20 Jul 2013

Transfer Fail: LFC hero 'disappointed' that BR ignored £15m goal-machine. Mistake...?

A few weeks ago, Anfield legend Steve Nicol urged Liverpool to sign Bayern Munich striker Mario Gomez as a potential replacement for Luis Suarez, but, for whatever reason, the Reds ignored the chance to grab one of Europe's most prolific goalscorers, and Nicol's former team-mate, Jan Molby, is not happy about it.

When asked recently who Liverpool should sign this summer to replace Suarez, Nicol told ESPN:

"If Suarez goes, get Mario Gomez in. You'll have a centre-forward who you know is going to be right in the middle, always in the penalty box, and just have the likes of Coutinho and Aspas deliver the ball".

Gomez signed for Fiorentina in an eminently affordable £15m deal, and upon hearing of the transfer, Molby conceded that Liverpool 'may have other plans', but suggested that the Reds had made a mistake in not pursuing the striker. He told EuroSport:

"I'm disappointed that a player of Mario Gomez’s experience, stature and record was able to move to Fiorentina with little or no apparent competition. You’d think one of Europe’s historic clubs would have moved for someone with such a good record. Certainly he seems suited to English football".

With Daniel Sturridge increasingly injury prone, and Luis Suarez almost certain to leave, Liverpool need at least one more prolific goalscorer, and they don't come much more prolific - at this price - than Gomez:

Recent record (All Competitions: Club and International)

* 2008-09: 48 goals/assists in 62 apps.
* 2009-10: 24 goals/assists in 54 apps.
* 2010-11: 46 goals/assists in 55 apps.
* 2011-12: 53 goals/assists in 59 apps.
* 2012-13: 27 goals/assists in 39 apps

* TOTAL LAST 5 SEASONS: 169 goals/29 assists in 269 apps.
* Scores or creates a goal every 1.3 games

Gomez's goalscoring record is absolutely formidable. Even Luis Suarez would struggle to consistently deliver this kind of creative contribution. Very few strikers in world football have figures as good as this.

In January, former Liverpool Managing Director Christian Purslow confirmed that the Reds were 'hours away' from signing Gomez during the summer 2010 transfer window, and in a recent column for The Telegraph, Jamie Carragher revealed that Gomez was the club's first choice to replace Fernando Torres:

"Gómez and Carroll may have had contrasting fortunes in domestic football, but their similarities can be underlined by the fact that Liverpool almost signed Gomez before we moved for Carroll. It fell through at the last minute, and since then Gómez has not stopped scoring".

I have yet to hear one legitimate argument against signing Gomez. The same tired arguments are used to dismiss the German (Goal-hanger; doesn't fit Rodgers' style; no one else wanted him etc), but these are (IMO) without merit.

Who cares how many miles Gomez runs per game if he scores 20+ goals a season? What difference does it make if other clubs didn't go in for him? A striker's main job is to score goals, and every year, Gomez does that without fail, even when he's relegated to the bench for most of the season.

Gomez will no doubt bang-in 25+ goals for Fiorentina this season, and Liverpool will end up lumbered with some young, cheap, inexperienced striker who will probably struggle to score 10 goals all year.

Liverpool need TWO new strikers if Suarez goes, and ONE if he stays. I'm a fan of Daniel Sturridge, but he is increasingly injury prone (something he admits himself), and Fabio Borini is probably not going to cut it in the consistent goalscoring stakes. In this regards, Gomez would've been a superb signing.

Mark my words: if Rodgers makes the mistake of relying on Sturridge instead of signing another striker (or two if Suarez goes) to pick up the slack, it will cost the club dearly next season, especially if anything goes wrong (fitness-wise) in the first 6 games (when Suarez is banned)





NOTE: Please stick to the Comment Policy (Click to read)


83 comments:

  1. fr once i agreed wth u....Gomez would be a good buy n player fr Liverpool but alas No....hopefully its not a mistake that wll come knocking at the head...YNWA

    ReplyDelete
  2. we missed the boat infact we missed an entire armarda,but we will sign some great players we have been told that fsg can sign any player they want,so lets not worry

    ReplyDelete
  3. liverpool4life5658:36 pm, July 20, 2013

    Okay fair point. But if he doesn't fit into peps plan at bayern who play similar to us, then why would he fit into ours? BR like his strikers to be flexible, Gomez isn't....

    ReplyDelete
  4. If Suarez goes we should really look at Kiessling, or Martinez or Burak.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Suarez doesn't actually fit the system that Rodgers likes to play, that's why we switched from a 4-3-3 to a 4-2-3-1. Great players can be accommodated and there's no doubt Gomez is a great player.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Okay, Rodgers signed him Fabio Borini, so presumably is 'flexible'? Where did that get LFC last season?


    This 'flexibility' thing is a red herring. What would you rather have: a so-called 'flexible' striker who scores 5-7 goals a season, or an allegedly inflexible striker who bangs in 20+ goals?

    ReplyDelete
  7. liverpool4life5658:43 pm, July 20, 2013

    I agree with your point about Gomez because he a very good player and is a coup for 15 million... I was just making a point that BR didn't sign him because he wouldn't fit In. :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. liverpool4life5658:47 pm, July 20, 2013

    Agreed, but Suarez can still do a job at LW- and RW, because he loves cutting in from the sides... It is a loss in a footballing point because Gomez is a excellent player.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Gomez is a good striker and a player we missed out on for a decent price.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I agree he could have been a wonderful signing and a coup. The only reason against signing him would have been BR thinking he doesn't fit his strategy of play.
    I'm not sure if he does or doesn't, what he probably does better than any player on the team at the moment except Sturridge and Suarez is scoring an incredible amount of goals, which we would certainly need(especially if Suarez will indeed leave, which I expect will happen sooner rather than later).

    ReplyDelete
  11. Gomez would be a great player for us, no doubt. But back up your claim that Sturridge is 'increasingly injury prone'. He's no Martin Kelly that's for sure. And Suarez almost certain to leave? Until he hands in a transfer request he's almost certain to stay. And the last time I checked he was an LFC player and despite several newspapers claiming he wants to leave so desperately, he has not yet handed in a transfer request. Even if Suarez stays and Sturridge stays fit,we still need another poacher I believe. Cheeky bid for Chicharito? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Agree. If LFC had gone in for Gomez, I find it hard to believe it would've been hard to get him.

    I can understand getting rid of players like Andy Carroll - he would never fit into Rodgers' style of play, mainly because he just isn't a very good player (technically/tactically etc). Gomez *is* a good player, and if a manager can't fit top class players into his team, I submit the fault lies with the manager, not the player.

    You could argue that Zlatan Ibrahimovic doesn't fit Rodgers' style either, but, like Gomez, it would be madness to reject him if he was available and affordable.

    ReplyDelete
  13. My claim is self-evident. Since arriving in January, Sturridge been on the sidelines three times due to niggling injuries. Plus, he is currently missing the pre-season tour because he's recovering from injury. In the space of six months, I would call that increasingly injury prone.

    ReplyDelete
  14. From what I hear you are spot on - Apparently his ankles a right mess. My mate saw him 2 weeks ago, so fingers crossed it's improved since then, but he doesn't seem to have Suarez's incredible durability....

    ReplyDelete
  15. don't worry jase rogers has tonight stated that we are in negotiation for one or two world class players,im going to get right behind him and fsg and am looking forward in eager anticipation for the unveiling of them /..my money is on ronaldo and bale

    ReplyDelete
  16. i can buy that flexable thing if they can actually perform in the position ...id sooner have a player perform in one position instead of a player like borini who is tripe in 3 positions

    ReplyDelete
  17. whats staggering is what was paid for gomes was only a bit more than we paid for borini

    ReplyDelete
  18. i like my strikers to score

    ReplyDelete
  19. liverpool4life56510:17 pm, July 20, 2013

    Doesn't everyone?

    ReplyDelete
  20. liverpool have a habit of dropping players after they score dont ask me why

    ReplyDelete
  21. im beginning to think that's why hes been shifted out by Chelsea and co without much fuss

    ReplyDelete
  22. It's a tough question though - would you build your team around a world class player, or would you bring in the right type of players to make them world class via your own strategy and style of play(Coutinho, for example)?

    I can't fault BR too much for this one. Zlatan, for instance, didn't have the best of times in Barcelona, even though we both agree he is a world class striker.
    I might blame him for other top players we've missed out on, depending how this window will unfold.

    As for Carrol - I still believe he's a decent player, he just couldn't find his feet in our system(and would never make the striker's position his own in a club of our stature).

    ReplyDelete
  23. Luis Saurez tv advert, well funny!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeihatAEk0g

    ReplyDelete
  24. wasn´t it zan who made a guestpost about Kießling?
    I have the same feeling about him, he isnt really for sale like gomez was, but he wouldnt be to expensive, hes a class striker and if we go for another stiker i´d love us to sign Kießling. Well yeah Gomez for 15m thats not a lot, but gomez doesnt like link up play, eventho hes a worldclass in and out stiker, if you have him in your team its like playing 90 minutes with 10 men only, but if you get a ball to him staying on the box, you could bet your house on it, he will score. players like these are often critisized in germany (for whatever reason) and the same goes for kießling... I think Kießling wouldnt consider twice if he has the chance to prove himself in another league, were hes probably more cherished and valued than in germany, and i think Hypiä wouldnt be in his way if theres a possibility comming for him to join liverpool. strikers like these can open up games just with their presence on the field (unlike AC who didnt know how to go and had absolutely no tactical appreciation) and IMO its a shame rodgers doesnt value those types of strikers, its pretty foolish to ignore these players continuously...

    ReplyDelete
  25. Aged 28-29, not the FSG way. Also he will be playing European football with his new club, something we cannot offer.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Liverpool Kopites12:43 am, July 21, 2013

    Yup. That's indeed the reason why, imo. But Rodgers likely believes he has the ability to improve every player's injury history and defy the odds.

    ReplyDelete
  27. To date, Guardiola hasn't signed Gomez's replacement or he is waiting for Lewandowski at the end of next season. He sold Gomez, instead of Mandzukic, who is less clinical but works for the team better and will possibly play Gotze/Muller as the false nine at times too. All of that illustrates that Guardiola doesn't need a forward that is mostly about goalscoring. Which goes to show it isn't all about pure goalscoring ability for some managers, when it comes to strikers. So of course, imo, there are palatable and valid reasons for not signing Gomez. So I can understand why some wouldn't want him. I didn't want him as a first XI striker but he would have been handy to have in the squad, even though that was a unlikely scenario for Gomez to accept.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I agree Suarez can more than do a job there on the wing as a wide forward but I don't think Rodgers gives that much freedom to his wide players or not as much as Suarez-the-wide-forward would require. Coutinho gets a certain level of freedom but even then, he has to come and help out. Unless Suarez is given a wide role where he is allowed to be relieved of most defensive duties (a la Ronaldo), I just don't see it happening on a regular basis. I've seen him do it for Uruguay but he doesn't have to do much work without the ball. Drifts brilliant all over the place for us and I wouldn't want to handicap that with a wide role in our system, unless it is a wide role that is tailor made him, like Real and Man United tailor made a wide forward role for Ronaldo.

    ReplyDelete
  29. This was my intent all along. We should of traded Suarez to bayern for Gomez, shaqiri and about 10 mil. Gomez prolific as anyone and his positioning as an Attacker is unmatched by any striker in the world, his poaching abilities are quite simply amazing to say the least. He's exactly what Liverpool need looking at the amount of missed opportunities on goal last season. Gomez is the man who gets that goal. And I had no shadow of a doubt that he would of been able to produce the same in the premier league. As for 15 million. That is outrageously underpriced. I completely agree about what has been said in this article however and I am utterly disappointed that we didn't try and set up any safe guard to Suarez's miss comfort however... Now that Gomez is at Fiorentina It seems as though our only option is to keep him no matter how unsettled he gets. Selling him to arsenal is an absolute no go even if the managed to draw deeper in the pockets for his signature. It would be like surrendering 4th place right then and there for cash. our midfield is already complete with courtinho Gerard and Lucas sure to take those roles. And our season is as much in there hands as Suarez if he stays. One thing I don't think I am too worried about is defence this season. Agger is top class, one of the best centre halves in the world and that's no overstatement. If we can manage to get just one more centre half in the shape of sahko or papa then our defence is as complete as anything. Kelly will be there to compete for first team aswell as skrtel both are top class performers skrtel has it in him just had a pretty puss season and Kelly's potential is adamant to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
  30. sure was matey, and i completely agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Theycallmemrburt2:27 am, July 21, 2013

    Target men on the whole havent worked at Anfield since Crouch and before that TOSH!.

    Riedle, Dundee, HEskey, Meijer, Morientes, Ngog and Carrol have all come in with great Reps and left looking foolish. NO MORE TARGET MEN PLEASE. We are more suited to skillful speedy strikers. Glad we overlooked him.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Even then, Rafa played Crouch as a second-striker at times!

    ReplyDelete
  33. I agree with you jaimie..People seem to be forgetting football is a about scoring goals to win matches..The overriding principle in this case is: Gomez can score goals(the thing that win games). He should have been considered regardless of System or playing style of the team..Everyone has a role to play and his role would be (TO SCORE GOALS)..Simple!

    ReplyDelete
  34. Rafa even played Crouch on the wing :-o


    Gomes is a very good finisher but he will not be of any use in a rotating front three.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Shankha Chaudhuri7:39 am, July 21, 2013

    Liverpool actually missed Gomez two years back and had signed Caroll instead..remember??

    ReplyDelete
  36. lol mines on pinky and perky

    ReplyDelete
  37. so rodgers has finally come out with the truth about pepe,please do not take us for mugs,and as for marque signings do not make me laugh ,

    ReplyDelete
  38. Pepe Guardiola got rid of Gomez for a reason. He just would not work in a system where you have to pass the ball into the oppositions net from your end of the pitch to the other.


    We got rid of Carroll for that exact same reason.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Pepe Guardiola got rid of Gomez for a very good reason. Not because he is a terrible player but because the words target men do not exist in Guardiola's vocabulary.


    If Rodgers got rid of Carroll then why would he want Gomez?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Because Gomez scores you to succeed, Carroll is a donkey

    ReplyDelete
  41. But we all know we will never go for him, even he's on a free...

    ReplyDelete
  42. Unlike Carroll, gomez is full of pace and technical skills, this player works out in every team believe me...

    ReplyDelete
  43. My point is that a target man will not suffice in the way Rodgers wants his team to play.

    ReplyDelete
  44. So why did Guardiola not decide to keep him?

    ReplyDelete
  45. " Gomez *is* a good player, and if a manager can't fit top class players into his team, I submit the fault lies with the manager, not the player"

    Tevez, Ballottelli, George Best, Suarez, and a million more,
    thats a bold statement to make, before I start researching, are you sure that you stand by that, ???
    and please dont say I am being frivolous,
    but we stand by our word, yes,?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Well the pepe/Carroll statements ala "they do have a future here" are to increase the value... But he promised us big signings, and I expect that now!!
    If that's not going to happen I will turn my back against Rodgers and troll here for sure!

    ReplyDelete
  47. Same with me with the lotto, keep just picking the wrong ones.

    ReplyDelete
  48. WRONG, Donkeys dont mind doing a bit of hard work, AC did.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I know what your saying, and I have to agree - I still don't think its good to be that single orientated in one direction/philosophy of football - but comparing Gomez to Carroll is like comparing a villa with a shed

    ReplyDelete
  50. Where was I comparing Carroll with Gomez?

    ReplyDelete
  51. He did the same with ibrahimovic at barca I think... And he's a bit like Rodgers in that criteria, both players have the philosophy and are staying strict to these... (Don't get me wrong guardiola is a finished article as a manager while Rodgers, well he isn't ;) )

    ReplyDelete
  52. Rodgers had to start somewhere did he not? All manager have to.

    ReplyDelete
  53. "Rodgers got rid of Carroll then why would she want Gomez?" Well its Not an comparison but it sounds like you put them on the same level.. Carroll wouldn't ever bang in 20 goals a season with BR being the manager, Gomez would

    ReplyDelete
  54. No, that is not comparing Carroll and Gomez.


    You clearly do not understand the phrase I made yet you agreed that a target man would not suffice in the way Rodgers wants his team to play.


    I am confused.

    ReplyDelete
  55. BR thinks he wouldnt suffice, because hes very single orientated on his philosophy (if thats a good think or not is highly debatable, and im not even sure about my personal opinion there), but he´s a little bit single orientated there i think... IMO a player fits in if hes scoring regular and brings the team forward, in BR´s he has to "fit his ideal profile of a player"

    ReplyDelete
  56. But BR clearly does not want a target man. That is as clear as daylight.


    Who are you to talk for Rodgers and guess about who is able to fit in his team?

    ReplyDelete
  57. dude, im not criticising rodgers, i like the football we play, im totally behind him! please dont classify me as one of the anti-rodgers-brigade! :)
    still there also many misstakes rodgers does, and IMO hes to single orientated in the direction of "the ideal tikitaka philosophy" and hes for example talking to much in the press, hyping to many players making to many promises

    ReplyDelete
  58. m8 its just my opinion, i thought were able to present that here :>

    ReplyDelete
  59. read your post lol.you cannot blame rodgers ,he probaly would like some marque signing,all managers do,but he dose not sign the checks ps i do not think you were calling me a tr0ll

    ReplyDelete
  60. Of course you are entitled to your opinion but you are making Rodgers out to be a clown for not signing Gomez when he is not after a target man.

    "Single orientated" my, my. Strong opinion there when some of us do not even know how to spell coaching badges.

    ReplyDelete
  61. You are the one making a fuss. Where have I classified you as anti-Rodgers?

    ReplyDelete
  62. max get off your high horse,and stop belittling posters on a daily basis,we are entitled to our opinion its a forum,if you do not like them do not read them

    ReplyDelete
  63. Where was I belittling anyone? Jaimie made it perfectly clear to you Jason. If you do not like what I have to say then do not reply.

    ReplyDelete
  64. m8 it wasnt meant to be mean ;) well ofc everybody wants, but he shouldnt make to high promises

    ReplyDelete
  65. I cannot believe other top European clubs never even competed for his signature telling me that just maybe Gomez does not have as much to offer as he once did.
    Surely Gomez himself would have pushed to get to a bigger club unless he himself thought that maybe he was not up for it.

    ReplyDelete
  66. i know that m8 but i think thats why it may not go live.maybe rodgers gets told one thing but then the club do another,agree he shoud not say anything till a deal is done thou

    ReplyDelete
  67. know he did ,he also did the same to you but yu stil carried on replying and sniping yesterday,anyway back to the subject,you where belittling derbaummann,please do not take it personally

    ReplyDelete
  68. i just dont like the idea of getting branded as someone i am absolutely not.

    ReplyDelete
  69. If i was sniping yesterday I would have been banned.


    i hardly even made posts yesterday. Do not make things up please.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Copy and paste where I have branded you anti-Rodgers. Please do me that favour.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Copy and paste where i have branded you anti-Rodgers.

    ReplyDelete
  72. lol i do not want an argument with you one of your posts at least was a clear snipe 2 on friday ,and your right i do not know why you did not get a ban i did flag them,maybe you only get banned when i do,if thats the case prepare yourself for plenty of rest;-)

    ReplyDelete
  73. He is a great player, not one that we needed though.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Well with each passing day, one less prolific striker to sign and higher possibility of Suarez leaving. There is a possibility that other players may also leave if they see that the dream is not taking shape. If Suarez leaves and they don't sign any proven striker/winger/fullback, then, I suppose it's a good time to pick up a new hobby instead of watching the EPL on Sat/Sun/Mon/Wed.
    I don't think anyone can fault me after supporting LFC for more than 37 years when most of my friends were supporting the Red Devils.
    If LFC doesn't do any impressive signings, it'll be the end of my couch football career, lol.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I too do not like being branded something I am not but you cannot accuse somebody of doing something when they have not done so.

    ReplyDelete
  76. never give up the faith m8,one great game for lfc is worth a thousand others,do agree with you about the transfer window however,ps get rid of your friends with friends like them who needs enemies ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  77. we all know how rogers wants to play ...he wants to keep possession with a lot of technical players who can play a variety of roles....Max we all get this and always have....what derbaum is saying it wouldn't be to bad if we actually had a player despite his limitations that can actually stick the ball in the net ..

    ReplyDelete
  78. i understand all this ....and like ive stated before i admire rogers for having the courage of his own conviction to play this way.....but the premiership is a land of giants and to go into a game knowing yo are not going to win any aerial battles means you are limiting your ability to defend and score...if it works great stuff if it fails this year rogers is sacked

    ReplyDelete
  79. two player benteke and lua wouldnt fit in rogers system and they both took liverpool apart last year literally by themselves.....any physical player will have a field day against us this year because we are as a team tiny....im going to have a pre season bat that carroll benteke and lua all score against Liverpool if they start

    ReplyDelete
  80. Ha...Ha...Ha...Ha..Ha...Ha..good one m8.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Could'nt afford his wages, can't afford Reinas'

    ReplyDelete
  82. Gomez has one position he could effectively score goals from: central striker. Look at the player that currently plays that role: Suarez. Could there be two less similar players? How do you dismiss the kind of tactical changes required to accommodate a change like that?


    Quite obviously Rodgers likes to play with Suarez in that role right now, so why would he ever buy a player that could only function effectively in that role? And why would he buy a player that, whenever he was brought on to the pitch, the entire attacking tactical approach would need to change? It doesn't really make any sense. It's not as simple as sending him on the field and expecting him to score goals. Teams train for hours each week to get tactics right, for Benitez it was relentless refinement, Rodgers has taken the better part of last season to even start to make it work. I think you're far too dismissive of how important team tactics are for actually creating and scoring chances. Gomez would score zero goals if he was sent on blindly without properly training and integrating with his team mates.


    Rodgers is trying to buy players that will supplement and compliment the players we currently have, not require a significant change in style. I guess I do understand that you feel the argument has no merit but I'm not even vaguely convinced your response is well thought out. You're going to need to explain that point of view in more detail if it's to warrant consideration. At least when people say that Gomez doesn't fit our style we can talk about concrete ideas like his lack of mobility or less than ideal pass completion in the attacking third. When you simply say the idea has "no merit" you haven't explained anything at all. You just shrug your shoulders and disagree. Maybe that's also fair enough, but it's not really a discussion is it?

    ReplyDelete