Liverpool FC Forum

[Benny The Noon]

I expect most of those fees are from the signing of new contracts as opposed to new signings

[Rockthekop]

The criticism is not just down to whether Rafa has had enough money to spend, there's the man management issues, the negative tactics, the bizarre substitutions, the reluctance to change when things aren't working, playing certain players religiously who are in poor form, having no decent back up for Torres etc.

There's many reasons why Rafa geta criticised, some of the criticism is very much justified although others are rather harsh. 

Managers can't get everything right but success is measured by trophies at top clubs, nothing else.

[account deleted by request]

The criticism is not just down to whether Rafa has had enough money to spend, there's the man management issues, the negative tactics, the bizarre substitutions, the reluctance to change when things aren't working, playing certain players religiously who are in poor form, having no decent back up for Torres etc.

There's many reasons why Rafa geta criticised, some of the criticism is very much justified although others are rather harsh. 

Managers can't get everything right but success is measured by trophies at top clubs, nothing else.

Good post , summed it up nicely there mate.

[Owzat]

this is for Saint and Mick.

£13.3Mil net spend dispels this great fallacy over Rafa Benitez

net spending means feck all, just keeps those who want to maintain the myth that Rafa doesn't spend happy. The current squad cost £150m, not £xm net but those players currently at the club cost £150m. Doesn't matter a feck what Crouch, Alonso, La La, Tinky Winky, Dipsy and Po were sold for because that is only where the money came from, not where it went.

You could make it look like most clubs spent next to nothing, you'll be comparing his spending with that of Citeh next to try and make him look a pauper. Of course players are going to sell for roughly what they cost, the net is always going to be relatively small but it still has FA to do with what the current players cost. Do you know why? Because he didn't start from scratch, he had a lot of players to start with and whether he can make profits or losses on players he sells is irrelevant, it is the quality he brings in and how much THOSE players cost.

Was it Bigmick who said you don't sell your house for £150k, buy a new house for £180k and go round telling everyone your house only cost £30k. The house cost £180k, you might sell that house for £165k, £180k or £250k, but the next house will cost WHAT YOU PAY FOR IT. It is nice if Rafa can buy players for £5m and sell them for £20m, makes a nice profit, but the measure of his purchases are what the players in the squad cost. The fact that Rafa has several players in his squad that cost more than the highest transfer fee EVER of over half the Premiership clubs, and they probably have impressive net (curtains) too passes right over the net brigades' heads.

You won't persuade me with the "net spend" argument, it is crass. It's like saying 2+2=4 so Rafa is a good manager, or give Rafa seven years and he'll do a fergie, both are equally irrelevant yet I bet there are plenty of LFC fans who firmly subscribe to the fergie theory.

[tubby]

Premier League agents' fees table
Total fees

Manchester City £12,874,283
Chelsea £9,562,223
Liverpool £6,657,305 
Tottenham Hotspur £6,066,935
Wigan Athletic £5,527,548
Arsenal £4,760,241
West Ham United  £3,576,972
Portsmouth £3,184,725
Bolton Wanderers £3,166,611
Everton £2,008,407
Sunderland £2,007,040
Aston Villa £1,708,374
Hull City £1,599,188
Manchester United £1,517,393
Blackburn Rovers £1,610,885
Fulham £1,469,258
Wolverhampton  £1,235,703
Birmingham City £974,982
Stoke City £716,042
Burnley £468,398
Total: £70,692,513

The figures regard payments to agents for the period October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009.

[url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1232205/Manchester-City-Chelsea-Liverpool-big-spenders-Premier-League-clubs-pay-70m-agents-12-mont




hs.html?ITO=1490]LINK TO ARTICLE[/url]

You had better get your excuses in early Bav    Way I see it is either Rafa is a mug who pays over the odds to agents, or we have spent more than anyone bar Citeh and Chelsea on transfers 

Am trying to come up with 1 but can't mate .   Shocking figures though, but I guess seeing as transfer fees are going up so do the agents fees. I wonder how much that Kia guy has made alone from fees for Tevez and Masch.

[tubby]

this is for Saint and Mick.

£13.3Mil net spend dispels this great fallacy over Rafa Benitez

net spending means feck all, just keeps those who want to maintain the myth that Rafa doesn't spend happy. The current squad cost £150m, not £xm net but those players currently at the club cost £150m. Doesn't matter a feck what Crouch, Alonso, La La, Tinky Winky, Dipsy and Po were sold for because that is only where the money came from, not where it went.

You could make it look like most clubs spent next to nothing, you'll be comparing his spending with that of Citeh next to try and make him look a pauper. Of course players are going to sell for roughly what they cost, the net is always going to be relatively small but it still has FA to do with what the current players cost. Do you know why? Because he didn't start from scratch, he had a lot of players to start with and whether he can make profits or losses on players he sells is irrelevant, it is the quality he brings in and how much THOSE players cost.

Was it Bigmick who said you don't sell your house for £150k, buy a new house for £180k and go round telling everyone your house only cost £30k. The house cost £180k, you might sell that house for £165k, £180k or £250k, but the next house will cost WHAT YOU PAY FOR IT. It is nice if Rafa can buy players for £5m and sell them for £20m, makes a nice profit, but the measure of his purchases are what the players in the squad cost. The fact that Rafa has several players in his squad that cost more than the highest transfer fee EVER of over half the Premiership clubs, and they probably have impressive net (curtains) too passes right over the net brigades' heads.

You won't persuade me with the "net spend" argument, it is crass. It's like saying 2+2=4 so Rafa is a good manager, or give Rafa seven years and he'll do a fergie, both are equally irrelevant yet I bet there are plenty of LFC fans who firmly subscribe to the fergie theory.

In our case it does mean something because Rafa has almost always had to sell to raise funds before he can buy, hence the large number of players coming in and out.

Equally I think people choose not to look at net spend because it is far easier to look at the total figure and just say feck it he has had 5 years. Whilst I agree after 5 years we should have someone else we can rely on for goals aside from Stevie or Torres and Rafa has also made some bad buys, the system in place that defines how he buys has hampered our progress.

Do you really think had Rafa been allowed to get all our first choice targets that we would be as bad off as we are now? Imagine if we had gotten Simao, Vidic, Silva or Villa ect..... Hindsight is an easy place to talk from mate.

[Owzat]

The criticism is not just down to whether Rafa has had enough money to spend, there's the man management issues, the negative tactics, the bizarre substitutions, the reluctance to change when things aren't working, playing certain players religiously who are in poor form, having no decent back up for Torres etc.

There's many reasons why Rafa geta criticised, some of the criticism is very much justified although others are rather harsh. 

Managers can't get everything right but success is measured by trophies at top clubs, nothing else.

Good post , summed it up nicely there mate.

I second that, people just don't have a counter argument other than lack of money which is bull anyway and played down with talk of "net spend" and "what such and such spent"

His tactics are poor, his substitutions are often too late and ineffective, he won't scrap zonal marking, his buys are often dubious, the squad is arguably thinner than in any of his previous seasons given the departure of key players in Hyypia, Alonso and Arbeloa, and he is far too stubborn in playing the same formation, same players etc. Sure we had some purple patches last season, a good start in ters of points covering up for poor displays, a good finale which was a combination of indifferent opposition and good form from Torres, Gerrard, Benayoun and Kuyt, but when you look at the crux, we drew too many against poor sides at home and had a mare in January and February against sides we should have beaten which cost us the title.

This season we're not drawing against modest sides, we're losing to them - villa, Sunderland and Fulham were all games we won last season. Rafa won't play Aquilani having forked out £20m (don't know what the "net fee" is for him, probably cost -£10m as Alonso's replacement) so he must rate him. He might as well not be on the bench. He spent £20.3m on a striker last summer, sold him back in January and hasn't replaced him which is costing us.

But don't panic, we've turned yet another corner after a win over rivals, but I think the truth is we're turning corners so often with a win to turn one corner followed by a loss to turn another, that we are arguably going in a circle.

If last season wasn't a one-off then how come Rafa has followed up both seasons of 80+ points with a bad start this season and 68 points in 06/07 ? If we can't put two good seasons together than how are we to believe Rafa can win the league? Last season's excellent points tally was primarily down to a boost of twelve points from doubles over the current top two. So far this season we've already dropped three of those points, not to mention other dropped points where we picked up three points. I always said repeating that points total would be difficult, the problem is if we pick up points off the big four we drop them against minnows or mid-table mediocrity.

[made in UK]

Doesn't matter a feck what Crouch, Alonso, La La, Tinky Winky, Dipsy and Po were sold for

Apologies, but that made me laugh.

[Owzat]

In our case it does mean something because Rafa has almost always had to sell to raise funds before he can buy, hence the large number of players coming in and out.

Change the record, as if we're the only club that ever sells players and how often is it our best player? Arguably Rafa was the catalyst for Alonso leaving, other than that he has sold ordinary players and brought in equally ordinary ones.

Arsenal sell their best players, the only two clubs that haven't so much are Chelsea and the mancs. There is FAR more to it than you're trying to make out, if he got the best out of his players and formation it would be an f in start. It is gutting to beat the mancs and bitters, yet lose to the likes of Sunderland, Fulham and villa. Perhaps you'd like to try and convince me that those three sides have way better resources, better players, unlimited funding and that we should be losing to them? The minute we feck up in the CL it's injuries and underestimating the opposition, not trying to sit on a 1-0 lead over Lyon and losing. Or trying to hold a 1-0 lead in France. Do Lyon have a bottomless pit of funds?

Excuses, excuses, excuses. As I've said before people will believe what they want to believe. "Rafa has no money" won't wash when he spends £20.3m on a striker, £20m on an injured midfielder, £17.5m on a full-back, £18.6m on a DM and so on.

It's pointless continuing this argument about spending, you're never going to persuade me and vice versa. It's a boring, tediously repeated argument and you've proved nothing except maybe that you are boring and tedious by forcing it out again, and perhaps too ready to believe what you want to

[Owzat]

Doesn't matter a feck what Crouch, Alonso, La La, Tinky Winky, Dipsy and Po were sold for

Apologies, but that made me laugh.

I wouldn't laugh, given Rafa's track record he's probably considering the last four to improve our defence - and the way our back four play they just might! 

[made in UK]

Doesn't matter a feck what Crouch, Alonso, La La, Tinky Winky, Dipsy and Po were sold for

Apologies, but that made me laugh.

I wouldn't laugh, given Rafa's track record he's probably considering the last four to improve our defence - and the way our back four play they just might! 

Oh c'mon thats a bit pessimistic. Maybe the Wiggles instead.

(jokes) 

[Sir Roger]

Good post
We definitely have problems with corners...

[Penguins]

Premier League agents' fees table
Total fees

Manchester City £12,874,283
Chelsea £9,562,223
Liverpool £6,657,305 
Tottenham Hotspur £6,066,935
Wigan Athletic £5,527,548
Arsenal £4,760,241
West Ham United  £3,576,972
Portsmouth £3,184,725
Bolton Wanderers £3,166,611
Everton £2,008,407
Sunderland £2,007,040
Aston Villa £1,708,374
Hull City £1,599,188
Manchester United £1,517,393
Blackburn Rovers £1,610,885
Fulham £1,469,258
Wolverhampton  £1,235,703
Birmingham City £974,982
Stoke City £716,042
Burnley £468,398
Total: £70,692,513

The figures regard payments to agents for the period October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009.

[url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1232205/Manchester-City-Chelsea-Liverpool-big-spenders-Premier-League-clubs-pay-70m-agents-12-mont





hs.html?ITO=1490]LINK TO ARTICLE[/url]

You had better get your excuses in early Bav    Way I see it is either Rafa is a mug who pays over the odds to agents, or we have spent more than anyone bar Citeh and Chelsea on transfers 

Am trying to come up with 1 but can't mate .   Shocking figures though, but I guess seeing as transfer fees are going up so do the agents fees. I wonder how much that Kia guy has made alone from fees for Tevez and Masch.

C'mon, we have just resigned Gerrard, Kuyt, Torres etc to new contracts and signed Johnson and Aquilani this summer. Of course the fees were going to be high. Let us see where we are next summer....

[Sir Roger]

The criticism is not just down to whether Rafa has had enough money to spend, there's the man management issues, the negative tactics, the bizarre substitutions, the reluctance to change when things aren't working, playing certain players religiously who are in poor form, having no decent back up for Torres etc.

There's many reasons why Rafa geta criticised, some of the criticism is very much justified although others are rather harsh. 

Managers can't get everything right but success is measured by trophies at top clubs, nothing else.

Good post , summed it up nicely there mate.

I second that, people just don't have a counter argument other than lack of money which is bull anyway and played down with talk of "net spend" and "what such and such spent"

His tactics are poor, his substitutions are often too late and ineffective, he won't scrap zonal marking, his buys are often dubious, the squad is arguably thinner than in any of his previous seasons given the departure of key players in Hyypia, Alonso and Arbeloa, and he is far too stubborn in playing the same formation, same players etc. Sure we had some purple patches last season, a good start in ters of points covering up for poor displays, a good finale which was a combination of indifferent opposition and good form from Torres, Gerrard, Benayoun and Kuyt, but when you look at the crux, we drew too many against poor sides at home and had a mare in January and February against sides we should have beaten which cost us the title.

This season we're not drawing against modest sides, we're losing to them - villa, Sunderland and Fulham were all games we won last season. Rafa won't play Aquilani having forked out £20m (don't know what the "net fee" is for him, probably cost -£10m as Alonso's replacement) so he must rate him. He might as well not be on the bench. He spent £20.3m on a striker last summer, sold him back in January and hasn't replaced him which is costing us.

But don't panic, we've turned yet another corner after a win over rivals, but I think the truth is we're turning corners so often with a win to turn one corner followed by a loss to turn another, that we are arguably going in a circle.

If last season wasn't a one-off then how come Rafa has followed up both seasons of 80+ points with a bad start this season and 68 points in 06/07 ? If we can't put two good seasons together than how are we to believe Rafa can win the league? Last season's excellent points tally was primarily down to a boost of twelve points from doubles over the current top two. So far this season we've already dropped three of those points, not to mention other dropped points where we picked up three points. I always said repeating that points total would be difficult, the problem is if we pick up points off the big four we drop them against minnows or mid-table mediocrity.

Good post

[Penguins]

The criticism is not just down to whether Rafa has had enough money to spend, there's the man management issues, the negative tactics, the bizarre substitutions, the reluctance to change when things aren't working, playing certain players religiously who are in poor form, having no decent back up for Torres etc.

There's many reasons why Rafa geta criticised, some of the criticism is very much justified although others are rather harsh. 

Managers can't get everything right but success is measured by trophies at top clubs, nothing else.

Some arguments are sound but you just go over the top here.

About man management. Honestly what do we know?
Almost everything is hearsay coming from the ever reliable media. Except spolied inneffective players like for example Pennant and Babel have come out and really said something of the sort.

Well, negative tactics imo has alot to do with the quality of the team as much as the mindset of the manager. If the team isn't good enough but you try to play freeflowing football you end up like Arsenal. Looks nice but no end result.
Chelski can play great defensivly and offensivly cause the have good players and good backup players. I wouldn't call Anchelotti a much more positive manager than Rafa.

I agree with the rest but I still think it is not easy to find a good enough backup at a reasonable price, especially with the summer as it was and out financial situation. Not to mention no matter how good he is, he should be thinking bench 1st.

We needed a replacement for Alonso and, even if you don't agree, we needed to replace Arbeloa that was dead-set on leaving on a bosman. Keeping an unhappy player that will leave for free is something I find useless.

Sure, success is measured by trophies but I don't see us being run as a top top club for the past 20 years and still not financially and being outclassed by our worst rivals by a mile.
And getting half the revenue every home game compared to manure really hurts us. Over a season that is a terrible amount of money