kop205

I don't think that even any of them would actually disagree with you. The line they take is to say that what they are doing now is no different to what other clubs, including Liverpool, have done in the past i.e. they say that the title is ALWAYS bought and it is just their turn to do it now. To even pretend that there is a parallel between what we have done in the past and what they are doing now is laughable. We became wealthy because of our success, not successful because of our wealth (we were 2nd division and playing in a toilet of a ground when Shankly took over and he had to battle for every penny he was given to spend). We have never relied on single benefactors who, were they to jump ship for any reason, would totally shaft the whole club (they seem to think that we enjoyed millions from Littlewoods pools in the 60s - my understanding was it was always Everton who benefitted from that more than us, hence the 'Mersey Millionaires' tag, but correct me if I am wrong). We have never operated beyond our means (in terms of expenditure outstripping income) to the extent that they do now. We have never spent anything like the kind of money on player wages (even as a proprotion of total expenditure) that they know spend. I could go on, but is a tired argument now, they are deluduing themselves if they think that what they are doing now is anything other than an unprecedented, ugly, freakish episode in the history of the game.

Amazed that you had time to read it, what with being so busy fantasising about 'bringing ickle Michael home' and all that. When it comes to posting s**** mate, you are right up there. Serioulsy though, you are going to have to explain to me just why Mourihno is sooooooo great because I'm just not convinced sorry. He's a good manager, that much is obvious, but so was Houllier in many ways and to airbrush out all that he achieved is shameful. I'm glad he went when he did, but he wasn't the clown that you seem to think. Anyway my basic point, which you ignored, was this - if Mourihno was Liverpool manager, operating within a tight budget, he would have had to have a far better strike rate in the transfer market than he has had at Chelsea. The only real successes he has had there have been the buys that are way beyond our price range anyway, people who he couldn't afford if he was our manager. If Houllier was at Chelsea, the money he wasted on Diouf, Diao etc would have been a drop in the ocean and he would have been given more to replace them the second it became obvious that they weren't the answer (although in reality he probably would have been buying more established stars anyway, as he could afford to). It certainly wouldn't have destroyed his reputation and harmed the club in the way it has here. Houllier rightly gets slated for some apalling buys, but Morihno's transfer record is just as woeful (Essien, Del Horno, Maniche, SWP). The diference is though, the stakes aren't as high for him because there will always be more money to rectify his errors and save his reputation. It is that that gives Chelsea an advantage, more tha being able to overpay for individual players. Struggling to actually understand most of that, sorry. Not sure where all the stuff about 'decent pros' come from, because I've never said that and nor have I said that it is their ability to overpay that gives them an advantage. It is their ability to just constantly and immediately replace their poor buys that sets them apart. One bad summer of transfer activity finished Houllier and set us back at least 2 years. One bad summer of transfer activity at Chelsea and they just rectify it in January. But as I've said all along, we are currently very, very close to being able to challenge them on the pitch cos we have class players who Chelsea can't buy better than, because there isn't better out there so I am still hopeful, whilst remaining aware of how tough it wil be to sustain that challenge. It is the fact that it is tough that makes it exciting though!

Again, I'm not saying Mourihno is a s*** manager and Houllier is great. My point was that any mistakes he makes will not have as big an impact on them as mistakes that managers at other clubs make will have on their clubs. Given their current spending power, I think it is impossible that he could make a mistake that would 'bring the whole edifice down'. That is delusional. They would either just sack him and give someone else a go, or give him another load of blank cheques. I'm more than aware that he has to fit the players into a system and that is why I said I believe we are very nearly in a position to compete with a couple of smart buys, but I stand by the point that there is a greater urgency for us to get the right deals than there is for them, because it is easier for them to rectify mistakes. Long term that does give them an advantage, but I'm not giving anything up, bring the c**** on, money and all I say...

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Big Stuff & Xabi34.

I'd argue that in many ways Houllier is vastly superior to Mourihno. He made some great buys for this club (Didi, Sami, Henchoz, Finnan, Dudek, Gary Mc), more so than Mourihno has at Chelsea so far (barring those who were already world stars) and by all acounts has a great knowledge of world football. I know he had his faults, but I think you have been seduced by the myth of the Special One there. Anyway, your coment is irrelevant to my point, which was that one mistake in the transfer market by a Liverpool manager will reverberate in ways which mistakes by Chelsea managers won't becuase they just egt abother bucket ooad of cash to rectify it. Bizaree that you picked that line out really and chose to ignore the main point I was making.

Most think dive, some think clipped, I don't give s***.

Of course we would, in the same way that Souness was a great player but Roy Keane was a c***. When have football fans EVER been consistent? I've said before, given the choice I'd rather Gerrard hadnlt done it but I'm certainly not going to gte all het up about it.

Oh no, quick, we'll have to change his song.

It isn't so much that they overpay for individual players and outbid everyone else, but that they operate with no transfer budget constraints, so if a signing doesn't work out they just go and buy someone else. That is what is worrying because it means that regardless of the skill of the manager, the odds are they get it right eventually. Houllier won trophies for Liverpool and in many ways was a fine manager, vastly superior to Mourihno, yet is almost reviled by some people now because his dealings in his last few years at the club are still hampering us now - having paid 14m for Cisse, we can't just shrug our shoulders and say 'Oh well, he's s***, lets spend 20m on someone else'. That is precisely what they can do and it means the stakes are much higher for us when we bring people in. If Xabi and Momo hadn't worked out, for example, we'd be well up s*** creek because it would mean another part of the team is in need of urgent strengthening. Thank God we have Rafa, and his buys have generally been excellent so far, but there is a pressure facing us that simply isn't there for Chelsea. Their spending is relevant because it is like being able to buy 100 lottery tickets whilst we can only buy 1. Having said that, I am always reminding myself that we can't concern ourselves with what they do and should just concentrate on us, because I still believe that (short term at least), if we get the next set of buys right, we ARE in a position to compete on the pitch. The harder part is sustaining that long term in the face of such relentless spending.

How many has he played in the last 2? His limited appearances at Madrid weren't down to inury, admittedly, but his time there hardly provides eveidence that he is capable of putting ina full season.

He has been a better player than others being talked about, but it also isn't too hard to make a case that his best years are already behind him and that it might be time to gamble on one of those others. For all that he is 'a proven goal scorer in the Premier League', his record in the last two years is not that impressive (and yes, I know it wasn't his fault that Madrd treated him shabbily and that Robinson broke his foot, but all the same it is two years since he was consistently scoring goals at the highest level). Decent enough ratio in that time, but not enough games played. Like I said, I'm not totally against this but I worry when I hear people describing it as a 'no-brainer' when there is evdience to the contrary that merits consideration, and I worry when I hear people talk about 'bringing him home' because it suggests they have an overly nostalgic view of what playing for Liverpool means to Owen and an inflated perception of how motivated it would make him. Fowler, undoubtedly, will try harder for Liverpool than he would for any other club and will actually play above himself - that is why brigning him back was so astute. I'm not sure the same would be true of Owen, so in that sense there would be an element of risk and it wouldnlt necessarily be the 'magic solution' that some seem to think. And the notion that Gerrard or any other player should dictate Rafa's transfer policy is beyond ridiculous.

He has never scored 25 league goals in one season, and I don't think the opposition that people have to the move is based on 'anger' at Owen because of the fact that/manner in which he left. It is probably based more on Rafa's fairly ambiguous attitude to him, and the fact that he has played very little football in the last two years. As well as being a guarantee of goals would be a guarantee of an inury - it isn't just since he left that he has had problems. We already have one striker who is likely to need resting for a greater than normal amount of games, so the people we bring in need to be ready to play 40 - 50 games. I'm not particularly against signing Owen (though I wouldn't think of it as 'bringing him home', as some seem to call it) and can see arguments for and against. I just donlt think it is the 'no-brainer' that some seem to think.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

I said when Abramovich took over that we would just have to grin and bear it for a few years whilst they win a lot of trophies - sit tight waiting for it all to go t*** up when Interpol catch up with him. It is a bit depressing at times, knowing that there is simply no way we can compete for players who would make a massive difference to us (like Shevchenko) but as Rimbeuax points out, 5 - 0 is some consolation! That, and the fact that we've got Rafa who might just be able to bridge the gap anyway if we have a good season transfer activity. In a strange way there is something exciting (and 'real') about having to wheel and deal a bit rather than just going out and writing another huge cheque. Even if we could do that I'd probably just worry (as I'm sure all Chelsea fans must do deep down) about what will happen if/when the money-man goes. All Kenyon's talk about 'sustainability' is b******s.

I think the 'joke' is the idea of releasing a DVD of a match that you lost - let it never come to that for us... Am certain that, a few years back, I saw an Everton video/DVD of the Gary Mac derby. I know I can't have done, that not even they would release a DVD of that (unless the missed off the last few minutes), but I am sure I saw it. Like I said, I know I can't have done and I must have just been hallucinating or something.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Catch him while you can, I have a sneaky feeling he may not be around much longer to share his views with us. Back on topic - Gerrard dived, give a s***. Can't say I 'approve' as such, but until he starts doing it week in, week out like many do then I'm not going to waste any time wringing my hands over it either. And the only person I've ever heard call Kenny a diver is Allardyce.

Quality! 'Injuries permitting' was quite a big rider really, wasn't it? Incidentally, what is all the s**** about Big Dunc in the Echo this week, and how he was the scoure of Liverpool? How many derby goals did he actually score? I can think of 2 - the header in Fat Joe's first game when fair enough, we did struggle with him, and one in the Gary Mac derby at their s*** hole in 2001. Were there many others? Many match winning performances?

I said as much about us and Arsenal in an earlier post. Fact is though that when it has come to the crunch none of the top clubs over here have gone for him and I don't believe he has been the one pulling the plug on those deals. I stand by what I said - Hargreaves wouldn't make it into the first teams of any of the top 5 over here and, given that Eriksson seems to gravitate towards those clubs in his selection, he would therefore struggle to get into the England squad were he playing over here. That has nothing to do with not liking him just because he plays abroad, which was the accusation Maldini made. It is actually providing reasoned argument to show why playing for a big club works to his advantage and has resulted in him being given far more chances than players who are probably no worse than him but play for less fashionable clubs. The fact that the club happens to be abroad is irrelevant. I don't know enough about how Bayern play to understand what his precise role is there (though I suspect it is to just sit in and let Ballack rampage) so I'm not going to cast doubt on his value to them. He has been there a long time and is obviously well-drilled in what he does for them, but that hardly makes him worth a place in the England squad or, which is tthe real point, a quality player. Nicky Butt had been at United a long time and was well-drilled in what he did for them but he was a very average footballer and never going to do anything of note at international level. He soon disappeared off the international radar when he left United and no other big clubs were even remotely interested in him. I just have never seen Hargreaves offer England anything special, or much at all, and as Hansen said last night, there is not a single area of his game that would score more than 7/10.

How exactly does my post prove your point? How exactly does what I said prove that if he was born in England and playing his football here then I wouldn't be so harsh on him? Offensive b******s. I happen to think that plenty of the England squad are vastly overated, including Ferdinand, Lampard, Lennon, both Coles and the 'captain', all of whom were born in and made their names in this country but given that your post was about Hargreaves I chose to give my opinion on him. I'm not even an England fand so the idea of hos 'Englishness' being at question is irrelevant and means nothing to me. I don't give a s*** that Bayern are a 'big club', I still don't rate Hargreaves. Big clubs still have average players playing for them - Traore won the Champions League with us for f***s sake. It doesn't automatically make him a good player. Sometimes players get lucky, are just in the right place at the right time I'll ask again - if he is that good, why have NONE of the top clubs in this country made a move for him, when he has in the past made it clear that he would be prepared to come. The Mancs have been crying out for a holding midfielder, we need a long term replacement for Didi, Chelsea have nobody to do the Ukelele role should he get injured, Arsenal were in the market for a Vierra replacement - none of us went in for Hargreaves. You might argue that this doesn't automatically make him a bad player and fair enough, I'd agree. I think he's a bad player because of the evidence of my own eyes from when I've seen him play. This just backs it up. If you think different, and want to use him playing for Bayern to back you up, then fine. Maybe you are right, maybe there are people for whom his 'foreigness' is an issue - but don't accuse me of that by saying that my post 'proves your point'. Take things at face value sometimes - I think he is s*** and have no hidden agenda for saying so.

The 'third club' is meant to be Milan, isn't it? Some trio chasing his signature, that. Although hopefully Milan wil get relegated to clear the way for us a bit.

Not that arsed either way, but that is patently untrue. Wild challenge, but no contact. And I hate Ian Wright and Lee Dixon. If the team got 7/10 overall then that was the very least that Carra deserved, especially given that he played 2 positions more than adequately. For what its worth (and in my eyes it isn't worth much cos I hope England get dicked and are on the first plane home, swiftly followed by the S*n bowler hat-clad, great escape singing, 'In-ger-lund till they die', lobster-skinned, shaven-headed bunch of f***ing asbos that they call 'supporters')...where was I? Oh yeh, for what its worth, it is hadly as if your holding midfielder SHOULD have the chance to truly excel against f***ing Hungary. The real proof of Carra's worth, wherever he plays, will be if/when he is used against a decent side - and I think he is as good a shout as anyone else in the squad for that role.

Ruddock certainly did, a couple of times at least, 'cos I remember thinking that in his case it was probably indictitive of a lack of basic fitness/conditioning. Can happen to anyone to be honest, no real rhyme or reason to it.