Keyblade

9 hours ago, bobzy said:

Watched the game and sent this to my Dad (we always discuss the games watching etc):  "Alexander-Arnold did NOT WANT to defend that "

He's such a weird player because he's technically brilliant, has a phenomenal passing range, great crossing ability and has a good shot on him... but defensively he's just so weak.  He's pretty much one of Liverpool's best players but doesn't really work in the position he plays - it's so odd.

He was always a RM, but moved to RB early in his career because he thought it would be a better pathway to the first team, and so it proved. I think Klopp should have eventually shifted him there permanently, but that would probably have been predicated on them signing a top class RB which they never did. 

26 minutes ago, VillaChris said:

Certainly limping to the end of the season now. I thought they'd pick up again after exiting Europa but hasn't happened.

Their transfer strategy is rightly lauded but I think last few months have shown the drawbacks of it. If I'm right they replaced Caciedo and Alexis Mac with Dahoud (clearly didn't settle and now back in Bundesliga), Baleba (promising but just a kid) and Lallana?!!!! Milner would probably be playing central midfield if he was fit currently. Gilmour was doing o.k but that's a real downgrade in a key part of the pitch and why De Zerbi is moaning so much so a little chink and we'll see what they do in the next window as the spark has gone from their play big time and this is how teams slowly fall back down the premier league.

You can only keep the conveyor belt running flawlessly for so long. It was bound to happen at some point. They had a good run though. Played against the likes of Ajax and Roma in Europe too, who'd have thought this when we were both slugging it out under Hughton and Bruce not so long ago?

Just now, CarryOnVilla said:

Yeah, they were flying high and looking good. Good enough for Chelsea to nab their manager. 

De zerbi comes in and carries it on, largely the same players and style. 

Or am I wrong and De Zerbi transformed them?

They've looked good in multiple periods under Potter, but they'd always lacked cutting edge and ultimately finished bottom half. I didn't expect that season to go any different. Lest we forget our famous Cazoo Derby where we were once joint top with Everton after a similar number of games. De Zerbi had them scoring for fun (not just topping the xG charts) and finished 6th + got them to an FA Cup semi. I'd say he did.

3 minutes ago, CarryOnVilla said:

Wasn’t Brighton on their way to that European spot when Chelsea nabbed Potter? 

What, after 6 games?

1 minute ago, villa4europe said:

Or what they did spend they spent really well... 

That's a large part of the truth, they sold incredibly well hence the net spend stuff and then by and large they bought really well

Man Utd spent twice as much on a team half as good 

And again klopp is a very good coach, would deny that or argue against that... Up there with Fergie and Wenger and Pep? In the conversation for best ever PL manager? Not a chance, but that's what's happening already and is going to happen this summer, 5 trophies out of 36 in 9 years in the conversation for one of the best... In that context he's simply not won enough 

You can only say they spent well in hindsight after seeing how they turned out. Did their scouting department (who largely predated Klopp's arrival) know that Salah, Mane, TAA, Robertson et al would be world beaters, or did Klopp coach it out of them?  FSG are notorious among Liverpool fans for not being particularly ambitious, and their transfer record belies that. It's quite obvious that they've been dragged to their level of success by Klopp.

9 minutes ago, CarryOnVilla said:

I never got the de zerbi hype. I don’t know what he’s done that potter didn’t before 

Actually be an attacking threat and finished in a European spot?

I mean for one, football is largely played on the balance sheet today, but also how did Liverpool get a team that should have challenged for more trophies, if it wasn't their budget? You can't have it both ways. Either they spent their way to their success (or perceived lack thereof), or they didn't and were dragged there through superior coaching.

12 minutes ago, Zatman said:

and net spend is flawed as I said because of them ridiculous deals

Football is played on the pitch not the balance sheet and Liverpool had a team to win more trophies and didnt

I agree net spend is flawed, but you brought up their sales. 

No matter which way you slice it, they have over performed under Klopp.

6 minutes ago, Zatman said:

not cherry picking as playersI mentioned were starters but net spend is flawed. They got nearly 20 million for Brewster, 50 million in Saudi money for a broken Fabinho and Henderson, not to mention the ridiculous Coutinho fee and scammed Bournemouth for a bunch of youngsters though Solanke is coming good 6 seasons later

You're still doing it. Look at the net spend list. They're 8th mate. That's including Coutinho.

Manchester City have bought at least 3 £50m+ fullbacks, but Klopp with TAA and Robertson for a combined £8m should have done better really. Because of course they were the TAA and Robertson we know now back when they made their debuts. I've always disliked Liverpool, but sometimes you have to hold your hands up and give credit where it's due.

13 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Alisson - world record transfer fee at time and top keeper

TAA - one of best technical players in world

Robertson was a top full back 

Van Dijk most expensive defender in the world at the time. Some idiots have even declared him best defender in Premier League history

Salah/Mane/Firmino nothing needs be said

Coutinho/Thiago/Milner/Fabinho/Matip/Jota all good players

Then big signings like Nunez and Keita which were duds

I'm not sure why you're cherry picking a handful of examples and ignoring overall spend which is a better metric, but even so let's look at some of these.

- TAA: Academy player who Klopp started playing from the age of 17. Not sure what you're getting at here. You realize when you mention players that cost nothing or very little you're making the argument in favour of Klopp right?

- Robertson was a top fullback at *checks notes* Hull City and moved for a then world record fee of *turns page* £8m? That one?

- Salah/Mane/Firmino: You're right, nothing needs to be said about turning a Chelsea reject slowly turning his career around in Series A, a promising young player from Hoffenheim and a good but inconsistent player from Southampton, for £30m a pop into one of the greatest front 3's in PL history. If there was something to be said I can only imagine it would be in Klopp's favour.

You can go through the other 5 clubs above them in spending (maybe not City), and cherry pick way more examples of very experience signings, both good and bad. To put it in perspective, they've only spent roughly £300m more than us in the time Klopp was there. And we spent 3 of those years in the Championship! This is the same amount that Arsenal spent more than them, and yet they have been much more successful than Arsenal, and lightyears away from us. How is this possible? Is it magic?

13 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

I have a long enough memory to remember what a basket case Liverpool were before Klopp.

They will quickly revert back there once he leaves. 

Hilarious how many people have such difficulty separating their emotions about a rival manager from their analysis of his record. 

He'll be remembered by Liverpool fans in the same way Paisley and Dalglish are but let Villa fans tell it and you'd think he was Souness or something.

1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said:

Palace have publicly put price tags of £60m on Eze and Olise.

Is it just me that thinks they might have gone cheap on those?

 

Very cheap. Are the in some financial trouble?

Spending since Klopp came in:

Gross:

Net:

You would hope Man United could sneak a couple of league finishes above Liverpool (such as the injury derailed season where Cardiff City bench warmer Nat Phillips made 20 starts for Liverpool), given how much they've spent.

Ironically, it's a feather in the cap of Klopp that people are expecting Pep/City-esque dominance from him otherwise he's deemed a failure, when by right they shouldn't even be up there. And they never were anywhere near up there for the ~30 years preceding him, and likely won't be for many gears after him. But he's the failure, somehow.

23 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

don't disagree about cheating city

but in that same time period man utd have 2 league cups, arsenal have 2 fa cups, Leicester have an FA cup and a PL title

in the last 9 seasons chelsea have 1 PL, 1 FA cup, 1 CL and 1 EL - they've also lost 7 finals in that time

while we are told that klopp is a world class manager and one of the all time greats in English football, VVD is the best PL CB ever, TAA is world class, Salah is world class, Alisson is the best keeper in the league - and to be fair to them they are a very good team, at times over his tenure they've been outright brilliant - but the trophy haul simply doesn't reflect that, 9 years would put him at 36 trophies available, they won 5 so 14%

and they've not been knocked out of these cup competitions by man city, they've lost to Southampton, Leicester, us, wolves (x2) west ham, west brom

Cup competitions are a crapshoot relatively speaking. Even saying that, they've been to 3 CL finals, which even City can't boast. I'd prefer to measure a team's greatness on league performance. If you take City out of the equation, they'd have had 3 of the 5 best seasons in PL history.

Also, I know we take the piss out of them for winning the Net Spend Table, but they really have spent comparatively little. Previous great teams like United, Chelsea etc simply spent the most. Klopp has done well elevating players like Salah and Mane to world class levels. I'm hesitant to add VVD to that given that he was £70m, but he wasn't anywhere near world class at Southampton, plus we've seen how big signings like that could go south *cough*Maguire*cough*.

2 hours ago, villa4europe said:

it is but I'm going to go back there....

1 PL, 1 FA Cup, 2 League cups, 1 CL in 9 seasons, he they / have underachieved 

he'll be put up there with fergie, wenger, pep and jose but doesn't have the trophy cabinet to match

He's had to contend with a cheating, Man City who have been sweeping up the trophies here. How can anybody else win the league here? They've finished a season with 90+ points 3 times and only won the title once. Drop them in Fergie's era and they're winning the league every season. Hell, they just need 5 more points this season to win the league in the hallowed treble season

Rooney being younger than Ashley Young, Ronaldo and even LeBron James boggles the mind. 

3 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said:

Did you think Scot Hogan was the missing piece of the jigsaw when we signed him?

How do you feel about cabbages, as they relate to football?

We need to play Diaby and Bailey together again. Keep the pressure on Cucurella all game. Keep Dougie on the bench til 60 mins. Tielemans and McGinn have been working so well together.

2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

9 behind even with 3 games in hand is hard, but those games in hand being Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal... Yeah..

Or you could look at it as Sheffield United, Burnley and Chelsea.

4 points from Chelsea and Brighton and we're almost home safe. Don't really care which order they come in. I think we got this. Of course Spurs could make it easy for us by losing a couple, but we don't want to rely on that.