• This website uses cookies. More information.
  • The This Is Anfield Forums community is moving to a new home. Click here for more information on the transition.

The Unreliable Rumours Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Richard88

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
649
Great summary above. Thanks.

A suggestion for the two players: Havertz and Sancho.

In the words of our great manager: Boom!
Good suggestions!

Havertz would be a phenomenal signing, but personally my top choice at CM would be Auoar, as I think his traits would be an absolutely perfect fit for our squad. He's a very skilful playmaker who is excellent at dribbling in tight spaces and breaking lines when driving up the pitch, and is also quite tenacious off the ball too... all of which are the exact traits you would associate with an ideal No.8 in Klopp's system.

As per this article, we also tried to sign Auoar already 3 years ago (in Klopp's first summer transfer window at the club), so there's clearly interest in him:
Speaking to Planete Lyon, he explained: ‘Before I signed my first professional contract with Lyon in July 2016, Liverpool were interested in me. ‘I thought about it hard with those close to me on the decision I needed to take, what was better for my progression. ‘I opted for Lyon because it is the club of my heart and my aim was to succeed here, in my city.’
I'm also a fan of James Maddison and think it's a shame that we passed on him before he went to Leicester. He has many similarities to Lallana and would therefore be something of a like-for-like replacement, but I guess the timing wasn't quite right with moving for him given how many other CM options we had at the time. I think the ship has sailed on him as Leicester won't sell cheaply.

At LW, Sancho would be a great choice, but I don't know how realistic that transfer would be given that he's already at a big club.

Leon Bailey and Bergwijn have been linked regularly, but frankly I think if we were interested in either of them they'd already be here. Bailey would be an interesting fit and is very skilful, though I think his best position is cutting in off the right where we've already got several options. As for Bergwijn, he seems like too much of an individual in his attacking style which obviously isn't what Klopp likes, and I'm also not convinced that his production would keep up at a higher level when he's not running at weak defences every week.

The player I most like at LW is Sessegnon. He's got really good link up play in the attacking third and also loves to drive up the pitch which I think would suit this team really well, not to mention that he can also play LB. Despite the clubs efforts it seems that he wants to stay in London and head to Spurs though.

Timo Werner's contract expires next summer too, and that would be an incredible 'free' signing, but I think he's destined for Bayern unfortunately.

In any case, it'll be really interesting to see what players Edwards and Klopp can pull out of the hat next summer.
 
Last edited:

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
13,395
You never said anything about starting 40 games. You’ve just added this now to bolster your argument.

You actually said we only have three players good enough to start in attack for three positions. That’s implies Origi and Brewster are of no use. Not against Norwich, or Brighton or Newcastle, or anyone we can afford to rotate and give one of the first choice lads a day off to. As I said before, I also think that Ox, Shaqiri and Gini could be drafted into the forward positions if we need to.

I understand where you are coming from, and as I keep saying I’d like Edwards and Klopp to get in a top drawer versatile forward before the window slams shut, but this argument is rapidly shifting from ‘we could do with a bit of depth, to we’re down to the bones and in the middle of a crisis’ and that’s clearly bollocks.

We’ve already been through the issues Ad Nauseam, but those issue keep being swept away as if they don’t matter. Like this is some silly game of football manager or something.

1. We have one of the best, if not the best, front three in the world. Buying someone at around that level is hard. It’s a very small pool of players, and their clubs will be loath to release them. We’re talking breaking our transfer record for a lad who probably isn’t first choice.

2. To compound this, we’ve been on such a run in the transfer market, clubs are going to be very wary about being the next mugs to be taken for a ride by LFC, and they’ll also suspect any player we’re interested is is an absolute diamond.

3. The attractiveness of offering lads who are at roughly the level of our front three (therefore prob the best player at their current club) a rotation spot, is hugely over-estimated. As is the number of games we can realistically offer without pissing off the front three.

Footballers, especially ones with the mentality to play for us, are ambitious. They might accept coming in behind Salah, Firmino and Mane, but they will want to see how they get past one of them to become first choice. Not many lads will fancy themselves to get past one of our forwards.

This principle is best illustrated at left back. 18 months ago, Robbo was persuaded to come here, knowing if he knuckled down and worked hard, he could knock Moreno out of the team. Fast forward to this window, with Robbo firmly established in the position, and Lloyd Kelly is knocking us back to go to Bournemouth.

4. We are in something of a Catch 22, needing, for Klopp’s ethos, ambitious, motivated players who want to work hard and play football. But such players, tend to want to play rather than be someone’s back up.
Right stop being pedantic you know what I mean by saying starter. Origi is not good enough to be a starter that doesn't mean he can't be given a starting role in a game ever that's just being daft on purpose to try and make someone else look like an idiot. You're doing this a lot recently to anyone who doesn't buy into your "everything is perfectly fine" opinion and its something you, as a mod, would be warning others over.

1. Were any of our front three at that level when we bought them? Why would we need to buy an established "best in the world" type when we've been doing brilliant at what we've been doing? Don't get me wrong I'd hardly turn my nose up at it if it can be done but much more likely to buy a Neres or Everton (Brazilian kid) and Klopp turn them into a star.

2. So we will have the same problem next year? No reason to wait. If its difficult now it'll be difficult then and we need to sign players sometime so we have to learn to overcome that challenge. Like we did with Alisson after Roma felt burned on Salah (so we have already learned to overcome this issue).

3. Just because one kid went somewhere else for guaranteed playing time doesn't mean every player will reject us. Clubs have been signing back up players for a long time. It happens every season. Not every player who moves to a club thinks either "I'm going to be starting from day 1" or "I can really see myself as the starter within a year"! For a start professional footballers dont look at a club about to play 60+ games and think the starting 11 is set in stone all season. Last season Salah, Mane and Firmino started 137 games between then, being overplayed, no major injuries. We are likely to play at least 60 which is at least180 starts without even considering us switching to a front 4. As a minimum we will have 43 starts to go towards other attackers and probably a lot more. We have the room for a new guy to come in and start between 30 (Fabinho first season level) and 40 (Salah style) games and still have playing time left over for Brewster and Origi.

4. They will play.
 

Walshy07

In Klopp we trust
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
2,727
Daily mail saying Woodburn going Oxford on a season long loan.Clearly has no future here so he needs moving on perm.
 
Last edited:

Sweeting

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
10,293
Daily mail saying Woodburn going Oxford on a season long loan.Clearly has no future here so he needs moving on perm.
He doesn't have the value to be worth moving on perm. He's only 19. Ryan Kent at 19 was worth fuck all but three years later we may get £15m for him. Harry Wilson hadn't played a first team club match at 19, at 22 he's worth £25m. No reason to sell Woodburn before we can get a return.

Going to Oxford would send him to a good footballing side, working under former Liverpool youth coach Karl Robinson and hopefully at a level where he will be able to define himself in a role.
 

Richard88

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
649
Daily mail saying Woodburn going Oxford on a season long loan.Clearly has no future here so he needs moving on perm.
Woodburn is a bit of an enigma, given that he seems too small to be a CM, but lacks the pace to make it on the wing. A bit like Jordan Rossiter in that respect I suppose, who for all the game intelligence he had he just didn't have the physical attributes for a DM in the PL.

Whatever the case hopefully he finds a role for himself.
 

cynicaloldgit

#MbappéonaBosman2022
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
6,688
Woodburn is a bit of an enigma, given that he seems too small to be a CM, but lacks the pace to make it on the wing. A bit like Jordan Rossiter in that respect I suppose, who for all the game intelligence he had he just didn't have the physical attributes for a DM in the PL.

Whatever the case hopefully he finds a role for himself.
Given Woodburn’s skill set- technique, finishing ability and game intelligence but no real pace- I’d have thought he’d make a good understudy to Firmino.
 

SBYM

What the fuck do you want?
Ad-free Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
9,256
That is fucking brilliant.

Just imagine VVD, Gini and Robbo storming into Klopp's office and demanding that he sign a winger.

Although I'm assuming that the morons of twitter are going to take it seriously.
It's all about the bantz...
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
15,504
He doesn't have the value to be worth moving on perm. He's only 19. Ryan Kent at 19 was worth fuck all but three years later we may get £15m for him. Harry Wilson hadn't played a first team club match at 19, at 22 he's worth £25m. No reason to sell Woodburn before we can get a return.

Going to Oxford would send him to a good footballing side, working under former Liverpool youth coach Karl Robinson and hopefully at a level where he will be able to define himself in a role.
Is Brannagan still there as well?
 

Jaytinho

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
237
Given Woodburn’s skill set- technique, finishing ability and game intelligence but no real pace- I’d have thought he’d make a good understudy to Firmino.
Agreed, scored a couple worldies for Wales and made us LFC fans rub our hands together for a minute. But, it seems Klopp knows something we dont
 

Zinedine Biscan

Spreading the word of St Igor
Moderator
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
24,503
Another aspect to consider with regards to transfers is the wage bill.

This summer the following salaries will have been removed from the books, totalling £160k/week, or £8.32m/year (not including Ings or Karius who's salaries have presumably been paid by their loan clubs).
  • Sturridge, 29 ...... £120k
  • Moreno, 27 ......... £40k
  • Ings, 27 ............... £60k
  • Karius, 26 ............ £25k
There are still a few high earners who are now on the fringes of the squad who need to be moved on soon as well:
  • Mignolet, 31...... £60k (2021) - 2nd choice GK
  • Lovren, 30 ....... £100k (2021) - 4th choice CB
  • Clyne, 28........... £70k (2020) - 2nd choice RB
  • Lallana, 31 ........ £70k (2020) - 7th choice CM
  • Milner, 33 ........ £120k (2020) - 6th choice CM
Those wages total 420k/week, or £21.84m/year. Combined with the savings from Sturridge/Moreno, that's £580k/week, or £30.16m/year.

The fact that those high wages will be coming off the books (either by selling them or by their contracts expiring) suggests that there will be plenty of room to make significant additions next summer, particularly as some of these players can be replaced internally by promoting young guys on significantly lower wages.

Milner is perhaps the only one you could justify his current wage for given the number of games he played this season, but going forward his role will likely diminish. That said, perhaps he'd be happy to stick around on a lower salary in a squad role, maybe as backup LB.

Whatever the case, saving up to £580k/week (£30.16m /year) on the wage bill will surely open up enough room to make a couple of big splashes at CM and LW next summer.

This is how the team would look (ages based on 2020) once all the players listed above are moved on (with Milner included at LB):

------------------------------ Alisson (27) ------------------------------------
----------------------------- Grabara (21) ------------------------------------

Trent (21) -------- Gomez (23) ------- Van Dijk (29) ------- Robertson (26)
Hoever (18) ------- Matip (28) ----- Van den Berg (18) -------- Milner (34)

------------------------------ Fabinho (26) -----------------------------------
----------------------------- Henderson (30) ---------------------------------
------------------------------- Grujic (24) -------------------------------------

----------------- Wijnaldum (29) ---------- Keita (25) -----------------------
-------------------- New CM --------------- Ox (26) -------------------------

Salah (28) ------------------- Firmino (28) ----------------------- Mané (28)
Shaqiri (28) ------------------- Origi (25) ------------------------- New LW
Wilson (23) ----------------- Brewster (20) ----------------------------------
Elliott (17) ------------------- Duncan (19) -----------------------------------

Factor in that the club could also sell some of the aforementioned players before their contracts expire, along with the likes of Kent (~£10m), Wilson (~£20m), Woodburn (~£5m), Awoniyi (~£10m), Grujic (~£25m), etc, and that's a healthy boost to the transfer budget in 2020.

These remaining big wages are probably a big reason why we're not seeing much transfer movement this summer, but when a few more of them come off the books in 2020 we'll again see some more signings. And with up to an additional £100m in sales there's no reason why the club shouldn't be able to go big-game hunting for the absolute best players in those two positions.
Agree with much of what you say, but if Milner is asked to be backup LB as his primary squad role then I think he would say thanks but no thanks and leave upon the expiry of his contract. He didn't want to be first-choice LB two seasons ago and grudgingly did the role for a year, and will likely accept filling in there this season on the occasions Robbo doesn't play (fingers crossed no injury for Robbo) as long as his most regular role will be in midfield. At age 34 I think it would be questionable whether he'd still have the legs to play full-back in a system as physically demanding as ours. Either way I think we'll definitely need a new LB next season.
 

Mascot88

Bootroom Member
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
24,404
Right stop being pedantic you know what I mean by saying starter. Origi is not good enough to be a starter that doesn't mean he can't be given a starting role in a game ever that's just being daft on purpose to try and make someone else look like an idiot. You're doing this a lot recently to anyone who doesn't buy into your "everything is perfectly fine" opinion and its something you, as a mod, would be warning others over.
OK. Before I even bother to look at your points, let’s sort this out.

I’m not doing anything to make anyone look like any idiot. If simply reflecting your points back at you makes them seem a bit daft, maybe there is a problem with your points rather than with me?

Yesterday you said that Brewster could not be seen as an additional player because he would have been part of the squad last year if he’d not been injured. Then you said we only have three forwards capable of starting games. This is what you said, I haven’t twisted your words or misquoted you.

My opinion is not ‘everything is fine’. It’s ironic that you spend so much time moaning about be misrepresented, when you routinely do this to other people.

My opinion is that we could really do with another pacy, versatile forward. But if we don’t get one, I’m not going to lose my shit. I trust Klopp to make it work.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
13,395
OK. Before I even bother to look at your points, let’s sort this out.

I’m not doing anything to make anyone look like any idiot. If simply reflecting your points back at you makes them seem a bit daft, maybe there is a problem with your points rather than with me?

Yesterday you said that Brewster could not be seen as an additional player because he would have been part of the squad last year if he’d not been injured. Then you said we only have three forwards capable of starting games. This is what you said, I haven’t twisted your words or misquoted you.

My opinion is not ‘everything is fine’. It’s ironic that you spend so much time moaning about be misrepresented, when you routinely do this to other people.

My opinion is that we could really do with another pacy, versatile forward. But if we don’t get one, I’m not going to lose my shit. I trust Klopp to make it work.
Are you really arguing that you don't know what I meant by "good enough to be starting" and you don't understand how that is different than a player getting the odd start here and there? Is that not a clear example of you being needlessly pedantic to point score, misrepresent what I was saying to something more ridiculous so you could then mock my point?

As i said you've been doing this a lot recently to me and others. Like with the Brewster one which you are, once again, misrepresenting in an attempt to twist my point into something that can be mocked.

My point was we had 6 forwards on the books last season we lost about 1.2 worth of forwards to injuries over the course of the season (we were actually lucky Brewster accounted for about 80% of that as he was the forward likely to get the least amount of game time).

We now have 5 forwards (providing the Wilson and Kent departures occur which is what we were discussing at the time) and have no way of knowing if we will have more, the same or less playing time lost to injuries. Till we know how much playing time is lost to injuries we can't say we are anything other than a man down as we have gone from 6 to 5.

We could yet have more injury issues next season than we had last as we were a really strong with none of our first 5 choices missing significant game time which is way above average.

To say Brewster (who was already in the squad) replaces Sturridge adequately (because he wasn't used much) is needlessly and deceptively over optimistic. It ignores first that Brewster or others may miss as much or more time to injury as Brewster did last season so we don't "gain" to the squad to compensate for the Sturridge departure.

Also it ignores that our front 3 were relied upon and played too much because the likes of Sturridge weren't good enough to offer real alternatives, if they were Sturridge would have seen lots more game time than he did.

It also ignores that we played 4231 a lot with the likes of Lallana and Keita in attack which Klopp stopped doing towards the end of the season because we weren't as fluid, we may well continue with 433 all season again putting more pressure on the forwards than last season.

Finally it misses the issue that we will be faced with more game time, possibly a lot more game time, for our forwards to meet.

Its incredibly deceptive to say Sturridge is replaced by Brewster, for a start CF isn't even where we are weak up top. We could have neither player and as long as we had decent alternatives wide then Salah, Mane and Origi would be more than enough cover for Firmino at CF.

We were already weak at wide attack so just having Brewster replace Sturridge (even in an ideal scenario with none of our attackers picking up injuries) still doesn't solve the issues we actually have up top. One medium term injury to Mane and we aren't continuing with the 433 that saw us through the knock out phase of the CL two years on the bounce and record run of undefeated games in the league to achieve a ridiculous points total.
 

Sweeting

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
10,293
Curtis Jones, Nat Phillips and Ben Woodburn left out of the Evian tour. Klopp says it is because we have too many players to take everyone but he found room for Bobby Duncan...

I' be surprised if all three didn't get themselves out on loan by the end of the window.
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
15,504
Like with the Brewster one which you are, once again, misrepresenting in an attempt to twist my point into something that can be mocked.

My point was we had 6 forwards on the books last season we lost about 1.2 worth of forwards to injuries over the course of the season (we were actually lucky Brewster accounted for about 80% of that as he was the forward likely to get the least amount of game time).

We now have 5 forwards (providing the Wilson and Kent departures occur which is what we were discussing at the time) and have no way of knowing if we will have more, the same or less playing time lost to injuries. Till we know how much playing time is lost to injuries we can't say we are anything other than a man down as we have gone from 6 to 5.

We could yet have more injury issues next season than we had last as we were a really strong with none of our first 5 choices missing significant game time which is way above average.
On that basis we haven't gone from 6 forwards on the books last season to 5 forwards on the books this season. Brewster has taken Sturridge's place and Glatzel has taken Brewster's. Same age as Brewster was last year, similarly suffering a long-term injury likely to rule him out of most of the season, but nonetheless he's still on our books and must, therefore, be part of our forward options for the first team even though, like Brewster at the beginning of last season, he's never played a competitive game for the first team.

See? Whichever way you look at it, we're not down a player for the forward positions from last year.
 

Mascot88

Bootroom Member
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
24,404
1. Were any of our front three at that level when we bought them? Why would we need to buy an established "best in the world" type when we've been doing brilliant at what we've been doing? Don't get me wrong I'd hardly turn my nose up at it if it can be done but much more likely to buy a Neres or Everton (Brazilian kid) and Klopp turn them into a star.
You are not changing the problem. When Salah and Mane signed, they weren’t the phenomenons they are now. But nor did they ‘serve an apprenticeship’ as a squad player. They went straight into the first team as a key player.

I’d love to get Neres. But I can’t pretend that if I was advising him, I would be concerned about him going to Liverpool to be an understudy to their front three. I might be advising him to stay at Ajax, where he is already a key starting player for a Champions League Semi-Finalist.

I understand that this isn’t black and white, and you might find a similar player is willing to come in and bide their time. But the only point I’m trying to make is that this is not easy. We massively simplify the transfer business, and then get pissy at the club because they have failed against the fantasy world version of the transfer market we’ve created.

2. So we will have the same problem next year? No reason to wait. If its difficult now it'll be difficult then and we need to sign players sometime so we have to learn to overcome that challenge. Like we did with Alisson after Roma felt burned on Salah (so we have already learned to overcome this issue).
It’s going to be a problem going forward, and we need to find a way of dealing with this - not just clubs, but fans. Especially as agents big up their players by linking them to us spuriously.

I only raise it as a further complexity we need to be aware of.

Maybe Roma felt burned on Salah. Taking Alisson off them for £54m hardly helps with that, does it?

3. Just because one kid went somewhere else for guaranteed playing time doesn't mean every player will reject us. Clubs have been signing back up players for a long time. It happens every season. Not every player who moves to a club thinks either "I'm going to be starting from day 1" or "I can really see myself as the starter within a year"! For a start professional footballers dont look at a club about to play 60+ games and think the starting 11 is set in stone all season. Last season Salah, Mane and Firmino started 137 games between then, being overplayed, no major injuries. We are likely to play at least 60 which is at least180 starts without even considering us switching to a front 4. As a minimum we will have 43 starts to go towards other attackers and probably a lot more. We have the room for a new guy to come in and start between 30 (Fabinho first season level) and 40 (Salah style) games and still have playing time left over for Brewster and Origi.
There is so much to say on this, I don’t know where to start.

Firstly, I’m sure the maths is sound*, but your insistence that you know what players want and need isn’t.

My opinion is that players want to be able to progress. They want to see their pathway. Fabinho might tolerate a 25-30 game season if he knows its part of the process of getting his first team shirt. But would he come if we already had a good DM to share the position with?

You also need to consider the games themselves. Saying a new signing can get thirty games is one thing, but if they also know that they will be second fiddle in every big game - the finals and semis, big European matches, games against the top sides etc - then that might be a problem. If a player is our go to against bottom half sides, dead rubbers, and domestic cups, is that still an attractive offer?

Secondly, you’ve decided that Salah, Mane and Firmino were ‘overplayed’. So you know better than our world class, highly paid, sports science team on the matter? We seem to assume that players can’t play 40+ games a season. But the professionals who advise the club on this seem to think its OK.

I think football and sports science has moved on a bit from even ten years ago. These are incredibly fit lads, and they don’t need as much rotation as the last generation. Mo Salah expects to start 40+ games a season, and will expect to play when he can.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
 

Limiescouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
16,595
Woodburn is a bit of an enigma, given that he seems too small to be a CM, but lacks the pace to make it on the wing.
As opposed to the Silvas at City or Cesc Fabregas?

My point was we had 6 forwards on the books last season we lost about 1.2 worth of forwards to injuries over the course of the season (we were actually lucky Brewster accounted for about 80% of that as he was the forward likely to get the least amount of game time).

We now have 5 forwards (providing the Wilson and Kent departures occur which is what we were discussing at the time) and have no way of knowing if we will have more, the same or less playing time lost to injuries. Till we know how much playing time is lost to injuries we can't say we are anything other than a man down as we have gone from 6 to 5.

We could yet have more injury issues next season than we had last as we were a really strong with none of our first 5 choices missing significant game time which is way above average.

To say Brewster (who was already in the squad) replaces Sturridge adequately (because he wasn't used much) is needlessly and deceptively over optimistic. It ignores first that Brewster or others may miss as much or more time to injury as Brewster did last season so we don't "gain" to the squad to compensate for the Sturridge departure.
This is such a bizarre line of argument. Brewster did not just pick up an injury that mean our options were limited. He picked up an injury before the end of the prior season that meant we knew he would miss the entirety of the following season and so was not part of the equation when putting the season's squad together. The fact he "on the books" it totally and utterly irrelevant. Last year we constructed the squad with the knowledge he would not be available. This year we have done it with the expectation he will.
 
Last edited:

Mascot88

Bootroom Member
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
24,404
Are you really arguing that you don't know what I meant by "good enough to be starting" and you don't understand how that is different than a player getting the odd start here and there? Is that not a clear example of you being needlessly pedantic to point score, misrepresent what I was saying to something more ridiculous so you could then mock my point?
I think you need to stop this now. You are getting aggressive because this argument is going as you imagined. The problem is way your points are landing, not how they are being replied to. If you don’t get that, might be time for a walk in the fresh air.

I’m saying ‘I don’t know what you mean by a starter’ because you seem to be contradicting yourself. You seem to want a lad who will come in to back up the front three, and who doesn’t necessarily need to be at their level. But you don’t think we can consider the three or four lads we have who will currently back up the front three and aren’t at their level? So do you want something different to what we have now, or just more bodies?

You said in a previous post (if I understood correctly) that somewhere around 13 games is enough to keep Brewster and Origi happy. I’m sorry but it isn’t.

Origi has just signed a new contract after much stalling, and I am sure he has been promised more than ‘the odd game’. Brewster was going to leave the club, and Klopp had to make him big promises to keep him at the club. These guys will be big parts of the squad going forwards.

As i said you've been doing this a lot recently to me and others. Like with the Brewster one which you are, once again, misrepresenting in an attempt to twist my point into something that can be mocked.

My point was we had 6 forwards on the books last season we lost about 1.2 worth of forwards to injuries over the course of the season (we were actually lucky Brewster accounted for about 80% of that as he was the forward likely to get the least amount of game time).

We now have 5 forwards (providing the Wilson and Kent departures occur which is what we were discussing at the time) and have no way of knowing if we will have more, the same or less playing time lost to injuries. Till we know how much playing time is lost to injuries we can't say we are anything other than a man down as we have gone from 6 to 5.
I didn’t twist your point to mock it. It was ridiculous to start with.

You argued we’re a forward down, having lost Sturridge and because Brewster was part of the squad last year.

Brewster wasn’t part of the squad last year. He was injured before the start of the season, and it completely disingenuous to suggest that we’ve gone backwards on this basis.

I’m clearly not the only one who thinks this. Like Kopstar said, if you think you can include Brewster last year, then throw Glatzel in the mix this year. Make as much sense.

We could yet have more injury issues next season than we had last as we were a really strong with none of our first 5 choices missing significant game time which is way above average.
Yeah we could. But you can’t stockpile players on the basis that you might get an injury.
 

FilthyBloke

Undervalued member.
Joined
Feb 26, 2018
Messages
2,441
I’d be happy to see Wilson, Harvey,Brewster and origi supporting our main front three.
It’s the full back cover that worries me. It’s not that we have players that aren’t up to scratch (Moreno/Clyne), it’s that at the very best our only option is to play a midfielder out of position or change the whole shape of the team.
For a team chasing the title I’m not sure that’s very clever.
And I’m all for this planning ahead strategy regarding transfers but the club have known for a while that Moreno and Clyne would be leaving (until Clyne got injured) so to not have any kind of strategy replacing them is odd.
It’s not even in case Robertson or TAA get injured, it could be suspension or even lack of form.
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
15,932
I’d be happy to see Wilson, Harvey,Brewster and origi supporting our main front three.
It’s the full back cover that worries me. It’s not that we have players that aren’t up to scratch (Moreno/Clyne), it’s that at the very best our only option is to play a midfielder out of position or change the whole shape of the team.
For a team chasing the title I’m not sure that’s very clever.
And I’m all for this planning ahead strategy regarding transfers but the club have known for a while that Moreno and Clyne would be leaving (until Clyne got injured) so to not have any kind of strategy replacing them is odd.
It’s not even in case Robertson or TAA get injured, it could be suspension or even lack of form.
I think the first thing is that we need to think of players skill sets, not simply their positional tag - Milner has the attributes to play as an attacking full back, he isnt out of position playing there.

City won the title last year playing 'a midfielder out of position' last season (and possibly the year before?), so why couldnt we?.

The club had/have a strategy for replacing Moreno and Clyde - they may either be having difficulty in executing that strategy because their targets arent available/willing to come, or because we are favouring to go with players already at the club.
 

Limiescouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
16,595
City won the title last year playing 'a midfielder out of position' last season (and possibly the year before?), so why couldnt we?.
You can also look at the core group of CMs Pep uses and say that Gundogan, the one lowest on the depth list, is only one playing the same role that he'd primarily had prior to joining up with Pep. D Silva was a left forward/#10. B Silva was the same on the right. Mostly the same with KdB. Fernandinho's evolution is possibly as much due to age as to Pep, but prior to Pep arriving he was a Sami Khedira type roving CM, not the 3rd CB style DM he has now become.

Pep moves players to roles he thinks their strengths will allow them to perform well, and our fans look longingly that way and say "we need midfielder with those skills". We do the same and the response is that we need to spend to bring in the right players, not shoe horn players into unfamiliar roles.
 
Last edited:

DanLFC

Strafing ground targets
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
2,126
Great thread explaining the clubs financial situation and why they may be choosing to wait until next summer to make more big transfers:

Interesting read that, I think it is simply a case our targets aren't available, at least at the price we want to pay, so we are keeping our powder dry till they become available maybe in January or next Summer.

Having players like Brewster and Wilson gives us that flexibility and if they really go good maybe we dont buy at all or focus elsewhere on the squad.

That said Id still love a lb to support Robbo
 

mattyhurst

TIA Regular
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
15,348
Wouldn't surprise me if we buy in January if I'm honest.

My post prior is about keeping Wilson, if we aren't going buy and to be honest I'd rather not now then it must be with a view to keeping Wilson as support. I wouldn't want us not to be signing players on the basis of bringing youth through and then flogging them. I say give him a chance in the Community shield final, if he copes then he is sorted as back up for us, from what I've seen he generally makes us look far more dynamic than we do without him.

As for Ox and Gino they are better suited further back, you could move the Ox into that front three if needed but Gino is a deffo no no.
 

i_still_miss_fowler

Open Your Eyes Morty!
Moderator
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
7,750
The problem is really Origi. Despite forever going down in folklore I dont think he should have been given a new contract.

He is by any definition a squad player, with a notable drop in quality from the front three. That is different to another first team player who can rotate in as required . Look at our midfield, we have 5 players who can call themselves first team players (Miner, Henderson, Wjindaldum, Fabinho and Keita) all would hope to start critical games (without the need of others getting injured/banned).

Having a a fourth attacker (who can compete with Firmino, Salah and Mane) helps the robustness of our front three by taking away from their match time. It gives key players greater recovery between two important games in a row. The impact on Brewster is low.

On the other hand Brewster competes directly for match time with Origi. As Origi is a squad player baring injury/bans his match time is often lower profile games when you can feel more confident of gaining a result, or the last alternatively 15 minutes of a game/last throw of dice.

We should have a real fourth choice attacker. Not simply to cover our front three in case of injuries. But to prevent those injuries ever occurring with better game management. If we feel having too many forward is blocking access to the first team for youngsters. We need to remove squad players.
 

Limiescouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
16,595
As for Ox and Gino they are better suited further back, you could move the Ox into that front three if needed but Gino is a deffo no no.
I think the issue is more the combination of the two of them ,especially when supplementing a pre-season Divok.

Gini arrived as a number 10 and has shown at times the ability to be effective further up the pitch. I think the issue is like we see from a poorly put together second strong cup side...it is not any one player who cannot play the role, but the combination of 7 or 8 players at the same time who are not up to speed. Both will play differently than Mane or Salah, but I think we can accommodate. The problem is the number of accommodations you make simultaneously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.