I've decided that I am going to continue this series with a renewed focus on myths relating to Rafa Benitez. Why? The level of deliberate lying and delusion amongst the Pro-Benitez Cult is frightening; these 'fans' just don't care about the truth - they're hell-bent on spreading misinformation in their desperate attempt to deify Benitez, usually to the detriment of the club. The truth needs to be out there, and I am going to continue fighting to ensure the truth IS out there. And if anyone doesn't like that, they don't have to visit this site.
The reason I say that the lying and misinformation spread by the Pro-Benitez cult is 'to the detriment of the club' is this: everyone else at Liverpool FC is demonised to make Benitez appear like some kind of unimpeachable God. Rick Parry was the first; he was ridiculed by the cult; then there's Christian Purslow and Martin Broughton, both of whom suffered totally unfair character assassination. And now it's Roy Hodgson being ridiculed by the Cult, despite the fact he's had to clean up the wreckage of last season AND work under intolerable conditions (Court cases/undertainty etc).
The Pro-Benitez Cult has divided the club more than anything else I've witnessed as an LFC fan, and that includes Hicks and Gillett. The Cult was there pre-H+G, and it's still going strong now. The worst thing about the Cult is that it prioritises the individual over the club; to them, Benitez is God. His word is law, and the good name of the club can be trampled if it means deifying Benitez.
The best way to stop the Cult is to counter their risible lies with reason, intelligence and, where possible, inalienable fact. And be clear: this is not even about Benitez per se; it is about the dangerously deluded fanatics who lie and spread misinformation in his name. It's not Benitez's fault that they do this; it is human weakness, and it's been this way for centuries.
So - onto the subject of this article. I read a comment on this site earlier that is indicative of what I'm talking about here:
"On the field, HE CONSTANTLY OVER-ACHIEVED AT ANFIELD with limited funds".
It really is disturbing that even after all the FACTUAL evidence advanced to refute the notion that Benitez had 'limited funds', people still persist in stating it and believing it. As I've argued before, it's Groupthink on a grand scale, mixed with equal parts delusion, weak-mindedness and good old-fashioned pig-ignorance.
The irrefutable FACT is that Rafa Benitez DID NOT HAVE LIMITED TRANSFER FUNDS.
Here are some further facts (all of which have been categorically proven with evidence). During his reign from 2004-10):
* Benitez spent £300m on transfers.
* Benitez spent MORE than Both Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger during the same time period.
* Benitez was given an average of almost £50m a year to spend throughout his tenure.
* Benitez had a higher average yearly gross spend than both Wenger and Ferguson.
* Benitez had a higher Net Spend per year than both Wenger and Ferguson.
* 54% of the club's entire transfer spending total since 1990 was spent by Benitez from 2004-10!
All of the above are objective facts, taken from the official accounts of LFC, Arsenal and Man United?
How is it possible for Benitez to have had limited funds with above facts in mind?! If Ferguson and Wenger had less money to spend, how can £289m been classified as a 'limited' amount of money?!
It makes no difference whatsoever that he was not given this amount in one go; the bottom line is over his tenure, he spent £289m of the club's money! That is REAL MONEY passing from LFC to other clubs for the services of players. That is NOT a limited amount, and anyone who thinks it is...well, there is no excuse really. It is dishonesty, plain and simple.
These are the facts. Nothing anyone can say can change it. Not even Paul Tomkins, who has devised a transfer analysis 'system' that is specifically designed to favour Benitez. In it, he gathers a 'panel of non-partisan experts' to guestimate the current value of players, and the gross spend (cobbled together from non-factual sources) is then compared to the amount of money already recouped AND possibly 'recoupable' in the future (!). Such an analysis (obviously) always leads to Benitez having sold/potentially sold more than he bought.
Such a system is another prime example of the misinformation peddled by Benitez's supporters when it comes to transfer spending. How on earth can a system of subjective analysis (such as that created by Mr Tomkins) supercede factual, inalienable figures FROM THE CLUB'S OWN ACCOUNTS?!
Do people want the truth, or do they just want to manipulate the figures in any way they can until they come up with an answer that fits their expectations/opinions?!
Benitez supporters (the Pro-Benitez Cult among them) do not want to accept anything - even facts - unless it puts the man in the most positive light possible. This is why his fans choose to believe in subjective systems of analysis and reject facts taken from the club's own accounts. The truth hurts; it doesn't suit the agenda; so it is ignored. Such is life.
There is no grey area here: any transfer analysis that does not come directly from the club's own accounts is inaccurate, and usually agenda driven and intellectually dishonest.
Benitez had enough money. The facts speak for themselves.
Deal with it.
NB. I am not messing about anymore with the comments section. Anyone who posts any of the following will be permanently banned:
* Any post that contravenes the comment policy generally.
* Any post complaining that I should stop posting about Benitez
* Any post that suggests I hate Benitez, or it's personal (it isn't).
* Any post that moans about my approach, my style etc.
Vociferously disagree by all means; tear my arguments apart if you can, but do so in the right manner.
Jaimie Kanwar
The reason I say that the lying and misinformation spread by the Pro-Benitez cult is 'to the detriment of the club' is this: everyone else at Liverpool FC is demonised to make Benitez appear like some kind of unimpeachable God. Rick Parry was the first; he was ridiculed by the cult; then there's Christian Purslow and Martin Broughton, both of whom suffered totally unfair character assassination. And now it's Roy Hodgson being ridiculed by the Cult, despite the fact he's had to clean up the wreckage of last season AND work under intolerable conditions (Court cases/undertainty etc).
The Pro-Benitez Cult has divided the club more than anything else I've witnessed as an LFC fan, and that includes Hicks and Gillett. The Cult was there pre-H+G, and it's still going strong now. The worst thing about the Cult is that it prioritises the individual over the club; to them, Benitez is God. His word is law, and the good name of the club can be trampled if it means deifying Benitez.
The best way to stop the Cult is to counter their risible lies with reason, intelligence and, where possible, inalienable fact. And be clear: this is not even about Benitez per se; it is about the dangerously deluded fanatics who lie and spread misinformation in his name. It's not Benitez's fault that they do this; it is human weakness, and it's been this way for centuries.
So - onto the subject of this article. I read a comment on this site earlier that is indicative of what I'm talking about here:
"On the field, HE CONSTANTLY OVER-ACHIEVED AT ANFIELD with limited funds".
It really is disturbing that even after all the FACTUAL evidence advanced to refute the notion that Benitez had 'limited funds', people still persist in stating it and believing it. As I've argued before, it's Groupthink on a grand scale, mixed with equal parts delusion, weak-mindedness and good old-fashioned pig-ignorance.
The irrefutable FACT is that Rafa Benitez DID NOT HAVE LIMITED TRANSFER FUNDS.
Here are some further facts (all of which have been categorically proven with evidence). During his reign from 2004-10):
* Benitez spent £300m on transfers.
* Benitez spent MORE than Both Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger during the same time period.
* Benitez was given an average of almost £50m a year to spend throughout his tenure.
* Benitez had a higher average yearly gross spend than both Wenger and Ferguson.
* Benitez had a higher Net Spend per year than both Wenger and Ferguson.
* 54% of the club's entire transfer spending total since 1990 was spent by Benitez from 2004-10!
All of the above are objective facts, taken from the official accounts of LFC, Arsenal and Man United?
How is it possible for Benitez to have had limited funds with above facts in mind?! If Ferguson and Wenger had less money to spend, how can £289m been classified as a 'limited' amount of money?!
It makes no difference whatsoever that he was not given this amount in one go; the bottom line is over his tenure, he spent £289m of the club's money! That is REAL MONEY passing from LFC to other clubs for the services of players. That is NOT a limited amount, and anyone who thinks it is...well, there is no excuse really. It is dishonesty, plain and simple.
These are the facts. Nothing anyone can say can change it. Not even Paul Tomkins, who has devised a transfer analysis 'system' that is specifically designed to favour Benitez. In it, he gathers a 'panel of non-partisan experts' to guestimate the current value of players, and the gross spend (cobbled together from non-factual sources) is then compared to the amount of money already recouped AND possibly 'recoupable' in the future (!). Such an analysis (obviously) always leads to Benitez having sold/potentially sold more than he bought.
Such a system is another prime example of the misinformation peddled by Benitez's supporters when it comes to transfer spending. How on earth can a system of subjective analysis (such as that created by Mr Tomkins) supercede factual, inalienable figures FROM THE CLUB'S OWN ACCOUNTS?!
Do people want the truth, or do they just want to manipulate the figures in any way they can until they come up with an answer that fits their expectations/opinions?!
Benitez supporters (the Pro-Benitez Cult among them) do not want to accept anything - even facts - unless it puts the man in the most positive light possible. This is why his fans choose to believe in subjective systems of analysis and reject facts taken from the club's own accounts. The truth hurts; it doesn't suit the agenda; so it is ignored. Such is life.
There is no grey area here: any transfer analysis that does not come directly from the club's own accounts is inaccurate, and usually agenda driven and intellectually dishonest.
Benitez had enough money. The facts speak for themselves.
Deal with it.
NB. I am not messing about anymore with the comments section. Anyone who posts any of the following will be permanently banned:
* Any post that contravenes the comment policy generally.
* Any post complaining that I should stop posting about Benitez
* Any post that suggests I hate Benitez, or it's personal (it isn't).
* Any post that moans about my approach, my style etc.
Vociferously disagree by all means; tear my arguments apart if you can, but do so in the right manner.
Jaimie Kanwar
Are you Roy in disguise? :p
ReplyDeleteyawn.....
ReplyDeleteFor the love of God, please Jamie give it a rest. You hate Rafa and we totally get it. Let it go son, let it go...
ReplyDeleteThe typical response of a Benitez apologist. I don't hate him at all - it has nothing to with him personally. I hate the Pro-Benitez Cult; I hate how they've twisted everything to do with the man into lies and misinformation.
ReplyDeleteGive it a rest & move on...what do u expect to achieve?
ReplyDeleteYou are pure manipulative that is a fact. When benitez came in as liverpool manager you forget united already had a winning team and some big signings like rio ferdiand 30mill rooney 30mill and a young superstar in the making ronaldo who they paid 11mill for.They had the team they did not need to spend. Wenger just went through a season with the unbeaten team and chelsea obv spent 250mill in two seasons under abromovich. Then rafa came into liverpoolfc and unlike ferguson he had to rebuild a whole squad, youth set up, scouting everything with the main thing ferguson had his squad, benitez had to rebuild the entire squad. Is that not a fact? He spent 10mill net over his tenure. fact. As i said he had to rebuild the whole squad and ferguson had already a winning squad filled with big money signings. You dont speak the truth. You twist everything.
ReplyDeleteObsessed much? If it wasn't for rafa, you would have nothing to write about. You owe him really.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that you cannot see what I want to achieve despite me explaining it in vivid detail speaks volumes about your comprehension skills. Why don't you read PROPERLY before posting such things?
ReplyDeleteNot everyone is blessed with commom sense. 8-) As i have stated this fact countless times, Ferguson had a team he built and only needs enchancement. Rafa inherited a team and needs to build. It cost less to refurblish a house than to build from scratch. IS THIS NOTION SO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND? Our friend thinks all the answer is the financial statement... LMFAO.
ReplyDeleteYou are pure manipulative that is a fact. When benitez came in as liverpool manager you forget united already had a winning team and some big signings like rio ferdiand 30mill rooney 30mill and a young superstar in the making ronaldo who they paid 11mill for.
ReplyDeleteThat makes no difference to anything. Am I arguing that Benitez should have achieved more, or overtaken united NO? Stop trying to change the focus. This argument is about one thing: the ridiculous notion that Benitez had limited funds during his tenure. I compare his spending to Wenger and Ferguson ONLY to illustrate that he did not have limited funds. Who United bought pre-2004 makes no difference to the actual amount of money Benitez had to spend between 2004 and 2010.
You dont speak the truth. You twist everything.
No - I do speak the truth; the irony here is that you twist everything, not me.
The truth is Benitez spent 289m in 6 years. That is what I have presented.
You have tried to turn this into a different argument altogether. That is twisting things.
Sorry mate your story has many holes. The amount of money given to Rafa to purchase players each year amounted to just £20million, additional funds were made from selling players; if you look at the figures that where released officially it all adds up...so please dont say Rafa had more money to spend on players then Alex, load of rubish...
ReplyDeleteApparently you didnt believe Rafa's claim of lack of funds, So you were able to reconcile in your mind that we had money for David Villa/Anelka but Rafa simply prefered Ngog?. Rafa had money to sign Daniel Alves but he preffered Albeola. You are more clueless than I thought. 8-) You can spend the rest of your life writing about Rafa, it is your choice. Another blockbuster you wrote was the "Attack on Roy", I thought Rafa was replying to "Roy". ?
ReplyDeleteOne thing I will say is that yes rafa spent over 50%
ReplyDeleteof the total spent by Liverpool in the last 20 years
But I think the situation of the rises in the price of
players has to be given consideration, however yes
he has had an awful lot of money to spend and he didn't
spend it right and that was his downfall and god bless him for
Istanbul my greasiest ever football memory but u can't live
On one football match 5 years ago
Thank god Hodgson was not around to spend that money.
ReplyDeleteThis is precisely what I'm talking about when it comes to delusion and pig-ignorance. (My rule about not insulting people on the site is lifted for people who part of the Pro-Benitez Cult. Anyone who is part of a Cult deserves ridicule, and I make no apology for that).
ReplyDeleteYou have just made up everything as usual, and you have the chutzpah to completely dismiss the figures from the club's accounts. Just like most anyone who is a mamber of the Pro-Benitez Cult.
The amount of money given to Rafa to purchase players each year amounted to just £20million, additional funds were made from selling players.
I don't know why I'm even bothering but...PROVE IT. Don't just regurgitate some nonsense you read on a fanboard like a sheep; why is this true?
if you look at the figures that where released officially it all adds up<span></span>
What figures 'released officially'? Post links please. The only figures released officially are those in the accounts.
so please dont say Rafa had more money to spend on players then Alex, load of rubish...<span></span>
No, it is a fact. I've posted the proof in the article above, and in countless other articles.
Hey Scott - I totally agree. Benitez has qualities, and he did some good stuff for the club too; Istanbul was an amazing night, and he deserves the utmost credit for that achievement.
ReplyDeleteOf course he had limited funds. Are you stupid reealy? He might of spent 289mill in 6 years but probably bought in 230mill back in. HE HAD TO SELL PLAYERS TO BUY PLAYERS. He had to take alot of risks because he had a whole squad to rebuild. For having a net spend of 10mill a season winning no5 for us, getting to another final and a couple of semis and a 2nd place league finish, do you think rafa did a good job considering the money he spent and bought in. If it was up to benitez he would not sell players like riise or crouch or bellamy or alonso, but to take us to the next step he had to sell to be able to spend.
ReplyDeleteno he is rick parry in disguise. lool
ReplyDeleteThe blind just follow faithfully without question when it comes to Rafa. I have always said he is a very wasteful manager. He would have bought more junk its in his blood :)
ReplyDeletewell. we got rid of rafa, and in came poulsen and konchesky. The worst signings in a long long time.
ReplyDeleteBenitez recouped quite a bit of money because he bought so many failed players. He had to sell them. Or he sold players because he alienated them so much that they wanted to leave (Alonso, Crouch, Hyypia etc).
ReplyDeleteHe did NOT have to sell players to buy. Where is your evidence? Who did Liverpool HAVE sell to buy Torres? Mascherano? Keane? Johnson? Aquilani? Babel?
Players were sold; they did not HAVE to be sold.
Ferguson's net spend was only 6m a year from 2004-10. And from 1990 - 2010, Liverpool spent MORE THAN MAN UNITED ON TRANSFERS, and look how many titles we have compared to united now.
if you were a real fan you wouldnt paw over old wounds like this all i care about is 3points on sunday vs chelsea..... enjoy the game from your sofa...... weirdo
ReplyDelete1 thing i want to know and i know u will defo know did we make a profit on the masherano deal?
ReplyDelete"Who United bought pre-2004 makes no difference to the actual amount of money Benitez had to spend between 2004 and 2010. "
ReplyDeleteIt does SIR. It meant given that United had quality in their squad and a matured academy, fund required to win the league is not as much as what a Liverpool of not a lot of quality in the squad and virtually no one at the academy ll need to win. So for you to even compare those clubs with a SNAPSHOT of financial statement 2004-2010 is comical.
<span>
</span>
I don´t really want to side with anyone here. I have a lot of respect for mr. Benitez, but it was impossible both for him & the club to continue. I wish him the best of luck! The real problem is that I don´t think they have replaced him with a quality manager. Roy Hodgson has achieved nothing outside Sweden. Allright, he lost a UEFA-cup final, but losing never made anyone a top manager. He has signed even worse players than Rafa, and now he tries to blame Rafa for the mess he´s in. It´s a disgrace.
ReplyDeletewhy slate him at every opertunity then?
ReplyDeleteCults, apologists etc etc. Repeat after me: you must not disagree with kanwar, less you become pigeonholed and ridiculed. Kanwar is the law.
ReplyDeleteJaimie, I do not understand what you are always trying to achieve with these articles. But one thing is for sure, you are a very troubled man. Your hatred for Benitez is eating you up. Let it go man. He is no longer the Liverpool manager and if the comments by the majority of the fans on most of your articles are anything to go by, you are wasting your efforts and emotions. No one gets you. Though I have to thank you for the figures you have posted. I was quite outraged with the way last season went and slagged off Rafa alot. But your articles have cleared the picture and shown me we may have gotten rid of one of the greatest managers in football right now who truly understood and loved the club.
ReplyDeleteffs jamie you are boring me now, rafa is gone,i am 42 and was around we won everything,and to me rafa brought back the good old days and pride, yes he had to go i the end but this vendetta jesus christ man give it a rest, instead of going over old ground, you should be looking who manager's us now,if rafa had the start woy had ,it would be all over the news,a toothliss manager who cant back hes players up and talks crap,but it seems rafa is more of a priority to you
ReplyDeleteOn your previous article you stated in 2008-09 Rafa spent £38m and recouped £45m,in 09-10 Rafa spent £22m recouped £31m.My philosophy is a simple economics,in Rafas last 2 years at the club he made £16m on player transfers for the club so he spent minus £16m on transfers.Last year Torres was injured all season and no money was forthcoming from H and G for adequate replacement hence 7th.Squad over last 2 years has been systematically weakened by H and G,then people say he had a good first 11 but his depth of squad was lacking,whos fault was that,,not Rafas.
ReplyDeleteI don't think this article will change anyones opinion. People believe what they want to believe and won't change that opinion regardless of the facts presented to them. As fans of LFC we know that better than anyone...
ReplyDeleteJK- not slating here (constructive criticism) but honestly as someone who (although relatively new to the site) likes the debate it's no fun having the same debate every day again and again. Surely there's enough going on at the club for this to be the last Benitez article for a little while?
You seem to have a lot of quantitative skill but ZERO analytical skills, You are able to present facts with numbers but unable to analyse what is behind the numbers, it is very typical, I see this at work everyday....
ReplyDeleteRafa doesnt need to spend much on his Inter team to win the league again, Are we saying if Juventus for example spends £300M on building a team and Rafa spend less, Rafa is a better manager? ABSOLUTELY NOT. INTER HAD A WINNING TEAM IN PLACE (Just like ManU). Juve on the other hand ll need to spend a lot more.... It is absurd to compare Rafa's spending to Ferguson's. If Rafa was so bad, why was he given a 5 yr contract?
Is it groundhog day? Jamie, you obviously have an agenda here and continue to ignore pertinant facts (ie net spend vs gross spend, strating point of Man U/Arsenal squads vs Liverpool's etc). No matter how many times you post a variation of this same article, intelligent readers will see right through it.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I can't tell if you are being obtuse or if you've been swept along by the overtly agoraphobic British press.
I have to disaggre with you, like I tend to do regarding Benitez, and I especially do regarding his transfer record. I used to study mathematics and statistisk in Copenhagen, and I think any of my teachers in statstics would give you an 03 for your analasis. I also disaggre with Paul Tompkins approach, since is based on pure speculation regarding potential transfer recovery on Benitez's signings. My analasis of Benitez's transfer record is; dividing players in to 3 catagories: 1) Players sold by Benitez, 2) Players bought and sold by Benitez and 3) players bought by Benitez but still at the club.
ReplyDeleteThe 2 most interesting catagories to me is 2 and 3. In the catagory of players bought by Benitez and resold (2) there is by my accounts a slight plus...
Then to calculate the price (for the club) for assembling the part of the squad is very simple: price of players in catagori 3 - price of players in catagori 2. This value is off course much higher than Benitez actual net spend but still much lower than his gross spend.
Why do I consider this approach the most statistically valid one?
Because the players who where here before Benitez where allready club equity, and therefore spending money recovered on these players is still spending money Benitez has not earned the club in any way. However players bought by Benitez and resold for a profit/loss is money that Benitez has indeed himself earned or lost for the club. Ergo returns should be subtracted or added depending on profit/loss when calculating the final outcome on Benitez's cost for assembling the squad.
I have to disaggre with you, like I tend to do regarding Benitez, and I especially do regarding his transfer record. I used to study mathematics and statistisk in Copenhagen, and I think any of my teachers in statstics would give you an 03 for your analasis. I also disaggre with Paul Tompkins approach, since is based on pure speculation regarding potential transfer recovery on Benitez's signings. My analasis of Benitez's transfer record is; dividing players in to 3 catagories: 1) Players sold by Benitez, 2) Players bought and sold by Benitez and 3) players bought by Benitez but still at the club.
ReplyDeleteThe 2 most interesting catagories to me is 2 and 3. In the catagory of players bought by Benitez and resold (2) there is by my accounts a slight plus...
Then to calculate the price (for the club) for assembling the part of the squad is very simple: price of players in catagori 3 - price of players in catagori 2. This value is off course much higher than Benitez actual net spend but still much lower than his gross spend.
Why do I consider this approach the most statistically valid one?
Because the players who where here before Benitez where allready club equity, and therefore spending money recovered on these players is still spending money Benitez has not earned the club in any way. However players bought by Benitez and resold for a profit/loss is money that Benitez has indeed himself earned or lost for the club. Ergo returns should be subtracted or added depending on profit/loss when calculating the final outcome on Benitez's cost for assembling the squad.
I don't believe that the post from RafaIsNamibian is a 'typical response of a Benitez apologist'. If you're a blogger worth your salt, try posting something positive on our wonderful club rather than continually to attack, or try not to fire insults at people who don't agree with your point of view.
ReplyDeleteI also don't believe there is a 'pro-Benitez cult' out there. It was time for a change at the end of last season,Rafa had taken the club as far as he could, just as Houllier had back in 2004.
I think what is an issue for a lot of fans (not a Benetiz cult) is that a change of manager should have brought about an immediate improvement in results, afterall the change was made to improve things. Not only have the results been extremely poor this season, so have the performances. Each time I've visited Anfield this season, it hasn't filled me with excitement. The performances (ignoring the results) against Sunderland and Blackpool hurt deep down. The last time I remember feeling that bad was when Bristol City knocked us out of the FA Cup in the Souness years.
Now, I'm not calling for Hodgson to go, nor am I pro-Benitez (thou Rafa did deliver the greatest day of my life - Istanbul 2005, and I've been to 6 European Cup finals) but things need to start improving dramatically, and 6 points from Blackburn at home & Bolton away is not an improvement, its expected!
Love to spark you, you fucking beaut
ReplyDeleteYou just do not get it, do you. Please continue in this vein because you are providing a perfect example of the Pro-Benitez Cult in action.
ReplyDeletefor you to even compare those clubs with a SNAPSHOT of financial statement 2004-2010 is comical.
<span> </span>This is just several kinds of stupid. How is this relevant? Whether I post the entire accounts or a snippet from the relevant section, the figures are still going to be the same.
And the money given to Benitez from 2004-10 has NOTHING to do with Man United's spending pre 2004. Are you suggesting that Moores/Hicks et al looked at Man U's spending pre 2004 and thought 'right: they spent this much in 2001, so we'll give Benitez this much in 2007'?!
Laughable.
As usual, you have nothing of interest to say related to the actual points being discussed. You change the subject and focus on unrelated issues. When you have something relevant to add, then perhaps we can debate the issues.
ReplyDeleteI'm a LFC fan since I was 5 (I'm now 38)but was also turned into also Bristol City fan as I moved to Bristol when I was 12. Yet I have always supported LFC first and always felt that LFC supporters had so much class compared to the rest. But not anymore. Lets be honest, Rafa messed up in the last couple of years and Roy still has a lot to prove, but please stop the negative comments and give the man a chance, as I have never heard so much negativity come from our so called supporters. I have seen so many managerial changes happen in the lower league clubs yet more often than not, it leads to to a worse league position than before. So my question is; are we Liverpool supporters who have class, who never react just because the media do and always give the manager a chance or are we the next Leicester..
ReplyDeleteMaybe just like some others think they are the law.
ReplyDeleteIt is not slating. Show me one - just one - instance where I have ever said anything personal about Benitez. It is about analysing history and focusing on the truth. Just because you can't hack that kind of analysis doesn't mean it is me slating Benitez. I don't make up the figures; they are what they are.
ReplyDeleteAdditonally, it's about seeing both sides. I can see and admit to the the good things Benitez has done, and I've referred to these things many times in various articles. I can also see the flaws in his reign, and they deserve dicussion too, especially when the Pro-Benitez Cult is lying, deceiving and spreading misinformation about the man to further an agenda.
I'm a LFC fan since I was 5 (I'm now 38)but was also turned into also Bristol City fan as I moved to Bristol when I was 12. Yet I have always supported LFC first and always felt that LFC supporters had so much class compared to the rest. But not anymore. Lets be honest, Rafa messed up in the last couple of years and Roy still has a lot to prove, but please stop the negative comments and give the man a chance, as I have never heard so much negativity come from our so called supporters. I have seen so many managerial changes happen in the lower league clubs yet more often than not, it leads to to a worse league position than before. So my question is; are we Liverpool supporters who have class, who never react just because the media do and always give the manager a chance or are we the next Leicester..
ReplyDeleteSee - this type of attitude is a disgrace. How many games has Poulsen played?! 6. And you write him off in such a manner after 6 games?! And Konchesky - name me one mistake he has made that led directly to a goal.
ReplyDeleteYou are a sheep, just spouting whatever the concensus tells you.
They are very far from the worst signings in a long time. Phlipp Degen, Andrei Vorinin, Emiliano Insua et al are worse, and that can be said more authoritatively because THEY PLAYED MORE THAN 6 GAMES.
"He spent 10mill net over his tenure." Do you actually believe yourself what you wrote there? I mean, do you really? Good Lord. Ah yeah, Rafa said so, didn't he. I surely think everybody should be allowed to have an opinion of their own, but this rather look like you are believing everything Rafa says. Not exactly an opinion of your own.
ReplyDeleteNo, we made a loss of 1.4m
ReplyDeletemascherano cost 18.6m (Loan - 1.6m; fee = 17m)
He was allegedly sold for 17.2m, but that figure could be inaccurate as the only source is the media (and LFC websites like LFC history).
But if I might add, looking at naked facts this way is still doesn't nesesarely represent the morale on how Benitez has fared. The accounts show a steady transfer recovery on Benitez part, meening that for me moraly the picture has always been Benitez had to sell all the time. To me that make it hard to get the continuity, which I consider essential to a title challenging squad. The opposite picture occurs on United's books, where only one major sale is noted. Ferguson hasn't had to chop and change all the time. (but credit for staying competative with no major outlay after Ronaldo's sale)
ReplyDeleteSecondly you have to compare the position they where in. United had a strong squad at a good age, while Benitez took over a squad that strugling sneaked in to top 4. The best players Hyypia, Carra, Hamann, Gerrard and Owen where either aging, used by Benitez to build the team or leaving before Benitez could work with him. Clearly United's squad needed adding while Liverpool's needed more rebuilding.
Kanwar, do you accept that a reasonably high percentage of the money RB spent on transfers was self generating? for example spending £10m on Alonso, then selling him for £30m and spending the balance on his replacement.
ReplyDeleteI havent got the time or inclination to actually work it all out, but i would guess that it's quite a high percentage.
It's true that RB spent a lot on transfers in his 6 seasons, but surely even you must accept that a lot of his spending was "wheeler dealing" bringing people in and then selling them on, simply because he couldn't often shop in the top shops.
Bottom line is he has a net spend of £10m over 6 seasons, not including the probable future sales of benitez buys who are still with the club i.e Torres & Reina.
When these players are eventually sold from the squad, RB transfer fund will be healthy in the multi-millions.
With that thought in mind, what point are you trying to make?
Unfortunately many fellow Reds fight tooth and nail to defend Rafa based on one football match 5 years ago.
ReplyDeleteYewo - thanks for your comments. My goal is not to change opinions - as you say, people will make up their own minds. They can only make up their minds IF the information is out there. At present, there is way to much misinformation and lies spread by certain Pro-Benitez sites. There is no counterbalance to that except this site. Seriously, look around. There isn't. That is why I have to continuously post articles like this. I can't stomach the one-sided lies being spread.
ReplyDeleteAs long as the Pro-Benitez Cult keeps putting the lies out there, I will keep responding with the facts, and a different view of events.
This site has a large readerhip; millions of people since it began, plus over 250-300,000 visitors a month. Only a very small minority post comments. The majority will read, and then make up their own minds, and that is what I want.
I appreciate what you're saying but there is an ideological war being fought here, and it needs to be fought. People are free to ignore Benitez articles; they don't have to read them or post comments. As I said above though, there are tens of thousands who still read them, and it's important that they have the information to make an informed choice.
I'm not quite sure you've made any relevant point here. Why don't you present an argument of some kind and then we can take it from there.
ReplyDeleteAnd the 3 players you mention cost 9m less than Poulsen & Konchesky. Poulsen is no better than Lucas, and is much slower. I'd rather Jay Spearing get a chance than the Danish Crab.
ReplyDeleteKonchesky mistake for goal v Utd when marking near post and was stood behind Pepe when the ball crossed the line. If he stayed in position, he would've cleared the ball and the game would've still been 0-0. He is an average left back at best. Never rated him and he's had 10 years plus in the Premier League.
Why do people ignore the many negative aspects of his reign? Because of one great achievement. People tend to blank out everything else and are not open to look at the entire picture in a well mannered way. Well, slating him won't help either. Maybe he should come back and achieve nothing. One day a few more people would see the light.
ReplyDeleteI hope you're comfortable in your armchair. Most of the 'cult' as you refer to it are or have been at some point regular matchgoers, something you never have been. Co-incidence? I'd say the 'cult's' opinion holds much more weight than yours.
ReplyDeleteKonchesky cost us a goal, as he was not staying by the post on a corner. That´s stuff you learn as a child, for christ sake. He is a very mediocre full-back, and a club like Liverpool need better players. Poulsen has not been any good for 5 years, I´ve been following him, since I´m part danish and also interested in Italian football.
ReplyDeleteTry posting something positive on our wonderful club
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you try opening your eyes and seeing that I have posted plenty of positive stuff about the club recently. I have been one of the most positive supporters of the club actually; defending Purslow and Broughton against character assassination; trying to ensure that the correct figures about the club's finainces are reported; slamming the doom and gloom brigade for making out LFC would die after Benitez left. And recent articles included positivity about LFC slipping into the relegation zone; arguing that we will make 4th place; refusing to jump on the doom bandwagon re Hodgson etc.
I have been massively positive, yet it's not the right kind of positivity. Why? Positivity about the Roy Hodgson regime somehow doesn't matter. It's not counted, which is ridiculous.
So next time, try being fair for once and checking your facts before accusing me of not writing positive stuff.
how can we take a loss on a player who we took on loan and turned him into the argentina captain?
ReplyDeletecomebackrafa.......there was no money forthcoming from H+G for adequate replacement? how about the 20 million RAFA CHOSE to spend on aquilani? a player we didnt need to spend that money on due to the availablity of better and fit players (vdv, sniejder, loric cana, james milner) and who was injured, he could have spent as little as 7 mil on alonso's replacement vdv cana and milner would have roughly this price, and still had 13 million available to get a replacement, but no RAFA CHOSE TO SPEND THE AVAILABLE CASH ON AN INJURED PLAYER WE DIDNT NEED!!!
ReplyDelete<span>"with reason, intelligence and, where possible, inalienable fact"</span>
ReplyDeleteaha, a different author, alas no, still JK
I'm sorry Jamie but the only thing I see that you've been posting recently is your 'debunking' series or Rafa stories. Let's see something on how we can improve, what's going wrong at the moment, and maybe, just maybe see some less aggressive responses from you towards fans who have a different point of view to you.
ReplyDeleteIt is clear that you are trying to villify Benitez and anyone who says positive things about him are Pro-Benitez Cult!! This is ludicrous and extremely sensationalist, typical of a cheap rag!
ReplyDeleteBenitez won the Champions League- only achieved 4 times by the club previous to his term in the entire history of the club!! Only Paisley and Fagan achieved that feat!! He almost won it a second time also. He was making steady progression to his penultimate season in charge before a disastrous final season!! Xabi Alonso was Benitez's key failing as manager - he was the conductor and had we kept him and masch and improved around them- I'm certain we would be challenging for the title!! He had his failings but what manager doesn't!!
In the last season we were all disappointed and at times wished he would leave but remember the great Alex Ferguson was moments from the sack before creating the most illustrious period in Utds history. It took 4 years before Utd won the title and they finished 11th in one season. Arsene Wenger (although one of my favourite managers due to the great football they play!!) was successful quite quickly due to inherited a still successful Arsenal team but the last time Wenger won the league was 2003-2004 (6 years ago) and they haven't won a trophy for 5 years!!!
Facts are Chelsea spent ludicrous amounts of money which eventually led to Premier League success (out-spending Liverpool!!!) and Ferguson may not in recent years outspent Benitez- the ground works for success were there ages before Benitez arrived. Utd had won the league with a squad developed over years and would never need complete overhaul. Ferguson was clever and integrated seasoned successful players with future talents until they were ready to take the mantle themselves. Success breads success (they get to know what it feels like and what is required to achieve it!!!!)
1992–93, 1993–94, 1995–96, 1996–97, 1998–99, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2002–03, 2006–07, 2007–08, 2008–09
Benitez inherited Houllier's side- and that was full of crap players who were never capable of winning a league title (Gerrard, Owen and Fowler aside).
You may be a Liverpool fan and you may have delivered the accurate accounts of Benitez's era but one thing is clear to me is you obviously don't understand football, tactics and requirements of success!!!
If you think we are better off with Hodgson and with the worst start to a league season since 1950s i think, playing diabolical football at times and the chances of even getting champions league are slim. He has lower the expectations of the club - he thinks we are a middle table club!!
You never heard the expression- aim for the stars and you'll hit the moon!!
YNWA
Unlike you We understand Poulsen is 30 yrs and We have watched him play for Juventus. Poulsen is not exactly going to get better. Konchesky is not exactly Evra or Cole... He is never going to get to that level. Nice try though...
ReplyDeleteweeve wafa awone woy
ReplyDeleteKanwar, you are simply hopeless
ReplyDeletebecause the player wanted to leave and didnt have too long left on his contract
ReplyDeletePeople disagree with me all the time without incident. Or have you not noticed that a high percentage of comments on this site are people disagreeing? The only people who are pigeonholed and ridiculed are those who are objectively stupid i.e. the Pro Benitez Cult. basically, anyone who argues against a proven fact is objectively stupid, and deserving of ridicule. As I said in a previous example on this thread: If a person truly believes that the world is flat, they are objectively stupid because it has been proved irrefutably that the world is a sphere.
ReplyDeleteSame applies to the Pro-Benitez Cult. Anyone who argues that Benitez had limited funds to spend, and ignores the FACT that he had 289m to spend (which is not a limited amount), is objectively stupid and deserving of ridicule. So far, it is only the Pro-Benitez Cult that believe things like that, so I have no problem attacking its members. In much the same way, I would have no problem attacking members of the BNP, or members of the Nazi Party.
Did Degen even play in 6 games? ;)
ReplyDeletePrecisely, Strebby.
ReplyDeleteSo according to your logic, RH spent close to 30 million on players this year. Why are we complaining about his lack of funds then :)
ReplyDelete<span>"Do people want the truth, or do they just want to manipulate the figures in any way they can until they come up with an answer that fits their expectations/opinions?</span>
ReplyDeleteThere is an answer to that out there. It was written by Erasmus of Rotterdam and goes along the lines of people want to be fooled as falsehood and lies appeal more to them than the truth.
Now, this was a very wise man who said that, but I would bet my bottom penny that most fellow Reds would dismiss this instead of having a long hard look at themselves. That (reflection) is the beginning of personal evolution, but that's something most people don't seem to aspire to these days.
Why do you keep refering to people as members of a cult?
ReplyDeletePlease visit anfield at least once. Bristol is far, far away. You need to experience the atmosphere then you may have a different take on things instead of continually trying to discredit an ex manager.
jaimie
ReplyDeleteWhen i followed your previous articles i came to the conclusion that in the last 2-3 years the net transfer dealings showed a profit, not very useful when you are trying to stengthen a sqaud! however, we have routinely settled for the maybe or almost players or those in decline, apart from Torres, when we could have been pushing on to sign a couple of established world stars.
I have no idea who might be in this infamous benitez cult but I am now bored by your articles. I do know that RB was predictable, no subs until after the hour mark by which time games were often out of reach, best case we might not lose, hence too many draws! Case in point, why in Athens leave Crouch until the last 10 minutes, a bolder manager would have done something at half time to take the game to the opposition.
Dont get stuck in a rut mate, try a new theme. The issue now for any LFC manager is can we develop a youthful squad of home grown talent, will the likes of Shelvey or Pacheco come though like a Keegan, Owen or Fowler? Cmon you redmen! Nev.
Fair enough -thanks for the reply. I'll continue to check the site for something that gets my interest but I' done with the Rafa debate for now I think.
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth there (in my opinion) are as many people that are blindly anti-Rafa as there are in the "Pro-Benitez Cult" i.e. those that refuse to credit Benitez for anything. I love Rafa for giving me some of the best nights of my life. I don't agree with his dismissal but can see why people did want him gone and can see he did make mistakes and have his faults. I do find it hard to understand he glee some people have that he's gone though.
Ferguson won it first time in his 7th. season as far as I recall.
ReplyDeletei still cant get my head around the offer real madrid made for alonso substantial cash AND snjieder and rafa turned it down, and now look at him, odds on favorite for the ballon d'or....... it still makes my blood boil that rafa bought aquilani, im not denying the player has talent, but this transfer alone and the season we had last season arguably because of this, was reason enough to sack rafa or leave by mutual consent or whatever it was
ReplyDelete<span><span>ob·ses·sion</span>
ReplyDelete<object>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
<param></param>
</object>
</span> <span>(<img></img>b-s<img></img>sh<img></img><img></img>n, <img></img>b-)</span>
n. 1. Compulsive preoccupation with a fixed idea or an unwanted feeling or emotion, often accompanied by symptoms of anxiety.2. A compulsive, often unreasonable idea or emotion.
Kanwar : A mind completely obsessed with a single thought, idea, or desire; an extremely narrow point of view. This common expression alludes to a single set of railroad tracks on which trains can move in only one direction. As used today, the phrase often carries the disparaging implication that the possessor of such a mind stubbornly resists any consideration of alternative viewpoints.
When all is said and done the bottom line is Rafa done more good than bad in his tenure. He stood up for the fans and tried to understand(take note RH) them.He made us #1 in europe and was probably 2 £20m sigings away from the title. Also his record compared to Wengers since 2004 is better having won more trophies than him.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I remember we've had a run of four straight defeats last season, which was the worst run in 100 or so years. I would just like to know if you were defending Rafa back then or if you were just as critical of him as you are now of Roy. Just out of curiosity.
ReplyDeleteIs that the Anfield were some (not all) were discrediting Lucas and are now discrediting the current manager. Where players got judged by the way they wear their hair? Where last season the Rafa-assembled squad was booed off on more than one occasion? Great atmosphere.
ReplyDeleteThis is ripe - coming from the unrivalled chairman of the Anti-Rafa CULT, which is just as bad a place to be as the Pro-Rafa CULT. Both are stupid and childish positions to take. Why are you so hellbent on proving them wrong, whether tey are or aren't? Do you not realise the man has left the club? He is history - and so should you biased anti articles be.
ReplyDeleteGet a grip, dude. The war is over. You can coat it all you like with your 'I need to keep responding to the lies', but the fact is - you DO dislike Rafa. End of story.
As expected, you are deviating from the real issue, There is no intelligence in comparing Liverpool's spending under Rafa to Ferguson spending for 6 yrs. It is comparing apples and oranges simply because Rafa had to build and Ferguson needs to enchance, You seem to want to make a career over writing about Benitez. The truth of the matter is you dont seem to possess the mental ability to understand the complexity of the issues. As stated earlier there are other factors responsible for Liverpool's decline in the last 20 yrs, (Yes, Rafa's buy one of them). To over emphasize on Rafa's is what i ll called a simple mind that is uncapable of seeing beyond their nose. There is are off the field issues, there are fund shortage (it is up to you to believe or not to believe it,) amongst others,
ReplyDeleteIt is rather unintelligent to pick an event and hammer on it. You need to look at the six year and make an informed conclusion. We all know Aquilani, Keane, Babel are bad buys.. It is not unique to Rafa. All managers buy bad players, What is important is the tenure of 6 yrs.... Not just last season...
ReplyDeleteThank god he isnt liverpools manager anymore. £200m spent for a squad that contains no full backs, no wingers, no midfield playmaker and one striker.
ReplyDeleteSurely its not just those clowns on RAWK who still think Benitez was anything other than a disaster.
I've noticed that a large proportion of comments get deleted, and thus the uninitiated follower of this blog leaves with the impression that the comments section is a fair reflection of life and opinion OTK - which it isn't.
ReplyDeleteJamie,
ReplyDeleteYou make so many points in this article so I will try to address them one by one:
p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Times}
The Pro-Benitez Cult has divided the club more than anything else I've witnessed as an LFC fan, and that includes Hicks and Gillett.
Really? H&G who most liverpool fans would admit were bad for the club and unable to take it forward or build a stadium and even you were laughing at and posting comments from the judge of the recent court case mocking H&G's case. Yet somehow a group of fans who felt that the manger had done a good job and should not be fired have divided the club more than two owners who forced our own Chairman who H&G appointed to take them to court to force through a sale to NESV. I think you're in a minority there!
p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Times}
Rafa Benitez DID NOT HAVE LIMITED TRANSFER FUNDS.
I agree with you on this point. Rafa didn't have limited funds but that doesn't mean he was provided with money when he needed it. As various others have argued how many players have LFC bough over 15m during Benitez's reign: Torres, Mascharano, Aqualinai, Johnson & Keane. Now I would argue that of the five players only one is an out and out failure and that is Keane. Johnson is a little suspect defensively but he is young and can improve and is great going forward. Aqualini had a terrible first season but is now playing brilliant for Juventus and not us! The point i'm making here is that things are repeating themselves again with Hodgeson he is spending money just like Benitez on average players (5-10m) where you are taking a gamble on quality. Also while it is true that 54% of transfer spending has been spent by Benitez the ridiculous inflation on players means that even average players cost ridiculous money look at ManU they just paid 7m for a striker from the 3rd division of the Portuguese league.
English players in particular cost silly money meaning that managers frequently have to go into Europe to buy players which means you are taking a risk with a player who might not settle at first in the PL.
Rick Parry was the first; he was ridiculed by the cult; then there's Christian Purslow and Martin Broughton, both of whom suffered totally unfair character assassination. And now it's Roy Hodgson being ridiculed by the Cult, despite the fact he's had to clean up the wreckage of last season AND work under intolerable conditions (Court cases/undertainty etc).
First off Rick Parry was useless and during his tenure at LFC we failed to grow our revenue through advertising or marketing our deal with Carlsberg compared to Standard Chartered was pathetic and its funny how as soon as Parry was replaced and Purslowe and Ayre were recruited things started to improve dramatically in terms of revenue for LFC. That's probably one thing that I would thank H&G for :) . I don't really get your point about Hodegson... Intolerable conditions? he knew what he was walking into and the fact that the club was being sold was of benefit to him as it would mean new investment and new owners. The fact is that Hodgeson was meant to be a safe pair of hands and so far his start to the season has been the worst in 50 years with LFC sitting in the relegation zone!
He has pretty much wasted money on Konchesky yes he will get better but was he better than Insu a young player who will only get better? Mereleis looks class but was he better than Aqualani? could we have used that money on a striker? I guess we'll have to wait until January to make that assessment but if Hodgeson is only a stop gap until the end of the season then its a pretty expensive and IMO counter prodcutive [...]
Wrong Ant, we lost two league games in a row last season, never four. For a Liverpool fan you're not much Kop when it comes to our statistics are you? This season we went 5 League games without a win, that's something that never happened under Benitez.
ReplyDeleteYes - a large proportion of comments containing insults, derogatory comments and sniping get deleted. If you falsely try and suggest that valid comments get deleted than your comments will also be delteted :)
ReplyDeleteClose to 30m - please do a breakdown of Hodgson's figures and show how they are 'close to 30m.
ReplyDeleteI don't have any complaints with the amount of money made available to Hodgson - he's a transitional manager, and the money he got/spent is entirely fair.
The fact that you attack Poulsen personally by calling him a 'Danish Crab' renders any argument you present devoid of credibility.
ReplyDeleteHm, but Rafa has made those bad buys and then moaned about not having any funds left.
ReplyDeleteAnd what you fail to see is the bigger picture. Konchesky and Poulsen are SQUAD PLAYERS. They are playing first team games at the moment because Hodgson hasn't had the money to buy first choice players in those positions. When he (or another manager) has the money, Poulsen and Konchesky will revert to being perfectly adequate squad players. The squad left by Benitez was thin, especially after trimming some of the dead-wood. Big bucks were never going to be made available during a sale process - do you not see this?! So Hodgson bought 'holding' players who will make do until there is oney to buy top class left-back/holding mid. It's not rocket science you know.
ReplyDeleteYes he did. And I think we all recognise his mistake. Managers do buy bad players... It is not unique to Rafa.
ReplyDeleteCompletely agree - the Aquilani transfer defies belief on so many levels. There's no doubting Aqua has talent, but that's not the issue. You could buy Pele, Zidane and Romario but it's pointless if they're injured. We needed someone to come in from day 1 of the season and make a differnce. Instead, by the time Aquailni made his debut, our season was already in the toilet. IMO, the worst transfer decision in years. There are obviously laughable transfers from the past (Sean Dundee, for example), but when it comes spending big bucks on a player, The Auilani transfer has got to be one of the most ill-advised.
ReplyDeleteRafa spent more money on playerys in the same way Barry Fry spent money on players at Birmingham. Over the course of time they both spent loads but were never abled to use their budget how they wanted. Fact!. The reason Rafa had such a high turnover of players was because they ere usully his third or 4th choice signing. The board simply wouldn't allow Rafa to spend his allocted budget where he wanted (something Rafa changed in his final season in the terms of his new contract) and instead insisted on 'value for money' OR more accurately 'quantity over genuine quality' The few occasions Rafa spent big his signings paid off. If Roy had half a brain he would have kept Aquilani over siging Lucas no.2 Meirles (what does he do? dribble? shoot? pass?......) Aquilani would have been a beacon of light for us this season...a real match winner. Johnson is the only player who hasn't really shone but that is mainly because our centre backs have no pace which highlights his defensive frailties even more. (For the record I beleive Frys record signings were Ricky Otto and Kevin Francis at £800,000 a piece. The rest of his 100 man squad cost £75 grand a piece 8-) . If fry had been given money to spend where he wanted instead of being given £50k every once in a while who knows......
ReplyDeleteFunny how you could replace "Kanwar" with "pro Rafa cult" and it would (too) make sense.
ReplyDeleteRafa Rafael
ReplyDeleteRafa Rafael
Rafa Rafael
Rafeal Benitez
He gave us hope not to mention 2 Champion league finals .. Why are you trying to taint his name? The only geniune success we have and you try and rob the fans of this? Have you evolved into a higher form of LFC fan because of this site!!! Every fan has their opinion and their favourite game and mine happens to be one night in Istanbul....
And the whole 6 years is littered with terrible buys:
ReplyDeleteKeane
Aquilani
Degen
Johnson
Babel
Voronin
Dossena
Zenden
Pennant
Morientes
Kromkamp
Josemi
Palletta
Leto
Nunez
Carson
Pellegrini
Itandje
Cavalieri
El Zhar
Aurelio
And the list goes on.
No one disputes that Benitez made some effective signings, but he signed a lot players who made no positive consistent impact on the team too.
Rafa Rafael
ReplyDeleteRafa Rafael
Rafa Rafael
Rafeal Benitez
He gave us hope not to mention 2 Champion league finals .. Why are you trying to taint his name? The only geniune success we have and you try and rob the fans of this? Have you evolved into a higher form of LFC fan because of this site!!! Every fan has their opinion and their favourite game and mine happens to be one night in Istanbul....
I'm sorry Jamie but the only thing I see that you've been posting recently is your 'debunking' series or Rafa stories
ReplyDeleteYes, because if you go to the homepage there are no positive articles at all, are there? You are blatantly lying. if you can't be fair then I'm not going to waste my time responding to your comments. If you don't like this site, you can always go elsewhere. And that goes for anyone else. if you don't like this site or its articles, I'm not interested in hearing you bgitch and moan about it. Just go elsewhere. I don't write to get hits; if I did, I wouldn't take regular breaks of 4-5 months off, would I?
Rafa Rafael
ReplyDeleteRafa Rafael
Rafa Rafael
Rafeal Benitez
He gave us hope not to mention 2 Champion league finals .. Why are you trying to taint his name? The only geniune success we have and you try and rob the fans of this? Have you evolved into a higher form of LFC fan because of this site!!! Every fan has their opinion and their favourite game and mine happens to be one night in Istanbul....
It's not a personal attack on Poulson, I call him Danish, as that's his nationality. I call him a crab as his style of play is moving from side to side (never going forward).
ReplyDeleteIf you've never heard of 'crab' used to describe a playing style, you obviously haven't had much exposure to football.
Therefore, I should be calling any argument you present 'devoid of credibilty'.
Also, Poulson is not a particully good footballer and the Premier League is far too quick for him.
Paisley - where in Anteaters comment does he mention the word 'league'? He stated:
ReplyDeleteAs far as I remember we've had a run of four straight defeats last season<span></span>
That is all competitions, obviously.
And it is correct. In fact, it's even worse than that. 4 defeats in row, but 6 defeats in 7 games:
29.09.2009 0 - 2 Fiorentina Artemio Franchi Champions L. 1st Group Ph. 04.10.2009 0 - 2 Chelsea Stamford Bridge Premier League 17.10.2009 0 - 1 Sunderland Stadium of Light Premier League 20.10.2009 1 - 2 Lyon Anfield Champions L. 1st Group Ph. 25.10.2009 2 - 0 Man Utd Anfield Premier League 28.10.2009 1 - 2 Arsenal Emirates Stadium League Cup 4th round 31.10.2009 1 - 3 Fulham Craven Cottage
Premier League
From this point forward, anyone who personally ridicules any Liverpool player, manager or employee will be banned.
ReplyDeleteYou're a Manc
ReplyDeleteI buy a guitar for £100, don't like it anymore so sell it for £80 and buy a guitar for £200, then don't like that one anymore so sell it for £160 and buy another one for £400. The £400 guitar really has cost me £460 (400 + 40 + 20). Yes I have effectively paid a bit over the odds for it but I cannot see why you would appear to be telling me my £400 guitar has cost me £700 (400+200+100). I know I spent £700 overall but not in total. I may or may not now have the guitar I want, but that is another issue altogether.
ReplyDeleteYou're becoming less and less credible by the article. You insist on sticking to the Gross spend when talking about money spent, you still haven't released salaries as promised and you still ignore net spend. In other words you stick by the facts that suit YOUR agenda. The pro Rafa "cult" as you call us were formed because of the biased negative press. If the press and pundits didn't attack Rafa at every possible opportunity - quite similar to you actually - there wouldn't be a "pro Rafa cult". It's called Karma. Maybe you should do an article on why the press hated Rafa so much, you being a journalist would understand best. I often wonder how negatively you watched Liverpool games the last few years? When we won were you happy or dissapointed?
ReplyDeleteBristol is not 'very very far away at all' - It's about 170 miles, and I've done the jounrey in less than 4 hours on my Motorbike many times.
ReplyDeleteI have been to Anfield lots of times; in my experience, it's people like you who constantly go on about others going Anfield (so tedious) that have never been. I don't need to boast about it - If I go to a game that's my business, not yours.
And being a games makes no difference to my views. Should I suddenly become a sheep and just acccept what people at games think?! Anyway, this myth that fans who go to Anfield are all 100% behind Benitez is utter nonsense.
Ahhh, nice to see someone else doesn't put Benitez on a pedestal like a lot of the so called Liverpool fans (cough RAWK cough). The level in which the man is held absolutley baffles me, I can remember people saying they would rather support Inter now that Rafa is there - come again? Absolute madness, deluded 'fans'. I honestly believe they would shake Rafas c0ck after he's taken a piss, ridiculous. No suprise I'm banned from RAWK I hear you say? lol. Good article man, nice to see a Liverpool suporter realise the club is bigger than the man in charge.
ReplyDeleteSuch compelling insight! I posted this article about 9 hours ago - has it taken you that long to come up with your cliched 3 word retort?
ReplyDeleteWelcome :) RAWK is the Pro-Benitez Cult stronghold on the net. As you say, the fact that people on that site said they would go and support Inter now (I too have seen those comments) just shows the depth of their delusion, and also show categorically how they put Benitez ahead of the club.
ReplyDeleteIt's pathetic. What's even more pathetic is the people who cannot see how the Pro-Benitez Cult is so damaging.
Paul - I've had enough of your crap. You're banned. take your vacuous drivel somewhere else.
ReplyDeleteJaime.. stop being a joke and an insult to Liverpool fans.. you only tend to see things your way. In the past you had a post about how Rafa only spent 10m a season and you were okay with it. Now just because he had a bigger outlay in net spent (which you said wasn't a good indication of transfer spending) and you slog Rafa. You really hate him and we get it - but that doesn't makes you right. It could just meant that the previous owners said "here Rafa, spend this money and bring us back X amount".
ReplyDeleteRight - how many more people want to be banned? READ THE COMMENTS AT THE END OF THE ARTICLE. If people keep posting stuff along those lines you will be banned. Makes no difference to me. Make your points - leave out the personal commentary.
ReplyDeleteAnd Konchesky - name me one mistake he has made that led directly to a goal.
ReplyDelete<span>
Read more: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2010/11/debunking-liverpool-fc-myths-no-9-rafa.html#ixzz14ANgNKHV</span>
He was at fault for the goal at blackburn, out of interest do you ac tually watch football or jsut analyse numbers?
You have quoted LFC History as a reliable source in the past
ReplyDeleteYawn
ReplyDeleteI too cannot see a priest on a mountain of sugar.
ReplyDeleteI have to say after reading all this, and it took some time reading it..Rafa had to go. He spent badly. not only did he but crap but he constantly played players out of position. He would play Lucas every week when everyone wanted him dropped. He didn't buy a striker when he knew Ngog was his only backup. He wanted to sell Alonso to bring in Barry...WTF... Never played a settled side. He was way to stubborn, I think it is his downfall. Look at his buys, please.. Verone, Ngog. Degan. Aquilani, Dossena, Pennant, Babbel, Palleta, Josemi, carson, Kromkamp, Nunez, Insua, El zhar, I mean he spent £20m on Aqualani, That says it all for me and never even played him...And i know you have all hear ed it before but we had our asses kicked in Istanbul and the team that bid pull us out of the shit that night weren't even his team so don't give me "He gave us 2005" Way to stuborn for his own good and I agree with James on many things....He did give us one thing..A load of laundry done in the car-park...he should be ashamed of himself.
ReplyDeleteSo Rafa had to rebuild the team that he inherited? The one that won the CL?
ReplyDeleteThe thing that really baffled me personally about that whole Aquilani situation was that even after he was apparently fit (by that I mean not injured anymore) he spent so much time warming the bench and not being picked for games, how was he supposed to get back to match fitness if eh was getting so little time on the pitch? I don't know what was going on behind the scenes obvioucly but it just seemed to make a complete waste of the deal.
ReplyDeleteIt's the waste of time and money that hightens all this, you buy a player you think you want but actually don't need, even if you get some money back by buying and selling, it's the value of the player when they were with the team.
ReplyDeleteI keep going back to the Keane incident, the team buys him for a lot then sell him for a loss 6 months later, we really didn't recoup anything, we just gave Tottenham extra money for sort of borrowing Keane to sit on the bench.
17th October 2010, Opening goal by Cahill for Everton
ReplyDeleteYeah, some half decent threads on there get absolutely destroyed in seconds by the pro-Benitez cult if you disagree with an opinion. I mean, not ONE THING negative can be said about the man, or his tactics, or his team selection, anything, it's absolutley ridiculous. There is no balance, how can there not be a balance? Surely, people make mistakes, managers make mistakes, yet Benitez doesn't make them? I remember we lost away at Pompey last year, lost to a host of 'average' clubs (without being disrespectful), yet any negativity was swung with some kind of bullsh-t positivity for Rafa? LOL. We played with freakin' 4 fullbacks on the pitch in some games, yet it was some master plan? One thing I can't stand in absolute nonsense and dishonesty - at least be honest, but the pro-Rafa brigade just cannot bring themselves to do it, hence the reason you'll get blasted for posting anything about the man which doesn't shine a light up his @ss. Anyway ..moving on
ReplyDeleteComical! You have 3 backup goalkeepers in your list there Cavelieri, Carson and Itanje. What were you expecting from them Jaimie? Oh let me guess 10 goals and 10 assists per season(to have a postitive measurable impact no doubt) Back up keepers are back up keepers, none of them were as good as Reina that's why they remained backup keepers - believe it or not all clubs have them.
ReplyDeleteALSO: DEBUNKING JAIMIES ENTIRE ARTICLE---- You have listed Zenden, Pelligrino, Voronin and Degen. These players are all free transfers. Why does a manager sign free transfers Jaimie? Is it possible it's because they have LIMITED TRANSFER FUNDS perhaps????? Consider your article DEBUNKED!
that was the other example of PK costing us a goal by the way - I'm sure there will be more examples on the way unless he is able to raise his game considerably.
ReplyDeleteI dont believe Roy has PK in mind for the squad, rather he is his first choice for left back. Prior to leaving Fulham we had an opportunity to sign his eventual replacement, Salcido, but Roy had made his mind up on PK - judging on the first 10 games it's clear who has adapted to their new club better.
Ok I wont argue with you that Rafa had to go. Everyone has an opinion. BUT like signing any player, surely they have to be on a par or better than what you already have. Hodgson is not a better coach than Benitez, i'm sure of that. He is an ego massager for Gerrard and Carragher, an old gurd that carries far too much poer at the club. Surely we either had to keep faith with a man ho was one yer into a 5 year deal or adequately replace him. If hodgson is fired this season then Konchesky, Meirles, Poulson and possibly cole will all become dead wood as any manager worth his salt will realise that these guys are not good enough. Until then, bring on Carlton cole.....
ReplyDeleteI have quotred LFChistory for a couple of 2009-10 transfer figures but only because there is no other source to use. I also acknowledge that the figures I got from there may not be 100%.
ReplyDeleteThis statement has made me question why I still visit this site - very reactionary and not well thought out considering your arguments from the last two weeks
ReplyDeleteJaimie, I have a house that cost 1.4 million. You have a house that cost 250,000. All I have to do each year to imrove my house is spend 100,000. You have come into your house and done the best you possibly can with it by spending 20/25,000 on it. You have made it shine but you know that it is getting old and only 2/3 things from it are there for the long haul. You house is falling down and you really need to knock it down and rebuild whilst keeping those 2/3 things that are very good about it. Now you are able to spend 110,000 on it each year to improve it, but in order for you to get up to the standard of house I have, you have to take big risks with your spending. Some things you buy, enhance your house and make it more valuable but other things just don't work out. They add no value at all and so you sell, at a profit if at all possible, to buy new things that you think WILL enhance your house. In the meantime, as I have been at my house a lot longer than you, I have been able to buy things that I know will enhance my house at a later stage as some things take longer to mature into something that adds value. You have no such luxury and thinking about the future, you also invest in such things. The majority of you budget is getting eaten up as you cannot just go out and buy a house like mine in one go. At times, an opportunity presents itself where you can buy this one thing which you know will greatly enhance your house but first you must sell 2/3 things to make up the money to buy it. I am still spending my 100,000 each year thus further enhancing my house. You in the meantime are still rebuilding but the bank is expecting much from the investment they have allowed you to make. They are making demands on you to improve at a much faster rate in order to catch up but at the same time, you have to keep making your house bigger.
ReplyDeleteHow long would it take for you to catch up with me and how would you do it?
I expect an answer....
YNWA
Interesting reading all this. The subtext, maybe delusions of grandeur on the part of the author??
ReplyDeleteMove on fella, Rafa is gone. We're stuck with manager of the year (which means more to the press than titles and cups) with his negative wingless tactics. Happy days.
Jaimie - just to add man, this'll be my last post or I'll end up starting a sh-t storm. I was reading a few threads on RAWK this week where everyone is salivating over Rafa and his mountains of milk and sugar and all that other wierd, totally idiotic things he was saying, lol. Have you read um? lol. I can't stand Whiskey Nose but imagine he came out with that? RAWK would be all over him like a rash, but since the messiah has said it, it gets the seal of approval and "come back boss" messages, lol. These are grown men as well? lmao..unbelievable. Now, I know you're tryna be nice man, but you've gotta laugh haven't you? lol. Come back boss... made my day that one, ha!
ReplyDeleteAgree with the guy at 22.58.
ReplyDeleteIf you replace a manager, you have to look at pedigree and records. With Rafa, you need someone who has done well in Europe and won one of the big leagues (La Liga, Prem or Serie A, and maybe Bundesliga). In that respect we did not replace Rafa with a better manager. Roy's philosophy is clearly even more 'do not lose' than Rafa, I mean how deep do you want to defend against Blackpool and West Brom. It's bordering on treason, back to the one trick counter attack days of Houllier.
And please don't even mention O'Neill, he'd be just as bad. It's common knowledge the Villa players were overjoyed when he left. His training consisted of fitness and 5-a-side, fitness and 5-a-side, fitness and 5-a-side... no tactics, nothing.
No more gambles, bring in somone to win and attack.
Dictatorship and bully tactics. :-[ . His excuses is it is his site and he can do as pleased.
ReplyDeleteLaughable, Konchesky is a FIRST team player. and Poulsen was brought to replace Masherano as Lucas wasnt good enough. How is Konchesky a squad player when Aurellio is always injured? You speculative mind is beyond the realms of reality.
ReplyDeleteJamie, you may have heard this before. But everytime I read your supposed fact based supposed analysis on the Rafa reign at Anfield the phrase "lies, damned lies and statistics" comes to mind. Wikipedia describes this sayings as follows and this describes you at your best. Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of <span>statistics</span> to bolster weak <span>arguments</span>
ReplyDeleteYet more cliches.
ReplyDeleteInstead of silly soundbytes, why don't you explain WHY my argument is allegedly weak? Explain why the figures are not correct. Explain why the club accounts should be dismissed.
I await your reply with interest.
Hi Jamie. rafa was limited as to when he could spend and how much he could spend on transfers AND wages and lengths of contracts he could give to players due to the hicks and gillette debt repayments.. i do agree it is time for us all to move on as rafa is no longer with us.. we need to get behind roy and the team and start climbing the table,, however u need to acknowledge that rafa did a fine job at liverpool and for that the fans will always hold him in high regard,, dont be deluded jamie, it's like u cant see a priest in a mountain of sugar.
ReplyDeleteIs this guy a troll or something?
ReplyDeleteDaveWestAus. You have big problems Jamie 'me boy' ! You are obsessed ! Benitez has the best win ratio of all past LFC managers ! And his figures are correct !
ReplyDeleteParry/Purslow & Broughton have no idea about football and players !
You talk of a cult - you have no right to say that in the fashion you intend ! The vast majority of LFC fans would have RAFA back tomorrow, and a large percentage of them have been LFC supporters for a lot longer than you.I,personally started watching the 'reds' in 1953,(57 yrs ago). DO NOT refer to me as part of a 'cult' in the manner that you speak ! We are LFC fans ! now then Jamie you should switch off!
Is it a typo or your article contradicts itself by insinuating he spent either £289mln or £298mln?
ReplyDeleteJamie Benitez did have small amounts to spend just after he took over some left or retired and needed to be replaced yes there was money for replacements but not squad strengthening.
ReplyDeleteLiverpools so called pro Benitez cult as you would put it are mainly just normal fans no conspiracy theories please!
I believe the 1 thing during Rafas tenure was the inability of the academy to produce the standard of players needed, and i do believe Rafa has left a legacy there as there is much more promising young talent than when Houllier left.
In Benitezes defence should we forget 2 champions league finals a super cup an unlucky 2nd in the league and count him as a failure because the cheapies he bought and Babel weren't up to it?
I wouldn't go as far as saying Aquilani was the worst transfer in recent years. He was bought injured but he was bought for five years not one. The fact that Roy chose to send him on loan, where by the way he is playing regulalry and well, makes it look worse than it actually was. Its unfortunate that he was injured for so long in his first season at Liverpool but even the medical team admitted that the injury did not initially look as bad as it turned out.
ReplyDeleteThe facts were that Aquilani appeared in 25 games for us last season, scoring 1 goal and providing 6 assists. We didn't see the best of him, and unexplicably he was sent on loan by Roy this season.
I'm sorry JK but i think you're wrong. For me there is a clear sell to buy policy at Lour club . Although there is no primary evidence, i.e no-one form the club has come out and said that we had to sell players to buy others, all you have to do is look at the patterns of players coming and going in the last few years.
ReplyDeleteIs it a coincidence that the season we buy Mascherano we also sell Sissoko? Is it a coincidence that the season we buy Torres we sell Bellamy, Cisse and Garcia. These players may not have been sold directly before another player was bought, and the money recouped may not have directly paid for a another player, but it happens close enough to suggest that they were sold so that the club could balance the books.
If there wasn't a sell to buy policy, why didn't we keep Garcia, Cisse, Sissoko and Bellamy. I'm sure Cisse and Garcia would have stayed given the option. Surely that would have strengthened the squad. The fact is that like any other business we had to unlock capital by selling players into order to buy players.
Alonso wanted to leave and we got approx £30m for him which went into the transfer pot. We then buy Aquilani for £20m. We sold we bought. The club didn't really invest anything in Aquilani, we used the money we got for Alonso. In my view there is no real investment by the club here.
Can I request an article. Can you do this same excercise of all of Rafa's spending but in order of the date players were bought and sold. This will give a fairer outlook of the spend. Giving a total is helpful but I think once and for all to totally answer the question on Rafa's spending, you must show the dates. The reason being: did Rafa have free spend or did he have to sell in order to buy?
ReplyDeleteSelling Alonso (whether he was pushed or not) to buy Aquilani makes a difference than kepping one and buying the other. Selling Mascherano to buy Poulsen, Meireles and Konchesky hasn't helped! Whats your opinion? For the record, I did like Rafa, but I love Liverpool and thats all that matters.
Am wondering if Jaimie has any Profit & Loss accounting experience. Appreciation vs depreciation ?
ReplyDeleteRafa would buy a player, and if the guy doesn't respond, he's off next season. Like Keano.
Where do you factor in shelf space and depreciation of value, Jaimie ? Houllier was a prime example of that. Buying lousy players, and keep them lingering because he couldn't admit he made a mistake...Diao, Cheyrou, Diouf, .... !
Factor that in, and you'll see Rafa was pretty decent in the transfer market.
And when a man has to sell in order to buy, Rafa's record is very very good. Coffee-shop book-keeping doesn't really work in this context.
Well said. Rafa was the best manager we've had since Bob Paisley. The top players, like the Gerrard's, Torres, etc want to win the Champs League first and foremost. If Stevie went to Spain, would he care more for the Champs League medal or a La Liga medal ?
ReplyDeleteRafa was the best out there in Champs League. Probably a major reason why he irked the likes of Jose and SAF. They couldn't figure him out.
ReplyDeletedON'T GET THE POINT OF THESE ARTICLES BY jk ANY MORE.... JUST FACTS FACTS FACTS (REMIND U OF ANYONE???).... JAMIE, U R NOW JUS BORING US TO DEATH.... GET ON WITH LIFE AND USE THIS SITE AS A PLATFORM IN CONSTRUCTIVE ANALYSIS WHICH FOCUSSES ON THE PRESENT AND MAYBE THE FUTURE... RAFA'S GONE... GET OVER IT
just want to say jamie what you have proven is here is actually amazing. this site is awesome. keep up the good work. I am a big roy hodgson fan i believe he is the right man for the liverpool job.. people are judging to quickly they forget that we are 10 games in. If all the players are backing him then i will do just the same. YNWA!
ReplyDelete<p>Here's a few quotes from over the years:
ReplyDelete</p><p>
</p><p>"If we want to have money available, then we have to sell some players. We have to sell expensive and buy as cheaply as possible"
</p><p>
</p><p>"More or less I have an idea of how much we will have to spend. I think we’d have to sell players to increase the money we’ll need, but at the moment we’re not talking about names and money."
</p><p>
</p><p>"We have a fantastic group of young players, in the future they will save us money. At the moment we have to still buy big names and the only way to do that is to sell players."
</p><p>
</p><p>And a little snippet from Nando with his two cents worth:
</p><p>
</p><p>"In football at the moment unfortunately money is really important," said Torres to the Liverpool Echo. "Clubs like Manchester United, Chelsea and Manchester City have a lot of money to spend on good players. That's not the way at Liverpool so we have to try to improve."
</p>
A huge part of what JK is saying is that Rafa didn't have to sell to buy. He's suggesting, for example, that when Rafa spent 70 million in 06/07 the 54 million made in player sales during that same period was purely generated because Rafa no longer needed those players and decided to get rid of them. Had Rafa wanted to keep those players he would still have had 70 million to spend.
ReplyDeleteYesterday you stated that konchesky and poulson were squad players. First of all, Konchesky is LFC first choice at left back, if you argue against that there is no hope. Secondly- you state that they were bought until upgrades could be purchased for more money. This is exactly what Benitez had to do throughout his time at Liverpool, he would buy, find an upgrade and sell, it's evolving the squad while keeping the squad large enough to compete
ReplyDeleteYes, it is not unique to Rafa, but why would you, for example, spent close to 20m on an injured player in a position that should not be the priority and then complain that there is no money available. I don't say that managers don't make mistakes, but spending the money you have on what turns out to be a flop (in one way or the other) should prevent you from complaining, right.
ReplyDeleteSimply adorable.
ReplyDeleteadorable.
Spot On!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well done Fraggs.
ReplyDeleteI would also like to add, wasn't it Broughton or Purslow who said in an interview with LFC TV that all the profit that Liverpool made went to service debt, but the funds we made by selling players always went back into buying players. Sounds like he was saying Liverpool had to sell to buy. Look we all know he had to sell to buy, so lets just all agree on that point and move on!
Nice mate...
ReplyDeleteGood - old common sense from a die hard Liverpool's fan & admirer.
Many so called - supporters should keep careful to your words, because your words condensed the true spirit of the Club & the deep good old attitude of our fans.
Spot On.
come in mr kanwar, just lie down on that couch, i must say this is the worst case of overactive rafatitus i have ever come across. lets try to get to the root of your problem, are you an evertonian ? no. emm have you ever worked for mr hicks or gillett, no. hu hum. i am going to hypnotise you, tell me about your recurrant nightmare mr kanwar,
ReplyDeleteistanbul ? tell what happened in istanbul, no no you must keep still, keep still, sorry mr kanwar i had to wake you, you were in danger of hurting yourself.
ReplyDeleteInteresting how you find the word "league" in my message. When it comes to reading you have a few deficits, don't you.
ReplyDeleteJaimie, you constantly talk about the fact that Benitez alienated people like Crouch and Hyypia. Fair point, Alonso wanted to leave but Crouch was an England International and wanted to play more games than he did for Liverpool because we had a certain Fernando Torres up front. Crouch joined Portsmouth so that he could play more games, not because he fell out with Benitez but because Benitez identified a better option. He had a year left on his contract, was not going to sign a new one and left. Hyypia was 36 and wanted a two year contract. He had already been displaced as the first choice centre half but wanted to continue playing so he left to go for a two year playing contract to Germany with Leverkusen, turning down English clubs in the process out of respect for Liverpool. Benitez had already offered him a one year contract as a player coach which Hyypia didnt want so can you put those ideas aside please. As for some of your comments about Liverpool fans and their delusions when it comes to Rafa. I will admit, I supported Benitez until it appeared that he had lost the support of the players at the end but in no way shape or form did he had unlimited funds. He spent a lot of money but he also recouped a lot of money and I think that you need to go back and re-address your opinions on nett spend. You cannot spend money that you dont have and Liverpool did not have the money to sign some of the players they did without selling others. It may be the case that players were brought in before others were sold but look at the Alonso Aquilani saga. Alonso was sold to Madrid and less than 24 hours later, Liverpool signed Aquilani using the money that had been generated from the Alonso sale. Aquilani would not have been bought in without the sale of Alonso, Meireiles would not have been bought in without the sale of Mascherano. If Rafa had not had any limitation on his transfer funds, we would now have the likes of Villa, Alves, Silva, Vidic, Evra, Milner, Malouda, Essien and Diaby playing for us. All players that we had shown an interest in but could not afford and before you say that these players would not have joined us given the choice, look at the comments from some players. Villa had always said he fancied playing for us, Alves was all set to join, Milner has always said he liked Liverpool. Instead, when Sevilla wanted too much money for Alves, we had to sign a cheaper Pennant, do you really think Rafa would have gone out and signed the likes of Voronin if he had been given unlimited funds? In my opinion, you need to get back to what is being a real fan, it is about passion, it is about excitement, it is certainly not about analysing balance sheets and accounts to prove a point but most of all, being a fan is about supporting your team, singing at matches, wearing the shirt with pride. I will ask one question and you can take it out and answer via email if you choose, have you ever been to watch Liverpool play at Anfield? If so, how many games have you been to?
ReplyDeleteI had to respond to this....right, Degen, Voronin, Zenden, Aurelio, Pellegrino were all free transfers. Johnson, Dossena, Morientes, Aquilani were all internationals for England, Italy and Spain, major major nations, are you saying that Lippi, Capello, Aragones and Camacho didnt recognise that these players were poor because that would suggest that they saw something in them! Palletta, Leto, Carson, El Zhar, Babel were all young players who showed potential to do well. Leto would have stayed had he been able to get a work permit which has nothing to do with Liverpool! Cavalieri, Itandje were bought in as back up keepers. Pellegrino was brought in for experience and all the players commented about how good a figure he was to have around. Nunez was brought in with the Owen deal because we had no right winger. Pennant was brought in because Rafa hoped he would have an impact on the right hand side having had a superb season at Birmingham the year before. Keane was brought in and it didnt work which could not have been predicted taking into account the fact that he has scored a bagful of goals in the Premier League. Babel was being chased by some of the top sides in Europe at the time we bought him. Some players don't suit clubs and styles of play. Ray Kennedy was signed by Shankly as a striker having scored goals at Arsenal. It didnt work out for him as a striker, he became a midfielder and became a star. Poor buys are part and parcel of being a manager in the top flight. Kleberson, Taibi, Veron, Djemba-Djemba, Forlan, Bellion, Smith, Saha- United signed those players for in the region of £70M. There are also a glut of young signings by Ferguson who didnt make it, not just Rafa.
ReplyDeleteI quite enjoyed the debate we had over on .tv. However, there are a few things that remain unresolved, from both myself and Holywood. In particular, the answer to this question:
ReplyDelete"Mr Kanwar
I would like to know what qualifications or experience you have in reading and assessing financial accounts.
Thank you."
would you care to head back over to carry on this debate from where we left off?
There is a very clear difference here: All club's plough money they get from selling players back into the squad; that's a given, but people are arguing that Benitez HAD to sell to buy; i.e. he was compelled to sell; could not buy players UNLESS he sold
ReplyDeleteThis is just wrong! Money he got from selling players was give to him but he was |NOT compelled/forced to sell to buy. Loans from H+G went into buying players, as did loans from Moores. The accounts state this quite clearly.
The only time Benitez would've been compelled to sell to buy is his last season when he could no longer be trusted with transfer funds after wasting so much.
Typo - it's 289m. The rest of the article states 289 - I just got the 8 and the 9 round the wrong way. Good spot, thanks.
ReplyDeleteThe status of the players doesn't matter; how could they apparently were when we bought them and/or what they may have promised is irrelevant - what matters is how they performed when they got here. And they were flops one and all.
ReplyDeleteAnds this distinction between free transfers and paid is a flasity - free transfers still carry signing on fees; wages; bonues etc. PLus, they take up space in the team and keep out other players who might do a better job.
@Belleamie - You sound like a Manc because only a Manc would spout such utter rubbish about Liverpool.
ReplyDelete"Well said. Rafa was the best manager we've had since Bob Paisley"
So Rafa was better the Daglish, Better then Houllier?
Houllier I hear people cry.....
Lets take a look at Houllier and v Rafa.
When Houllier took over at Liverpool he had a squad that hadn't won anything for 4 years(which was the League Cup), a squad were one of the best players had just left for nothing and a squad which was full of ageing has-beens.
Also the training facilities were a complete joke.
With 2 years he won the Cup treble, League, FA and Uefa and finished 3rd in the Prem. The following year we won the Charity Shield and the Uefa Super Cup and finished the 2nd in the Prem.
Unfortunately it was during this season were he fell ill and had to have an emergency operation for a dissected Aorta. For me this is where he started going wrong, personally I don't believe he fully recovered and was not it the right frame of mind.
Houllier has admitted that it actually took him 3 years to truley get over the scare.
Now let’s look at Rafa... he inherited a much better squad and a club in a much better position then what Houllier took over.
Don't forget that it was Houllier who started a massive overall of both the training facilities and youth academy.
So Rafa wins his CL in his first season.. look at that the squad that won it, how many of those players were Houlliers signings and how many were Rafa's signings? Only 2 players were Rafa's signings.
So it could be said that he had the basis of a good sqaud, after all it had just won the CL.
The following year he Wins the FA Cup and finishes 3rd in the Prem, again its showing the signs of a good squad so why the rebuild?
The following year we finished runners up in CL.. Again it must of had a good squad to achive this yet it was at this point he started to go up against the board stating that they were not backing him in the transfer market.
The following year he purchased Torres, Babel Benayoun, Lucas and Voronin. In that year he had a net spend of 29.9m (for those who think net spend is the be all and end all) and yet he won nothing... This was season he also fell out with Pako which to me was the begging of the end.
So yeah for me Houllier was the better manager simply because he had a much bigger job on his hands and set the foundations for rafa's success.
Rafa's downfall was Mostly his own doing.
He wasted so much money on players who weren't fit to wear the Liverpool shirt.
He also could get that the fact that the Prem for most fans was the one we wanted, hence taking off Torres against Birmingham last season to the utter disbelief of both Torres and Gerrard.
Let us not forget the spankings we took of Arsenal as well due to Rafa's squad rotation, as well as the other humilating defeats we have suffered in both the Prem and League Cup due to him "resting players"
People saying he had to rebuild the squad is utter rubbish. Houllier did have to rebuild not only the squad but the training facilities, the Academy and dispose of the Spice boy imagine that we had inherited as well as the culture.
When Rafa took over Liverpool when by and large we were on the up and the squad did not need a complete rebuild.
While I'm here, might as well comment on your latest.
ReplyDeleteYou argue that Benitez didn't have "limited" transfer funds. Therefore, he must have had "un-limited" trasnfer funds, no? I see no evidence to suggest that Benitez had unlimited funds.
Anyway, semantics aside, you have yet again failed to understand the the issue. Benitez, under the American owners, had an increasingly smaller transfer budget. In the last 2 seasons, his transfer budget was effectively zero, and it looks likely he didn't even have the mone raised from player sales.
You're own "evidence" supports this assertion. looking at the entire spend over the whole time is a pointless comparison in this argument.
Even if you just look at gross spend, which you seem so insistent on doing, you can clearly see the amount spent has decreased significanlty. Less than a third in 09-10 than it ws in 07-08.
Right - so just because arch-propogandist and professional victim Benitez says it, it must be true? Nonsense. He makes statement like these to elicit sympathy from fans.
ReplyDeleteHe was NOT compelled to sell to buy. He sold players, yes, but most of the time he sold because he'd made a complete pig's ear of the signing in the first place. He made lots of mistakes, hence a high amount of money recouped.
In his last season he may have been forced to sell to buy but that is only because the club no longer trusted him with money after he'd wasted tens of milionsz on duff signings.,
I am not going to give you personal details about my life. If you don't want to believe what I'm saying then don't believe it! Malkes no difference to me at all. I've been proved right with ther accounts on every occasion I've used them.
ReplyDeleteI will say this though: I have vast experience of interpreting accounts, and I am legally qualified.
Accounts are easy to interpret - you ask questions like this because you're desperate to find a way to discredit me. You want to be able to dismiss valid, accurate accounts, which you would do if you could find a way. Good luck!
One final note: Benitez himself said on monday that he had a net spend of 10m. Check my figures TAKEN FROM THE ACCOUNTS: what he said matches what I came up with i.e. proof the analysis is accurate.
And Beniterz would know, would he not?
You argue that Benitez didn't have "limited" transfer funds. Therefore, he must have had "un-limited" trasnfer funds, no? I see no evidence to suggest that Benitez had unlimited funds. <span></span>
ReplyDeleteWhat are you on about?! Unlimited funds - what nonsense. I have not suggsted that at all.
Anyway, semantics aside, you have yet again failed to understand the the issue. Benitez, under the American owners, had an increasingly smaller transfer budget. In the last 2 seasons, his transfer budget was effectively zero, and it looks likely he didn't even have the mone raised from player sales.
This is a typically flawed analysis from someone who is incapable of loopking at things fairly. Just because money was recouped does not mean there was no money to spend. You seem to be suggesting that Kene, Dossena, Aquilani, Johnson et al cost nothing! That is blatantly wrong. Real money was paid out to other clubs for their services; recouping money does not change that.
Just because there was a negative net spend two years running does not mean there was no money to spend. This thought process is emarrasing.
Even if you just look at gross spend, which you seem so insistent on doing, you can clearly see the amount spent has decreased significanlty. Less than a third in 09-10 than it ws in 07-08.
It doesn't matter if the gross spend decreased - there was sill sginificant money available to Benitez to spend, and he pissed it away on an injured player, a defensive liability, and other flops.
If the money had been spent PROPERLY then Liverpool might have benefited. Instead, the club suffered.
Money recouped by Benitez is evidence of his continual mistakes in the transfer market. Let's look at two examples: Keane and Dossean.
Both failures; both sold recently. That money will go into the money recouped column. What does it represent? Failure. Money wasted. Like much of the money Benitez made from selling players.
That is a complete load to tripe too!!!! There IS a distinction between free transfers and fees paid because it doesn't impact on what fees are spent!!! You cannot tell me that you are comparing a £10m player with a free transfer are you?? And it does matter how good they apparently were or what they promised because you do not spend £20m on a player based on promise alone! You expect them to be a good player. Keane, Aquilani were good players and still are but they did not fit in to our style of play, something that is only found out when you try them out in that position and with your players! Yes they carry signing on fees but they do not show up in your accounts or that of the club when it relates to transfer fees paid and players who are signed for transfer fees still receive a signing on fee. If you dont have the money Kanwar, you cannot buy the player but you still have to put 11 players out on the field, irrespective of how much they cost! Zenden actually had a good impact, Voronin scored goals in Germany, Degen was an attacking full back, Aurelio, had it not been for injuries, would actually have made the left back berth his own! Your arguments are completely flawed. You have removed all passion from your 'support' in your desire to be different.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what I think is the bottom line of sams point, every or any transfer is a gamble, it happens a lot of rafas gambles didn't pay off(for whatever reason) and I can sort of live with that, it happens, but for me, I'll go back to my original point where this started, the aquilani transfer was a completely irresponsible one given the players price, buying him injured and his injury record the guy played less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma. Like I say every transfer is a gamble, I loved it when we got morientes world class and potentially the missing link, it didn't work it happens. There are hundreds is examples at many clubs of this, but the aqua deal in my view was nothing short of a scandal and a completely avoidable situation
ReplyDeleteI agree with what I think is the bottom line of sams point, every or any transfer is a gamble, it happens a lot of rafas gambles didn't pay off(for whatever reason) and I can sort of live with that, it happens, but for me, I'll go back to my original point where this started, the aquilani transfer was a completely irresponsible one given the players price, buying him injured and his injury record the guy played less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma. Like I say every transfer is a gamble, I loved it when we got morientes world class and potentially the missing link, it didn't work it happens. There are hundreds is examples at many clubs of this, but the aqua deal in my view was nothing short of a scandal and a completely avoidable situation
ReplyDeleteI agree with what I think is the bottom line of sams point, every or any transfer is a gamble, it happens a lot of rafas gambles didn't pay off(for whatever reason) and I can sort of live with that, it happens, but for me, I'll go back to my original point where this started, the aquilani transfer was a completely irresponsible one given the players price, buying him injured and his injury record the guy played less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma. Like I say every transfer is a gamble, I loved it when we got morientes world class and potentially the missing link, it didn't work it happens. There are hundreds is examples at many clubs of this, but the aqua deal in my view was nothing short of a scandal and a completely avoidable situation
ReplyDeleteI agree with what I think is the bottom line of sams point, every or any transfer is a gamble, it happens a lot of rafas gambles didn't pay off(for whatever reason) and I can sort of live with that, it happens, but for me, I'll go back to my original point where this started, the aquilani transfer was a completely irresponsible one given the players price, buying him injured and his injury record the guy played less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma. Like I say every transfer is a gamble, I loved it when we got morientes world class and potentially the missing link, it didn't work it happens. There are hundreds is examples at many clubs of this, but the aqua deal in my view was nothing short of a scandal and a completely avoidable situation
ReplyDeleteI agree with what I think is the bottom line of sams point, every or any transfer is a gamble, it happens a lot of rafas gambles didn't pay off(for whatever reason) and I can sort of live with that, it happens, but for me, I'll go back to my original point where this started, the aquilani transfer was a completely irresponsible one given the players price, buying him injured and his injury record the guy played less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma. Like I say every transfer is a gamble, I loved it when we got morientes world class and potentially the missing link, it didn't work it happens. There are hundreds is examples at many clubs of this, but the aqua deal in my view was nothing short of a scandal and a completely avoidable situation
ReplyDeleteI agree with what I think is the bottom line of sams point, every or any transfer is a gamble, it happens a lot of rafas gambles didn't pay off(for whatever reason) and I can sort of live with that, it happens, but for me, I'll go back to my original point where this started, the aquilani transfer was a completely irresponsible one given the players price, buying him injured and his injury record the guy played less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma. Like I say every transfer is a gamble, I loved it when we got morientes world class and potentially the missing link, it didn't work it happens. There are hundreds is examples at many clubs of this, but the aqua deal in my view was nothing short of a scandal and a completely avoidable situation
ReplyDeleteI agree with what I think is the bottom line of sams point, every or any transfer is a gamble, it happens a lot of rafas gambles didn't pay off(for whatever reason) and I can sort of live with that, it happens, but for me, I'll go back to my original point where this started, the aquilani transfer was a completely irresponsible one given the players price, buying him injured and his injury record the guy played less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma. Like I say every transfer is a gamble, I loved it when we got morientes world class and potentially the missing link, it didn't work it happens. There are hundreds is examples at many clubs of this, but the aqua deal in my view was nothing short of a scandal and a completely avoidable situation
ReplyDeleteI agree with what I think is the bottom line of sams point, every or any transfer is a gamble, it happens a lot of rafas gambles didn't pay off(for whatever reason) and I can sort of live with that, it happens, but for me, I'll go back to my original point where this started, the aquilani transfer was a completely irresponsible one given the players price, buying him injured and his injury record the guy played less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma. Like I say every transfer is a gamble, I loved it when we got morientes world class and potentially the missing link, it didn't work it happens. There are hundreds is examples at many clubs of this, but the aqua deal in my view was nothing short of a scandal and a completely avoidable situation
ReplyDeleteI guess Broughton/Purslow are liars as well?
ReplyDeleteWe all know he had to sell to buy, even Torres knows, even Mascha said that is the reason why he left.
Now can we move on?
I agree with sams point that every transfer is a gamble we don't know what their impact will be until they have been there a while, but I still stand by my original point, the aqua deal was nothing short of a scandal that a player we didn't need, who was not a priority position, who cost 20 mil, with a shocking injury record, less than 50 games in his previous 3 seasons at Roma, was a completely avoidable situation!
ReplyDeleteSent from my iPhone
On 3 Nov 2010, at 09:51, "Echo" <js-kit-m2c-s3ca4emh3rrb54nqrjmablnfthhm12g3m4mhb5g8sklpal18us6g> wrote:
</js-kit-m2c-s3ca4emh3rrb54nqrjmablnfthhm12g3m4mhb5g8sklpal18us6g>
You are right Strebby, every transfer is a gamble but I think that on the whole, when given money to spend, and I am talking about big money here, he got it right. I actually think Aquilani is a very very good player who we bought too early. We should have let him recover before signing him and the problem we have now is that if he makes one more appearance for us, we have to pay Roma the full fee. Keane was a disappointment that nobody saw coming, everyone was very excited when he was signed. But, Torres, Alonso, Masch, Reina, Agger, Kuyt, players who were signed for a lot of money in their relative positions have all been successes. Babel showed recently in the Napoli game that he is devoid of any feeling for the club. He is lazy and has been a huge disappointment from what he showed at first yet we are still looking at getting £8-9M for him if and when he leaves. I am not arguing that Benitez signed some poor players but what I take issue with on this site is that everything Benitez did, even if it was good, is criticised and attributed to someone else. I saw a comment the other day saying that it was luck in 2005 and 2006 that won us those trophies and that we were lucky to beat West Ham and Milan but we still had to get there in the first place. In fact, against West Ham, you could say we were hugely unlucky that we didnt win the game in normal time when you see that we scored an own goal, they scored from a miss-hit cross and the other goal they scored was a glaring mistake by Reina. In getting to the final though, we beat Chelsea, Birmingham, United and it was down to Rafa and the players that we got there.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't asking for personal details.
ReplyDeleteAnd I haven't tried to discredit anything you have said about what is in the accounts. I have deliberately not commented on that, as it is somehting I know little about.
I asked because there were two people debating the accounts, each with differeing views. One of which I know to be qualified, the other I don't. In order to decide who is in a better possition to interpret them, I would like to know who is qualified and who isn't.
If you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, I don't see any poblem in making your credentials known. If you are going to speak with such authority on the subject I see no problem.
Regarding benitez's comment being "proof" that your analysis is correct, your logic is seriously flawed. This is clasic example of "affirming the consequent", a logical fallacy well known since Aristotle. It confirms your total is correct, but that does not prove the analysis is correct.
anyway, are you going to come back to .tv and debate this properly, or just run and hide?
ReplyDeleteAny reason why you've deleted my comments Jaimie?
ReplyDeleteI think you're wring that everything rafa has done he gets no credit for, jaimie gives him plenty of credit for making the club more professional winning what he did finishing 2nd etc.. He's always give credit where it's due, yes there are plenty of people who won't and I've read some of the same comments but a lot don't come from jk himself, and this is the only site I know of that backs up his points with facts
ReplyDeleteSent from my iPhone
On 3 Nov 2010, at 10:13, "Echo" <js-kit-m2c-s3ca4emh3rrb54nqrjmablnfthtmighhh3qsa33fat164tatper0> wrote:
</js-kit-m2c-s3ca4emh3rrb54nqrjmablnfthtmighhh3qsa33fat164tatper0>
Your comment has not been deleted - it was held for moderation. You have posted before under the same IP and been banned for abuse. Thus, anything else you post will be checked first before going live. Your comment is live now anway. If you sill to making points without including derogatory comments then all your comments will go live.
ReplyDeleteA couple of points:
ReplyDelete1. When comparing the rel. spends of Benitez and Ferguson it has to be taken into account that MU's books reflect a huge 65m profit made on the sale of one player.
2. As pointed out by myself and many others yesterday, it' spending POWER that really counts. Right now all the talk is about Gareth Bale. Well, who out there thinks LFC can possibly match the market rate for him were he to become available? Yeah, no one. Who could afford him in this country? Chelsea, MU and now City.
In a nutshell, over a few seasons a club may spend 30m on three, four or five players - but it's not the same as having the financial muscle to spend 30m in one go on one star!
Yes, the balance books tell one story ... but c'mon, use your eyes, guys!
3. The question of limited funds. Well, that is partly answered in my point above, re lack of power. that is a limitation! Since 2007 it has also been clear that LFC have - to a degree - sold to buy, in the sense that several players have been sold for a profit, with said monies reinvested in the team.
Given that quite a few have been sold for a profit, they can't also be bad buys!
Outside of those profits some funds have been available - to the tune of 10m pa (as most of us agreed yesterday!). It's really personal opinion as to whether you think spending 10m pa was ever gonna get LFC back to the top, given that 2003-04 LFC finished 30 pts behind Arsenal and 15 or so behind Chelsea and MU. (I have to add here that MU's immediate response to that failure was to go out and spend 30m on Rooney.)
Did Rafa make some poor signings? Yes. Some cost a pittance, and are inconsequential to this debate, while we can all argue as to how poor the few costly ones are/were: Johnson, Aquilani, Dossena, Keane and Babel.
I'm sure some would try to add more, but that'll do for now. As is, three of those players still belong to the club and about half their outlay was recouped from the sale of the other two. So it goes. In the past decade Chelsea have written off some 60m on Schevchenko, Mutu and Crespo alone; MU wrote off 14m just with the Veron debacle. Mistakes happen.
Above all this is fans having to accept the financial realities of LFC. Even if a quartet like Ronaldo, Roonay, Tevez and Berbatov could be signed, LFC could not afford to pay them the market rate in wages. Problem is, when it comes to the major trophies, LFC are competing against clubs who can!
Accepting that, all that's left is to quibble re style of football ... Rafa's style was pretty successful (two Cl finals, 2nd in league, top 4 finishes) ... the alt. to that is to attack attack attack - perhaps try to play like Spurs, or Arsenal ... tho I would caution that you have to look at what exactly those clubs have won lately playing such football. But that's another argument!
Fair enough.
ReplyDeleteLimited means something were limits are placed on it. So if somthign is not limited, it ust be unlimited. I wasn't being serious with this part anyway, just a small joke :)
ReplyDeleteI never said Benitez had "no money". So pretty much the rest of your post is a straw man argument and thus irrelevant.
"....a typically flawed analysis from someone who is capable of looking at things fairly"
ooh, an ad hominem, looks like you're running through your full repetoire.
If someone disagrees with you on here, you shout them down and call them stupidm, then delete any posts where people reply in kind. Why don't you come onto an independant forum where such behaviour is not tollerated?
Refreshing to see someone speak sense. The Benitez love-in continues unabated, with the spin on this 'Net Spend' nonsense seemingly his boggest defence.
ReplyDeleteThe Pro-Benitez cult is indeed frightnening and it saddens me to see how utterly blind our 'fans' can be. Hodgson has made mistakes - granted - but he has walked into a grim situation to begin with. To be hounded after a handful of games tells you all you need to know about the modern day Liverpool support.
That aside (as it is a SEPARATE issue), Benitez lost the dressing room long before he trousered 6 million and scurried off. If he was still here, it's fair to say that Torres and Gerrard wouldn't be. I could list a million reasons why Benitez was never gonna cut it at Anfield, but I'd be here all day. Selfless he was not. Self obsessed he was. Liverpool FC always came second as far as he was concerned. His ego came first.
For those people who thought that he'd somehow turn round his year-on-year failings in the league, I'll just say this: YOU CAN'T WIN THE LEAGUE ON PENALTIES.
apols for odd typo ... was resisting temp to type in Whore for Rooney.
ReplyDeleteAlso, recoup part refers only to net result of Dossena and Keane transfers. About half the cash back, at most.
Every manager makes mistakes in the transfer market Jaimie, even managers whom are somewhat successful, such as Alex Ferguson.
ReplyDeleteJust because they've had more success, does not excuse their failings, no manager in the history of football is infallible when it comes to having a 100% success rate in the transfer market.
The majority of players Benitez sold he made a profit on from their original transfer fee, I'd imagine it's probably 70%-80% of players he bought and sold were at a profit. Obviously there are some glaring exceptions like Keane, Pennant & Morientes but there are also successes such as Alonso, Bellamy and Crouch plus many others at a lower scale.
Vincenoir - it is you who is clutching at straws. Suggesting an argument is flawed, and by someone who is not being fair is not an ad hominem argument at all; it's statement of fact. You forget that I've seen you slagging me off allover the place on LFC.tv; arguing that I am alias X, Y and Z; that underpins my view of you.
ReplyDeleteAnd you're holding up lfc.tv as some kind of paragon of message boards?! Get rea. It is a place where abuse and attacks on people are par for the course. I have been attacked (unprovoked) on there for YEARS, and people just buy into it without question. So please, get off your high horse and face reality.
Such behaviour is not tolerated?! You're right - sensible discussion is not tolerated.
And if you have a problem with me or this site, don't visit. it's that simple.
It's nowhere near 70-80% of players. I will prove this in an article in the next couple of weeks.
ReplyDeleteWhat you and others fail to see is this: Benitez sold lots of players because he made lots of mistakes. He had no choice to sell in many cases, and if hadn't bought the wrong players in the first place then he would not have needed to sell so many, would he?
That is why Liverpool has recouped more money that the likes of United and Arsenal during Benitez's reign: transfer mistakes that needed to be recrified.
And you laud him for this?
You seem to suggest that it's admirable that Benitez made money from selling. What is the point of football? To buy dozens of players and sell them quikcly, or to buy the right players in the first place, players who will improve the team and increase the chances of winning games?!
Football is not about selling players; it is about winning games.
No one disputes that Benitez made some good signings; he did! Torres, Crouch, Agger, Reina etc - top signings, and bravo to him for that.
However, he wasted tens of millions on poor players and/or the wrong players, and he had to sell them all because of those mistakes, and/or alienating them.
But how do you know it's wrong JK? There's no proof either way. The opinion that he did have sell to buy is as logical as your opinion that he didn't. I'm not disagreeing with the accounts or loans. There obviously had to be a level of initial investment from the owners at some or the other. But the fact that over £200m was recouped and the big turnover of players suggests to me that the books had to be balanced, therefore there was a sell to buy policy.
ReplyDeleteIs this following scenario a possibilty? Rafa speak to the board and says he wasnt Torres and it will cost £24m. The board say that's fine, we'll give you the money upfront but you will have to sell a few of the players at some point to get some money back. The owners loan the club x amount which is shown on the accounts. Rafa then sells Garcia, Cisse and Bellamy, raising approx £16m, which covers the more or les two thirds of the Torres investment. The owners will at some point take the loan back. Is this a possibiliy or not?
But how do you know it's wrong JK? There's no proof either way. The opinion that he did have sell to buy is as logical as your opinion that he didn't. I'm not disagreeing with the accounts or loans. There obviously had to be a level of initial investment from the owners at some point or the other. But the fact that over £200m was recouped and the big turnover of players suggests to me that the books had to be balanced, therefore there was a sell to buy policy.
ReplyDeleteIs this following scenario a possibilty? Rafa speak to the board and says he wants Torres and it will cost £24m. The board say that's fine, we'll give you the money upfront but you will have to sell a few of the players at some point to get some money back. The owners loan the club x amount which is shown on the accounts. Rafa then sells Garcia, Cisse and Bellamy, raising approx £16m, which covers more or less two thirds of the Torres investment. The owners will at some point take the loan back. Is this a possibiliy or not?
But surely the point of him buying numerous players who may have later been sold at a profit was due to the need to do so? We didn't have the luxury of going out and spending £20m+ on one player when many areas of the squad needed improvement or cover.
ReplyDeleteAs I understand it, between 2004-2010 he bought in 40 players (who started a League game) spending £225m in the process, he recouped £132m from the subsequent sale of 25 of those players. You could argue the purchases he left could be worth well in excess of £100m given they include Reina, Agger, Johnson, Skrtel, Babel, Kuyt, Lucas and Torres to name a few.
So IMHO I don't believe he "squandered" a fortune by any stretch of the imagination, although the particular myth is one pedalled by many. How can one squander a fortune but still have assets that more than cover that "pissed away" fortune?
I'd also add, just because YOU believe he sold lots of players because he made lots of mistakes does not make it so, It is simply your opinion. The same can be said of those that believe he had to sell in order to buy, he sold players at a lower figure to buy players whom were eventually sold for higher fees.
ReplyDeleteAn example of this? Danny Murphy, sold for £2.5m, Xabi Alonso bought for £10.7m, sold for £30m.
There are many opinions that could be used to interpret Benitez' history in the transfer market, it doesn't mean any of them are accurate.
Why do you state your opinion like it's fact? It's quite clear that there is no solid evidence to back up your assertion while we have the spoken word of a highly regarded manager and two of his very best players (if not more) backing that up. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that Rafa is lying and the only person to actually contradict him is you. No one else within the club has questioned his suggestions that he had to sell to buy, no one else in media has called it into question. Oddly enough, of all the millions of Liverpool fans and commentators around the world, the only one who questions this notion is you and you have not the tiniest shred of evidence to back it up.
ReplyDeleteSaying someone is incapable of soemthing is an attack on their chracter, not the argument they put forward, which is most certainly an ad hominem attack.
ReplyDeleteIt is not a statement of fact, it is your opinion.
I have never claimed you are any alias on the .tv message boards. Please provide proof of this or retract that comment. Others may have done, but I have not.
I never said you were clutching at straws, I said it was a "straw man argument". This is completely different.
I never said .tv was brilliant, nor did I make any comment on my opinion of it. I invited you to debate this somewhere impartial, that could be anywhere other than your own site. It seems you are only cofortable "debating" on your own site, where you can shout people down and call them stupid if they don't agree. And then remove comments from people who do the same to you.
There is plenty of abuse on .tv, but if you report it, it's generally dealt with. I suggest if you have a problem with what is said about you, you report it to the site administrator.