• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You're Klavan a laugh.

Status
Not open for further replies.

6TimesaRed

Not a Bot....
Administrator
He Captains Estonia and he is turd...

Wtf was going on when we signed him..

Seriously. The warning signs where there to see last season to get rid, now the fucker is 3rd choice.

Absolute gash centre back..
 
I'm not klavan none of it.

On a serious note I shudder when I see his name on the team sheet especially if paired with lovren.
 
In fairness to him he had some decent to good performances last season and isn't solely to blame but is part of a collectively shit back line.

The fact Lovren has been complete wank and Matip has also looked suspect should give you a clue.

I think we are missing Clyne and Milner massively back there.

I think he's done but I'd love a Rags to riches story for the bin man
 
The biggest issue with him is that he doesnt have the build to be commanding in this league.
He gets easily outmuscled and loses most of the duels infront of goal.
 
I'm not going to point the finger solely at Klavan, there have been occasions when he has played well for us, nor is it true that Lovren is always poor but clearly at the moment he is not on form and his confidence is low, I can understand that many fans are frustrated but at the same time I'm not so sure that the criticism is going to help raise any of the defenders up.

A bit more maturity on the pitch, maybe by playing Milner back there again. Actually tweaking the midfield somewhat and playing one of the three as an outright defensive midfielder might help... I dunno....I understand why Klopp has done it but at the same time constantly changing the defence is not working out very well at the minute is it.

What is also true is that everybody in the team needs to buckle down a bit so that we as fans can revert to being happier and everyone can feel a bit more positivity around the place. I think it would help.
 
I think it's a bit unfair that he gets continuously singled out because he's an easy target (old, Estonian, unfashionable). It's obvious that he's shit but Matip and Lovren haven't been doing much better lately.
 
He is not good enough, and it's really irritating that when Leicester (and Burnley in the weekend) defenders had been blocking shots all game, he turns his arse when they scored the first goal.
 
The biggest issue with him is that he doesnt have the build to be commanding in this league.
He gets easily outmuscled and loses most of the duels infront of goal.

I think there's obvious physical requirements to play in central defence in the Premiership, but he's nearly 6 foot 2, so height isn't a massive issue, and while there may be factors involving his upper body strength, there's quite a few examples of CBs who don't look that massive and are still extremely effective.

So I accept there may be physical factors, but I think the biggest problem is that he's not very good.
 
He's a casualty of the almighty lash-up we made of signing van Dijk. The intention was clearly for him to be 4th choice only and in those circs, coming into the side less frequently and with less pressure on him, he might well have done better than he has so far.
 
We never should've got rid of Sakho, regardless of whatever happened between him and Klopp. He was probably our best defender - a toss up between him and Matip - though that's not saying much. But when it became obvious we weren't signing Van Dijk or any other cb, we should never in a million years have been left with a squad with Matip, bloody Lovren and fucking Klavan as the only senior centre backs. Absolutely mind-boggling.
 
I don't agree with the "regardless" bit. I liked Sakho, rated him more highly than some on here and was sorry things went sour for him at LFC, but something serious clearly lay behind that and IMHO it doesn't make good sense simply to sweep such things aside, particularly when we don't know the full details.
 
Sakho was sloppy
He had doping issues
The manager had issues with his attitude
Barely an improvement on anything we had
Bring back Skittles and Aggro
 
We never should've got rid of Sakho, regardless of whatever happened between him and Klopp. He was probably our best defender - a toss up between him and Matip - though that's not saying much. But when it became obvious we weren't signing Van Dijk or any other cb, we should never in a million years have been left with a squad with Matip, bloody Lovren and fucking Klavan as the only senior centre backs. Absolutely mind-boggling.

I was going to post but then I read yours and though 'why bother?'
 
Just took a look at defenders that have left since Klopp took over.
They are:
Sakho
Toure
Enrique
Skittles
Wisdom
Ilori
Smith
McLaughlin

Some not good enough, some old/injured, some he didn't rate, I guess. But are we in a better situation now or not?
 
I don't agree with the "regardless" bit. I liked Sakho, rated him more highly than some on here and was sorry things went sour for him at LFC, but something serious clearly lay behind that and IMHO it doesn't make good sense simply to sweep such things aside, particularly when we don't know the full details.

I understand that, and to an extent you have to side with the manager if he's so intent on getting rid of Sakho. However, he should also be pragmatic enough to realise that the defence is fucking shite, and Sakho is better than most, if not all, of them. He could've buried the hatchet until at least January and tried again for Van Dijk. Or you know, perhaps, sign someone else. I know that would be difficult given that Van Dijk is the only centre back better than Klavan and Lovren in world football.
 
Think the bit you are missing is the £26m we banked for Sakho to balance the books for FSG.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 
I've never really bought into all the lizard hype when it comes to FSG, but this summer was the first time I ever really saw any credence in those claims. However, I think Sakho was sold purely because Klopp hates his guts, unfortunately.
 
In a way you both have a point. I agree that Sakho was let go because of a breakdown in relations between him and Klopp, but I also suspect money had something to do with the decision not to buy someone else when it became clear that van Dijk wasn't coming (yet). Klopp will have had a set amount to spend over and above what I suspect we've already earmarked for van Dijk, and I can well believe that none of the options available for the kind of money we're talking about were noticeably better than what we've got now. In those circs, going down the "somebody, anybody" route is a mistake we've been making FAR too often for the last quarter century.
 
I suspect it's as much due to the salary bill as it is transfer fees, we have a very large wage bill compared to our peers & I suspect that salary demands would increase in line with the fees demanded.
 
Just took a look at defenders that have left since Klopp took over.
They are:
Sakho
Toure
Enrique
Skittles
Wisdom
Ilori
Smith
McLaughlin

Some not good enough, some old/injured, some he didn't rate, I guess. But are we in a better situation now or not?

They're all shite, bar Sakho to a point. I'd argue what we have is better, not massively better, but it is
 
Just took a look at defenders that have left since Klopp took over.
They are:
Sakho
Toure
Enrique
Skittles
Wisdom
Ilori
Smith
McLaughlin

Some not good enough, some old/injured, some he didn't rate, I guess. But are we in a better situation now or not?

Ilori isn't he playing for the reserves tonight?
 
I'm sympathetic to the "don't waste money on a stopgap we'll have to shift next year" but surely we could have been like the cunts we accuse the Italian clubs of being and made some dodgy loan offers.

Bottom line is we needed to upgrade on Klavan and make a decision on how best yo further Gomez's development, even if we couldn't upgrade our top pairing. Early evidence suggests failing to do so was an error.
 
Yeah, I'm sympathetic too, and I've been an advocate of it myself, but to me, it boils down to this: Klopp has said he wants two players of quality in each position on the pitch. There are two CB positions. We have Matip who is the best of the bunch, and I'm a fan, but he can't really be relied upon with his injury record and some iffy performances. We have Lovren, who I think is utter log and manages to paper over the cracks every now and again with good performances. All of the CBs in the premier league have good games in them, doesn't mean we should go and splash out on James Tomkins. He (Lovren) is not good enough. Klavan is a fucking joke.

Therefore we have one, maybe, good centre back at the club. One. Klopp, supposedly, should be wanting four. If he thinks Lovren and Klavan are good enough to be getting consistent games at this club then I've got to be asking serious questions. We should have been targeting Van Dijk AND one other.

Ideally, what I would've liked to have seen was:

Matip
Van Dijk
Sexy CB #2
Lovren (I would've preferred Sakho over him, but he obviously has pictures of Klopp skullfucking a pig so that was never going to happen).
Klavan stripped and sold for parts.

Not sure about Gomez, either, he could break down at any moment, like he has done in the past. Twice. Plus his middle name is Dave. DAVE.
 
We definitely had room in the squad for a clear number 1 (VvD) and a competitor to start alongside him. Agree - 2 could have been targeted
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom