Phil Mcnulty BBC Article

[Guest Kitehoo]

Below article from Phil Mcnulty on the BBC Website. I understand this is a huge risk with Torres but such is any player

at 27 million. I don't agree that this signing is supposed to be the final piece in the jigsaw. That is simply complete rubbish.

Man Utd have just gone out and spent over 50 million on 3 players. Look at what Chelsea have spent. And we spend one transfer close to the usual figures they dish out and its do or die for our club and Rafa. What a load of b******s.

We all know we need to get in a few more players and those will have a very important part to play as well as Torres. As will sorting out our away form and getting a good start to the season.

 

 

Fernando Torres is being painted as the final piece in Liverpool's jigsaw - a puzzle that remains incomplete after 17 title-free years at Anfield.

 

"The final piece of the jigsaw" is a phrase that has become synonymous with Liverpool in an era when they have failed to win the trophy they covet most.

 

The pieces have been assembled by a succession of managers, only for men like Graeme Souness, Roy Evans and latterly Gerard Houllier to find another crucial bit had gone astray.

 

Boss Benitez has suffered a similar fate, despite successes in the Champions League and the FA Cup.

 

The list is endless - Paul Ince, Stan Collymore, Harry Kewell and Djibril Cisse to name but a few.

 

Now Torres is poised to take on the cursed mantle, complete with a huge £26.5m transfer fee and a lavish six-year contact to match.

 

The 23-year-old Spain striker will be under pressure to deliver - but this deal has as much riding on it for Benitez as it has for Liverpool.

 

Benitez has cited a lack of funds and an inability to compete for A-list stars as reasons for his failure to get anywhere near the Premiership pace-setters.

 

He made his most pointed accusations in what appeared to be a fit of pique after the Champions League final defeat against AC Milan in Athens in May.

 

It is a claim which will draw gales of laughter from some clubs, given the scale of investment handed to him by Liverpool's board in the last three seasons - much of it spent on very ordinary players.

 

It is also a claim he can never make again - not when new owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks have broken Liverpool's transfer record in such emphatic style.

 

The arrival of Torres is as much a defining test of Benitez's title credentials as it is of the young Spanish striker's glowing reputation.

 

There can be no more excuses if they fail to threaten Manchester United and Chelsea this season.

 

Torres is A-list and expensive; a symbol of the sort of player Benitez claims has been out of his reach before.

 

Now he has got him, bought and paid for in a record-breaking manner, he can no longer use finance as his shield against expectations.

 

And yet, despite his undoubted quality, Torres comes with an element of risk as well as an expensive price tag.

 

He is powerful, athletic, proven in Spain, if not beyond, and able to play as a lone striker as well as in a partnership.

 

But he is untested in the Premier League and is so costly that inevitably huge pressure will be placed upon him.

 

Benitez must hope he does not suffer the same fate as Fernando Morientes, who arrived at Anfield amid much fanfare.

 

He was a failure, skulking back to Spain quick-smart complaining that defenders in the top flight had the affrontery to tackle him. And tackle him quite hard.

 

Torres is the identikit of the sort of player Liverpool need to add to a miserly defence and an array of midfield talent.

 

If he comes off he could actually be, well, the last piece of the jigsaw.

 

Liverpool lost points and games they should have won last season because they were essentially a blunt instrument in attack.

 

Craig Bellamy has not been up to the job and, while Dirk Kuyt may have a heart as big as a bucket, he is hardly ruthless operator in front of goal.

 

Peter Crouch remains Liverpool's most reliable striker, but Benitez would not trust him with a starting place in the Champions League final.

 

Torres must come up with the goals his price tag demands - and this is because the stakes are as high for Benitez as they are for Liverpool.

[Rimbeux]

He's right that Rafa has got the kind of player he's been asking for, so now he cannot, and we cannot go on about not having the cash to compete; not that it was a solid platform anyway, it's been Rafa's choice to go for quantity over quality, and a huge squad.

[johngibo YPC]

lot of b******s in that article over shadows the sensible points.

 

'last piece of the jigsaw' is a phrase used alot in the Evans Era but i haven't heard it at all since.

 

Are spending IS likely to be on the same scale as Man Utd and possibly Chelsea, but before it was more like Newcastle and Spurs. This is unlikely to get you a league championship, no matter how much this "claim will draw gales of laughter from some clubs"

 

"skulking back to Spain quick-smart complaining that defenders in the top flight had the affrontery to tackle him. And tackle him quite hard."

 

did i miss that??

[Billy Dane]

Wonder if he would have placed so many question marks over Torres' head if he had signed for the Mancs?

[cymrococh]

Nobody has called Torres the final piece of the jigsaw, so the whole article is a load of cockgobblery.

[Guest Kitehoo]

He's right that Rafa has got the kind of player he's been asking for, so now he cannot, and we cannot go on about not having the cash to compete; not that it was a solid platform anyway, it's been Rafa's choice to go for quantity over quality, and a huge squad.

 

Before Torres Rafa's biggest signing was Alonso or Kuyt at around 10 million plus change. How many times has Jose and Saf broke that aswell as countless other clubs across Europe.

 

Rafa's policy was not buying average players but buying what he could afford. If you look at the money he has spent on transfers in his time at Liverpool and account for the money gone back out and what he's recouped in our CL campaigns he's spent obviously alot but not enough to turn around and now say after one major transfer he's had it as good as SAF or Jose.

 

If Torres does not work out then the blame of course falls on Rafa but to say this kid is all we need to compete or even win the Premiership is complete nonsense.

[Falconhoof]

He's right that Rafa has got the kind of player he's been asking for, so now he cannot, and we cannot go on about not having the cash to compete; not that it was a solid platform anyway, it's been Rafa's choice to go for quantity over quality, and a huge squad.

 

 

After signing one player, Rafa now has parity with Chelsea does he ?

 

Don't talk daft man.

[Rimbeux]

Wonder if he would have placed so many question marks over Torres' head if he had signed for the Mancs?

 

 

The question marks I see here are about what his transfer represents in the context of Liverpool moving into a supposed different mode of spending, and the aims of that spending in taking Liverpool to a title competative level and how he'll live up to it, that is a difference. Aside from that, you could point to plenty of questions about the relative worth and adaptability of Carrick, Hargreaves, Rooney, Ferdinand, Essien, Drogba, Sheva etc, Darren Bent even, it goes with big money moves.

[fred milne]

After signing one player, Rafa now has parity with Chelsea does he ?

 

Don't talk daft man.

Did Arsenal have spending power parity with Utd between 1998 and 2004? Money isn't everything.

[Paul]

Not forgetting when Rafa arrived we were told we have gained a manager capable of challenging clubs working with a greater budget as had been the case at Valencia.

[Falconhoof]

Did Arsenal have spending power parity with Utd between 1998 and 2004? Money isn't everything.

 

I was responding directly to "He's right that Rafa has got the kind of player he's been asking for, so now he cannot, and we cannot go on about not having the cash to compete"

 

You can't say, ah well Rafa has signed one expensive player so now he can't talk about the money Man U and Chelsea have had.

[Falconhoof]

Not forgetting when Rafa arrived we were told we have gained a manager capable of challenging clubs working with a greater budget as had been the case at Valencia.

 

Who told you that ?

[Rimbeux]

Before Torres Rafa's biggest signing was Alonso or Kuyt at around 10 million plus change. How many times has Jose and Saf broke that aswell as countless other clubs across Europe.

 

Rafa's policy was not buying average players but buying what he could afford. If you look at the money he has spent on transfers in his time at Liverpool and account for the money gone back out and what he's recouped in our CL campaigns he's spent obviously alot but not enough to turn around and now say after one major transfer he's had it as good as SAF or Jose.

 

If Torres does not work out then the blame of course falls on Rafa but to say this kid is all we need to compete or even win the Premiership is complete nonsense.

 

 

After signing one player, Rafa now has parity with Chelsea does he ?

 

Don't talk daft man.

 

 

I've never gone in for the poor man line to start with, I think there more to look at in how our money has been spent, and at our attitude and tactics in the league. For me anyway, it was enough of a stretch pleading s*** backing for a lack of challenge before we smashed our transfer record in such a way.

 

I know many dont agree that we could have recruited more quality rather than quantity under Rafa, but I think it's a more than fair argument. It's very narrow and unobjective if you follow the line that we can't compete unless we spend as much as anyone else in the market, some may even say more 'as we need to catch up', I dont buy that, doubt I ever will, it's a nice cliff to go jump off.

Edited July 3, 2007 by Rimbeux

[Rimbeux]

Who told you that ?

 

Parry, it was one of the criteria

[McBain]

Not much wrong with that article

[Paul]

Who told you that ?

 

Parry said it if I remember correctly.

[Falconhoof]

Things are getting very mixed up here Rimbeaux.

 

Parry was quite rightly praising rafa's record with Valencia which is unbelievable given the resources he had. Thats not to say he should be able to do it here. Chelsea have been able to spend without any thought for budget for several seasons now, they've only stopped recently. Thats never happened in the history of football, or professional sport. To say we were told Rafa was capable of competing with that because of what he did with Valencia is missing the point somewhat. To then say, ah now he's bought Torres for £27m means he can't complain about Chelsea's spending makes me think you can't see the wood for the trees.

[Benitez]

Did Arsenal have spending power parity with Utd between 1998 and 2004? Money isn't everything.

 

they spent plenty mind, and money isn't everything you are right, but then, Arsenal haven't been able to compete with chelsea either have they. So I guess it is something

 

As for past summers, Rafa has been backed pretty well, but only to an extent, so I think McNulty's article is badly 'researched'. As there is a difference between being given 40 - 50 mill to spend as you want as Chelsea and the Mancs do, and being given 10 - 15m and then told to sell to buy. Not really ideal when the players you want to sell to buy are on huge contracts that are hard to shift. And the fact that in the summer 2005 Liverpool where outspent by Newcastle, and then last summer where outspent by Spurs, should give McNulty an idea of the money thrown around by clubs who have achieved less, and how much Rafa has really spent in comparison to others.

 

IMO what Rafa needs to do tho- is stop bulking the squad so much as he has the last 3 years, and just go for pure quality. So no Heinze, no Malbranque, just 2 or 3 real quality players. But I don't think he'll do that.

[Guest Kitehoo]

Rafa can no longer complain about backing from the board however Torres is not going to win us the league next year. We still need more.

[Lee W]

I know many dont agree that we could have recruited more quality rather than quantity under Rafa, but I think it's a more than fair argument.

 

Alonso, Reina, Crouch, Garcia, Mascherano, Agger, Sissoko, Kuyt

 

One of Rafa's projects has been scouting and recruiting the best young talent across the globe and 'hedging' his bets for the future, alongside recruiting for the first team - a very difficult balance to achieve. Something Houllier could never quite achieve, and Wenger has also worked this strategy for some time....

 

It's his squad now though, no doubt, but imo he had no choice but to spread his resources more thinly and I've said this before, but by and large his purchases have been spot on, if not they've been shifted on (almost mercilessly), where possible.

 

Not much wrong with that article

 

Apart from the opening sentence.

Edited July 3, 2007 by Lee W

[Rimbeux]

Things are getting very mixed up here Rimbeaux.

 

Parry was quite rightly praising rafa's record with Valencia which is unbelievable given the resources he had. Thats not to say he should be able to do it here. Chelsea have been able to spend without any thought for budget for several seasons now, they've only stopped recently. Thats never happened in the history of football, or professional sport. To say we were told Rafa was capable of competing with that because of what he did with Valencia is missing the point somewhat. To then say, ah now he's bought Torres for £27m means he can't complain about Chelsea's spending makes me think you can't see the wood for the trees.

 

 

He competed against the Real of £45m odd Zidane, £30m odd Figo and the other Galacticos, and Parry specifically said the aim was to win the title, and getting in Rafa was because they needed a man who could compete with less money. It was not a throwaway bit of praise.

 

My point is, and where I agree with the article, is that anyone saying they can't compete because of money while being able to spend such on a player (and I dont expect the manager to use the line) is on less than credible ground.

[Falconhoof]

My point is, and where I agree with the article, is that anyone saying they can't compete because of money while being able to spend such on a player (and I dont expect the manager to use the line) is on less than credible ground.

 

 

Thats where I disagree with you, so its probably best if we discard the Valencia stuff for the time being.

 

Chelsea were never going to go for Torres, never in a million years, while they had Drogba and Shevchenko. So on that one transfer we were never competing with Chelsea. Over the period of Rafa's tenure at LFC and Mourinho's at Chelsea there have been wildly different budgets. One signing doesn't suddenly bridge that gap in spending and it doesn't mean we are likely to compete financially for a player if Chelsea were seriously interested. Nothing has changed on that score.

[R A Softlad]

He's a blue.

[gazza]

Not much wrong with that article

 

Souness never got the lid off the f eckin box never mind mislaid the final piece !!

[smithdown]

I read an article by McNulty a few weeks ago saying his inside knowledge from Man City suggested that all would be rosy and the Seville manager would be in charge by the end of the week.

 

He's a d1ck.