,779
The 3 most telling points for me regarding Markovic are; 1: Klopp hasn't had any time for him at all. 2: He turned up for his last loan not fit enough to play. 3: He couldn't agree personal terms for this move.

Think his head just isn't right and it's incredibly frustrating for us and the club
You're probably right, unless Anderlecht were trying to take the pee. Even then there's enough to suggest that he isn't that bothered by not playing.

His career has well and truly disappeared down the toilet. Quite sad.
 

Hope in your heart

Loyalty and patience, two undervalued concepts...
Admin
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
21,670
Likes
19,704
What I'm a bit stunned about is that if the wages were a problem, then it should have been obvious that Anderlecht wouldn't be able to pay what he wanted. So, why did Markovic and his agent agent not rather look for another loan somewhere, since it was clear that no rich enough club would come along for him to buy him for good?

At least, it would have taken away a bit of the wage bill for the club and allowed the player to actually... you know... play some football for a change.
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
11,305
Likes
10,805
What I'm a bit stunned about is that if the wages were a problem, then it should have been obvious that Anderlecht wouldn't be able to pay what he wanted. So, why did Markovic and his agent agent not rather look for another loan somewhere, since it was clear that no rich enough club would come along for him to buy him for good?

At least, it would have taken away a bit of the wage bill for the club and allowed the player to actually... you know... play some football for a change.
The player travelled to Anderlecht, presumably wages would have been discussed before then?