Fair comments both.
What a carcrash the whole thing has been, and what a predictable one.
What a carcrash the whole thing has been, and what a predictable one.
We only have a 24 hour window to sell Balotelli
- Thread starter redhorizon2
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
We could ask Leicester to take him on loan. With Kante possibly leaving, I would say it's perfect for him.
What's Kante leaving got to do with anything?
In any case, they have Vardy and have just signed Musa. They don't need him, even if he wasn't fucking shite, stupid and lazy
Didn't the speculation begin on the US tour when some photos of Rodgers shaking hands with Milan players? Talk about sending the wrong signal to the TC
I think he sent the right signal when he said he didn't want to sign Balotelli.
Didnt he have a choice between Balotelli or Eto'o?
The whole exercise was poorly managed and exposed divisions in the club's hierarchy. At that point he should quit as manager.
Regardless, the damage is done, and at best we could recoup part of the original fee paid.
Bullshit, it was have been completely selfish of him to quit at that stage.
The buck stops with the manager. Whether its his or TC's signing, its his responsibility. But coming out in public and stating that he didn't want x players, he completely gave away his powers.
Yeah, just like a Kante.
I hate this manager vs TC crap that rears its head all the time.
It was stated on many occasions - while Rodgers was here - that the manager was part of the TC and had the final say on all signings. It was also stated by Rodgers himself (on Sky Sports I believe, after he'd left Liverpool) that Balotelli was presented to him as a final option late in the transfer window and he took it.
Rodgers was asked by the press a couple of weeks beforehand if Liverpool were signing Balotelli and he said no ("categorically") - presumably because the idea had already been floated and he'd turned it down. But when Balotelli was the last option on the table; Rodgers changed his mind, no more than that.
Just because it is called a "Transfer Committee" (thank you American owners!) doesn't actually mean that Liverpool transfers operate any/much differently to any other club. I very much doubt there's a club operating now, in the top leagues, with a manager that has total control over transfers - nor do I believe that there is one where the manager has no say whatsoever.
Just to be clear (before agenda alarms start going off), Balotelli was a bad idea all around in hindsight - some saw it coming, mind - but I don't blame Rodgers for changing his mind and taking his last option to plug what he saw as a key gap in the squad (shit or bust).
Mario isn't an option for Klopp though, so the sooner he is off the wage bill the better.
It was stated on many occasions - while Rodgers was here - that the manager was part of the TC and had the final say on all signings. It was also stated by Rodgers himself (on Sky Sports I believe, after he'd left Liverpool) that Balotelli was presented to him as a final option late in the transfer window and he took it.
Rodgers was asked by the press a couple of weeks beforehand if Liverpool were signing Balotelli and he said no ("categorically") - presumably because the idea had already been floated and he'd turned it down. But when Balotelli was the last option on the table; Rodgers changed his mind, no more than that.
Just because it is called a "Transfer Committee" (thank you American owners!) doesn't actually mean that Liverpool transfers operate any/much differently to any other club. I very much doubt there's a club operating now, in the top leagues, with a manager that has total control over transfers - nor do I believe that there is one where the manager has no say whatsoever.
Just to be clear (before agenda alarms start going off), Balotelli was a bad idea all around in hindsight - some saw it coming, mind - but I don't blame Rodgers for changing his mind and taking his last option to plug what he saw as a key gap in the squad (shit or bust).
Mario isn't an option for Klopp though, so the sooner he is off the wage bill the better.
I don't disagree, especially considering that Suarez was moved on early in the window so there was plenty of time to plan for a replacement. It's clear that the club expected more playing time from Sturridge than they got, but that's no excuse.
Balotelli was a poor target, but I don't buy that he was forced on anyone.
Genuine question then: how do you reconcile that view with Rodgers saying just three weeks or so before the signing that "Mario Balotelli will never play for Liverpool Football Club"?
That is an odd comment but I cant imagine a club signing such an expencive player on those wages without the manager having the final say, and agreeing. It would be an horrendous business decision.
Rodgers said it was a calculated risk. I've been wondering if Rodgers saw it as a challenge to get him performing and thought he could do it. In hindsight Eto'o on a free transfer would have been excellent compared to this mess.
Rodgers said it was a calculated risk. I've been wondering if Rodgers saw it as a challenge to get him performing and thought he could do it. In hindsight Eto'o on a free transfer would have been excellent compared to this mess.
It's a good question. I think what is most likely in that scenario is that Balotelli was already on the list that had been presented to Rodgers at that point - he said no because he didn't want him. When push came to shove though and he was the only choice left - he took him. It was a stupid thing all around really, Rodgers should never have been so certain if he thought there was a chance and he probably should have been more diplomatic in his response anyway. After being so dismissive of the signing, though; Balotelli shouldn't have been offered again even just to save face.
Look, this whole debate is a tough one because if you look at what is in the press - then the answers are contradictory at times. Rodgers said in 2014 that he had final say, after he left he said he didn't have final say. Ayre has said that Klopp has final say and that is the way it has been at Liverpool under all managers from 2007.
It's up to you which version you want to believe, for me I don't think the transfer operation is that different to anywhere else - just a lot of dodgy decisions being made!
Rodgers said something after he'd left the club about developing Mario in the same way he had other players - so you're probably onto something there!
Eto'o had nothing left by then though (even at Everton he looked a spent force) though it would certainly have been cheaper.
The whole transfer set-up was awful, an attempt by FSG to have their cake and eat it by not forcing Rodgers to accept a DOF he didn't want but still keeping some sort of oversight on him. I'm not as harsh a critic of theirs as some on here, but that was not their finest hour. I'm sure it's true that other clubs involve people other than the manager. Where I suspect we fell down is that (a) our structure seems to have been more formal than elsewhere and (b) too many non-football people were involved not only in researching info.but also in the decision-making itself.
The whole transfer set-up was awful, an attempt by FSG to have their cake and eat it by not forcing Rodgers to accept a DOF he didn't want but still keeping some sort of oversight on him. I'm not as harsh a critic of theirs as some on here, but that was not their finest hour. I'm sure it's true that other clubs involve people other than the manager. Where I suspect we fell down is that (a) our structure seems to have been more formal than elsewhere and (b) too many non-football people were involved not only in researching info.but also in the decision-making itself.
I wouldn't say the set up itself is awful. Take this from Ian Ayre, for example:
[article]
“The point that has been made about the committee, and I don’t think we did anything any different to most football clubs, is that the manager will say we are looking for somebody in this position and a bunch of people – a mix of traditional scouts and more recently analytical and digital-based information – bring all of that together as was always the case,” he said.
“Then we look at two, three, four players, the best players for that position, show them to the manager and the manager can go watch or have the scouts go watch those players and narrow it down.
“At that point I’ll become more involved and start talking to clubs, agents, players on a negotiations basis and then the manager will choose.”
[/article]
If you take that at face value, then that is broadly the same as you could imagine at any club. I would say, if the above is accurate, that perhaps we don't have the right people in some of these decision-making positions.
Yep, I think we went all out for Sanchez without some alternatives. The players left to choose from in the end werent the same type of player at all. Very strange and a good example to back up your points.
There is an obvious counter to this argument though and I'll be quick before we risk derailing the thread completely.
I think Sanchez was seen as an easy win in the Suarez transfer and the fact there wasn't any real alternative is because they weren't really looking for that type of player (they should have been).
My reasoning for this? Rodgers actually returned to the playing style of his first year after Suarez left. He was also pleased as punch when Liverpool signed Benteke - a player many saw as a bad fit and about as far away from Suarez/Sanchez as you can get.
Striker signings in the Rodgers-era were all over the place. Target man (Carroll) promptly shipped out because he didn't fit the style, then three more square pegs (Balotelli, Benteke & Lambert) brought in over next three and half years that were also a mismatch and broadly similar in playing style.
Yeah, thats true. Good point and it highlights what I've been saying for a while about the lack of transfer strategy and building a squad. The squad was horribly loopsided and unbalanced.
Shame that we didnt get Sanchez. It might have changed Rodgers plan re his tactics.
Oh God, you are right! I totally forgot about Suarez-lite! Liverpool paid a hefty price for one FA Cup goal.
- Status