Xherdan Shaqiri (LW/RW) Stoke

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
19,423
Likes
31,476
Skimping on the tea again, are we? We all know how you get without it so be a good lad and stick to the recommended dosages, eh?
You're probably more right that you know. Have been having a lot of stomach issues in the last year or so, and it seems tea is one of the things that is setting me off so haven't had a proper cup for months now. God I miss it. This is probably why I'm being a miserable arse lol
 

Hope in your heart

Loyalty and patience, two undervalued concepts...
Admin
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
21,040
Likes
17,952
I understand you like him, Hope and that's fine.
Actually, I don't like him that much on a personal level... He's not the smartest tool in the shed to be fair, has horrible advisors and agents (his brothers) and is... somewhat ugly, as some have already said. lol But I know from what I have seen with my own eyes that this lad is a good footballer, and I'm convinced that he can help us becoming stronger on the pitch if Klopp goes for him.

I'm not doubting one moment that if Klopp decides to go for him, he'll get the best out of this lad. And then, he'll add genuine strength in depth, something we thoroughly need.

"You sign Voronin, maybe it works maybe it doesn't, it's low-cost risk."

"You sign Joe Cole, maybe it works maybe it doesn't, it's low-cost risk."

"You sign Jovanovic, maybe it works maybe it doesn't, it's low-cost risk."

"You sign Balotelli, maybe it works maybe it doesn't, it's low-cost risk."

"You sign Poulsen, maybe it works maybe it doesn't, it's low-cost risk."

"You sign Adam, maybe it works maybe it doesn't, it's low-cost risk."

"You sign Konchesky, maybe it works maybe it doesn't, it's low-cost risk."

Rinse and repeat.

The chief problem with signing a player who isn't good enough to start is that you end up with a player who's not good enough to start, and you get burned over and over like we have.
You sign Andy Robertson, maybe it works maybe it doesn't, it's low-cost risk. ;-)
 

Wyld@Heart

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
2,486
Likes
5,939
I'd take Shaqiri as a squad filler. Was saying to a friend the other day who'd have been better to have as an option in the CL final after Mo got mugged; Shaqiri or a barely match fit Lallana or the choice of Ings and Solanke. Depth is the hallmark of title winning teams and has been so for many a year now.

Injuries fucked us up in midfield to be sure but the front three carried us through the season mightily but it still remained just them since Jan. We kind of fell over the line abit in the league and then the lack of cover for Mo, Bobby and our madcap Senegalese bit us on the arse in the final. Only Shaqiri coming in to bolster our attack would have me in a bit of a fume but I can't see that; GK, Fabinho, Keita, Fekir type if not actually Fekir, classy wide front type person and the Shaqiri and that would be an awesome window all around with depth to spare. 12 mil odd is unlikely to mess with our budget in the other areas.
 

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
19,423
Likes
31,476
Hang on, when we signed him Joke Hole was apparently better than Messi.
Kind of what I've tried to allude to. Sure, in some cases we more or less knew we were getting someone pants... but in most cases I can recall just as passionate debates about the qualities of such players (and I'd say Voronin's record at Leverkusen was similar to Shaqiri's at Bayern/Stoke). Now we look at the list and say 'yeah, but they were rubbish', but that is largely hindsight. I can remember a lot of positivity around Jovanovic (remember when it down to him or Chamakh? Dark days...) and Cole in particular, even Voronin (though I wasn't part of the TIA community back then). Probably Shaqiri is better than most of those (it wouldn't be hard), but it still brings back memories of signings in similar circumstances.

Anyway, have had my say now. Hopefully we're looking at every conceivable option (I'm sure we are) and if we sign Shaqiri then it's because he's the best one available to us.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
10,166
Likes
6,370
Sure, it's all about opinions. What I'm getting at there really is there are alternative options and hope that Shaqiri is one of a number of avenues being explored. If our recruitment team takes a long solid look at every possibility and still comes to the conclusion that he's their man, and it's a judgement not just on cost but also ability and suitability, then they've earned enough credit with me for me to support their decision.
Not to sound pessimistic but every signing we make as a club has a cost decision. Every player is available at right price. Might be 400 million or something stupid but yeah every player we buy we are targeting because they do what we want/need and within what we can spend.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
661
Likes
1,003
What medical? As far as Roy was concerned, if you'd got two of everything (that you should have), and you were warm and still breathing, you were in.
lollollol you are so right about old Roy - anyone will do. lollollol this was a sad time for our club, hopefully not to return :-(
 

UpTheReds

Active Member
Joined
May 26, 2018
Messages
409
Likes
240
Kind of what I've tried to allude to. Sure, in some cases we more or less knew we were getting someone pants... but in most cases I can recall just as passionate debates about the qualities of such players (and I'd say Voronin's record at Leverkusen was similar to Shaqiri's at Bayern/Stoke). Now we look at the list and say 'yeah, but they were rubbish', but that is largely hindsight. I can remember a lot of positivity around Jovanovic (remember when it down to him or Chamakh? Dark days...) and Cole in particular, even Voronin (though I wasn't part of the TIA community back then). Probably Shaqiri is better than most of those (it wouldn't be hard), but it still brings back memories of signings in similar circumstances.

Anyway, have had my say now. Hopefully we're looking at every conceivable option (I'm sure we are) and if we sign Shaqiri then it's because he's the best one available to us.
I wish we had better data from some of those leagues then to see just how bad some of those buys/targets would have looked at the time with it.
 

Noo Noo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2014
Messages
1,410
Likes
1,028
If there's genuine interest from us then there has to be a reason behind it, something in his playing stats that has at least got the scouting department looking at him. Pretty sure that Klopp knows about him as well given he spent some time at Bayern.
 

CymruRed

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
494
Likes
413
No I'm not saying that at all and I don't know where you get that from. We nearly signed Fekir so there will be an alternative or we go back for Fekir. I never stated we buy two "Fekir" types. Having signed Fekir or the alternative I don't understand the need to spend £12mill plus on Shaqiri. As stated earlier we lost two first choice players from the squad and replaced them with Keita and Fabinho.
You mentioned Fekir/Fekir <--- twice,i never said you DID say that,i was ASKING if thats what you were saying,thats all,so there was no misunderstanding in why you think we don't need a Shaqiri type player on our bench.So your happy if we buy Fabinho,Kieta and a Fekir type player and leave it at that? no player on the bench at a low fee who can come on and give Mane/Salah a break on the forward wing position?
 

Semmy

tho your dreams be tossed and blown
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
7,151
Likes
3,822
This lad doesn't take his profession seriously.

If he did, he wouldn't be a fat little sausage roll with 2 smug chins. What are they feeding the lads at Stoke's grounds, meat pies and ales for breakfast?

If we are planning to have another run at it, that extra wide player would be able to play either wing, two-footed with guile/pace and a football brain. To properly rotate Salah and Mane from 50-60 matches to 35-40. Lowers the risk of injury if rested. Whomever we go with will get 25-30 matches just for coverage in the players stay healthy, nevermind the annual winter slump the Mane has in Jan/Feb.

This season we looked 2 players short of silverware, which is the same situation we had in January 13/14 where we had the opportunity to buy to help fill the squad and didn't then pissed the Suarez money sway on dross.

I fucking hope we don't do it again by rummaging through the bargain bin. Thought we were past this.

For those counting, that's a no from me on the swiss troll
 

big noyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
919
Likes
1,029
i know a lot of people rate harry wilson and that it's not my money to worry about, but activating shaqiri's relegation clause and bringing in gelson martins for 'free' would add depth/balance with plenty left over to address other areas. and if the fekir deal is revived, you have a reasonable bobby facsimile too
 

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
19,423
Likes
31,476
I know it started out as a joke, but people do realise he's not actually fat, yeah?

There are plenty of rather homoerotic photos of him on the internet to prove it*

*SO I'M TOLD
The thighs! The unnaturally muscular thighs!

I'm still having flashbacks.

In build, Shaqiri is not unlike one of those classical oil paintings of cattle:

 

hoosierred

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
1,705
Likes
1,082
As much as ANY of us on this board of impotent nonsense actually know.
To answer your original question - because Payet was homesick in London and prefers to be in France... and does not appear to have a release clause that under values him in the market.

None of which clarifies who is or isn’t an ass or able to help the team. Shaquiri is a great football manager pickup right now.

Someone with a better knowledge pool than us clever fellows has to figure out if he’s going to be happy filling in from the bench, running hard everyday, and being a good teammate - like anyone we try to bring in.
 



KillerBeeLFC

TIA Reserve Team
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
880
Likes
609
As much as ANY of us on this board of impotent nonsense actually know.
But I dont see many people on this forum calling people aresy shitbags for no reason. He isnt the 100 million quid player people seem to want but Im not sure why any LFC supporters think we NEED a megastar forward to supplement the best attacking trio in Europe. Who the fucks this mega star going to replace? We scored the most goals ever in a champions league campaign so not sure how we could improve on that. Why are some so content on rocking the apple cart, I really dont get it. Shaqiri seems like a decent signing to me. Would stop teams immediately pegging us back as soon as salah or mane come off as he has the quality to hurt teams and teams will know that.
 
D

Dave Almighty

Guest
But I dont see many people on this forum calling people aresy shitbags for no reason. He isnt the 100 million quid player people seem to want but Im not sure why any LFC supporters think we NEED a megastar forward to supplement the best attacking trio in Europe. Who the fucks this mega star going to replace? We scored the most goals ever in a champions league campaign so not sure how we could improve on that. Why are some so content on rocking the apple cart, I really dont get it. Shaqiri seems like a decent signing to me. Would stop teams immediately pegging us back as soon as salah or mane come off as he has the quality to hurt teams and teams will know that.
He simply isn’t that good, he has 15 goals in 3 seasons for Stoke and NO ONE has tried to sign him. No one has any clue if we are.

I have a certain standard that I hold Liverpool players to, he is vastly below. If you are cool with the upside of £30m being spent on a Stoke player with as much output as Robert Snodgrass....then you do you mate.

I am frankly baffled Liverpool fans aren’t horrified by him being an option. He would suit the Ev, therefore nothing like good enough for us.

Every argument I hear for him can genuinely be argued for Theo Walcott joining us. Honestly, there is very little difference.

Walcott since 2015 has appeared 56 times for Arsenal and scored 23 goals.
Less games, more goals. More trophies in his career, much of a muchness, arguably a better option.

And he is shit as well.
 

SC LFC Fan

Active Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2017
Messages
97
Likes
164
He simply isn’t that good, he has 15 goals in 3 seasons for Stoke and NO ONE has tried to sign him. No one has any clue if we are.

I have a certain standard that I hold Liverpool players to, he is vastly below. If you are cool with the upside of £30m being spent on a Stoke player with as much output as Robert Snodgrass....then you do you mate.

I am frankly baffled Liverpool fans aren’t horrified by him being an option. He would suit the Ev, therefore nothing like good enough for us.

Every argument I hear for him can genuinely be argued for Theo Walcott joining us. Honestly, there is very little difference.

Walcott since 2015 has appeared 56 times for Arsenal and scored 23 goals.
Less games, more goals. More trophies in his career, much of a muchness, arguably a better option.

And he is shit as well.

Where are you getting upside of 30m?
 

Speckydodge

TIA Squad Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
2,384
Likes
1,050
My problem with him being our wide rotation option is that when Salah or Mane were out what we missed was their pace and directness and he doesn't solve that for us, also evident would be the drop in quality from them to him still. Like any player that joins I'd support him and hope to be proven wrong but I'm very unsure of this one.
 
D

Dave Almighty

Guest
Where are you getting upside of 30m?
He will need paying.
4 year deal. Arguably £60k a week.
That is £12.5m on top of £15m
£27.5m on a player with very limited sell on. He is 27.

That’s a big outlay on a player who isn’t as good as Theo Walcott.