26 Sept 2013

'He's a fighter': BR to make formal bid for €10m star who rejected LFC. Mistake...?

Last summer, Tottenham Hotspur infamously beat Liverpool to the signing of Gylfi Sigurdsson, a player who - at the time - seemed destined to follow Brendan Rodgers to Anfield. It wasn't to be, and the Icelandic International later explained that he chose Spurs because he was 'impressed with club's plans for the coming years'. Well, after a disappointing first year in London, it seems that Liverpool boss Brendan Rodgers is keen on going back in for Sigurdsson, who may find his chances limited as a result of the huge influx of new players over the summer.

According to the Liverpool Echo:

"Brendan Rodgers is keen to be reunited with Gylfi Sigurdsson.

"Liverpool are ready to make formal approach in January for the player who - having had a mixed spell at Spurs since he joined for £8.8m from Hoffenheim last year - has started to flourish in recent weeks".

If this is true, then it would show a stunning lack of ambition on Rodgers' part. For me, Sigurdsson is NOT the type of player who is going to move Liverpool forward.

He is yet another (comparatively) cheap 'nearly-man', who hasn't really done anything in the game, and the Reds need to sign top class, experienced attackers who can come in and make an immediate impact. Will Spurs let Sigurdsson leave? A 'Spurs source' told the Liverpool Echo:

"It remains unclear whether Spurs chairman Daniel Levy will want to sell but business is business. Whatever he sells Gylfi for, there will be a decent mark-up."

After the debacle of his first transfer window, I think Rodgers has massively improved with his transfer choices, but targeting Sigurdsson - recently described by AVB as a 'fighter' - would be a step backwards, and I doubt that many in the fanbase will be impressed if LFC's interest intensified.

Additionally, the plain fact is Sigurdsson REJECTED Liverpool. He had the chance to come to Anfield, but stuck two-fingers up at the prospect. There are probably hundreds of players out there who would kill to play for the Reds, so why go after a player who wasn't interested?

At the time of LFC's interest, I advanced eleven reasons why it's a good thing the club missed out, and those reasons still stand today:

1. Not key to Swansea's style of play. Yes, Sigurdsson scored some goals, but it was pass-masters like Joe Allen, Leon Britton, and Angel Rangel who really made Swansea tick.

2. Only at Swansea for five months (!). The club was playing superb football for ages before he arrived. Five months of the Premier League experience is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

3. No feeling for LFC or its history. Sigurdsson had the chance to join one of the world's most prestigious and respected clubs, and if the attraction of Liverpool wasn't good enough for a player with only five months of Premier League experience, then quite frankly, I'm glad he signed for Spurs.

4. Lack of experience. As we've seen with Andy Carroll, buying players based on only half a season of Premier League football is a risky proposition. Sigurdsson did well for Swansea, but there's no guarantee that he'll be able to replicate that form at a top club.

5. Brendan Rodgers let him go. If Rodgers really saw Sigurdsson as a vital component in his LFC revolution, he would've moved heaven and earth to sign him. He didn't, which to me means that he saw the 23 year old as a decent player to have, nothing more, nothing less. Indeed, in an interview with LFC TV today, Rodgers confirmed that he 'was not prepared to pay more' than what had been previously agreed for the player, which suggests he didn't feel Sigurdsson was worth the extra money.

6. 10% conversion rate. This is significantly lower than some of LFC's other midfielders, including Gerrard (23%); Maxi (23%); Bellamy (19%). Okay, his rate is superior to the likes of Henderson and Downing, but that's hardly a difficult achievement.

7. 43% shooting accuracy. Only 32 of Sigurdsson's 73 shots for Swansea were on target. A creditable amount, but no better than LFC's other players, including: Shelvey (43%); Bellamy (52%); Kuyt (45%); Johnson (47%); Henderson (45%); Gerrard (52%); Maxi (47%);

8. Not a genuine game-changer/match-winner? The Swans failed to win 12 of the 19 games (63%) in which Sigurdsson played, 8 of which were defeats, including a 4-game losing streak in April and only 2 wins in the final 9 league games of last season. Where was Sigurdsson's individual impact for the team then?

9. Top-level impact? Sigurdsson's goals came against: West Brom, Wigan, Fulham, Blackburn and Spurs, which suggests that he finds it easier to score against the poorer teams in the league. Conversely, he failed to score or assist against Liverpool, Newcastle, Man United, Man City and Chelsea (granted, this point is rather tenuous, but what the hell!)

10. Poor assist rate: Sigurdsson's assist rate for Swansea was one every 6.3 games, which is not great. Extrapolated over a season, that would be 6-7 assists in 38 league games. Stewart Downing - an experienced Premier League player - got 8 assists in his final season for Aston Villa, but ended up with a big fat zero in his first year at Anfield.

11. Mercenary? According to LFC Legend Steve Nicol - and then later confirmed by Rodgers himself - Sigurdsson's wage demands derailed Liverpool's bid, which suggests he's a bit of a mercenary. In public, he'll say the usual stuff about ambition etc, but the reality is he went to London for the money.

What's changed over the last year? Like Clint Dempsey, Sigurdsson flopped in his first season for Spurs. They wanted the midfielder, and they can keep him.

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


  1. Liverpool is still a mid table team, look at spurs. Ambitious.

  2. we have had enough with Allen,Borini,and now Aspas and that is 30 mil worth of "talent".We were not interested in signing a proven talent in Ericksen and hoping to sign this guy who had a forgettable last season. Hoping this to be a rumour. Honda is out of contract this january .We should go for him than this guy

  3. I would rather we try for Mata, I know its highly unlikely. But you never know.

  4. I don't think Spurs have been any more ambitious than Liverpool. Selling your best player isn't ambitious.
    Spurs have been playing better, and maybe made some better investments, but that's not down to ambition that's down to clever purchases, and not wasting money. Which Liverpool are quite famous for...

  5. Selling your best player for the benefit of the team doesn't make a team unambitious.

  6. Sigurdsson is a good player; he's just not what Liverpool needed then and not really what Liverpool need now still.

  7. No it doesn't, I agree. But it certainly doesn't help you.
    If they really are more ambitious than Liverpool, and have aspirations of winning the league, then you need to keep your best players, and if they were that ambitious, Bale may not have wanted to leave.
    Don't get me wrong, I think Spurs are an ambitious club, and they have come on immensely in the last few seasons. But I wouldn't say they were more ambitious than Liverpool.

  8. I doubt they could have stopped Bale from wanting to leave for Real, even if Spurs were genuine title challengers. Real is Real.

  9. Bale was contracted to Spurs, they didn't have to sell him, just like Liverpool didn't have to sell Suarez, and Utd didn't have to sell Rooney.

  10. I wasn't referring to it, in terms of contractual obligations but apologies if you were (though if you were, I am a little confused as see what I quote below from you). I am talking about in terms of desire to leave for Real Madrid and the pull of Real Madrid, in relation to what you said: 'and if they were that ambitious, Bale may not have wanted to leave'.

  11. if he gets this guy for 10m its 40m worth of mediocrity and counting

  12. Sports direct is a Mike Ashley Company, he owns NUFC.

  13. I know mate but there is also a website called sport direct. Sport not sports. I assume its not a british based website otherwise they would have seen that mistake was easy to make.

  14. are you sure avb was quoted correct and didnt say hes shite

  15. Spending good money on players like Aspas, that wouldn't get into any Top 4 teams line-ups (and then talking like they're supposed to somehow move us into the Top 4), is not an ambitious move in my eyes.

    Spurs lost arguably their best player but in the process developed one of the very best teams in the league. I would happily take that deal!

  16. Leave him where he is.......out in the cold at Spurs.

  17. Not likely will happen. I prefer Mata.

  18. Haha, Spurs are twice as much ambitious. Their revenues and fan base is not even close to Liverpool yet their spending, management and pull over players (especially Liverpool targets) is quite impressive.
    Look at their squad right now, I would exchange Bale for this team any day. Just wait and watch, when we sell Luis Suarez and replace him with crappy players next summer. I don't blame Suarez, he must leave asap. Can't play in a team which is full mediocrity.

  19. I agree. I think it's a non-story, not sure how it got started. The only question is if Rodgers feels like he has some deep insight into the player and believes he's a potential superstar. All the points made by JK seem valid to me and some things would surely have to change. The player never seemed interested in coming to play for us and we refused to budge on our evaluation the first time around. Not sure there is anything to this one.

  20. Spurs have spent more wisely than Liverpool have, but they have both invested a lot of money, which is showing ambition. Just because the signings have turned out better at Spurs doesn't mean they are more ambitious, it just means they have better scouts, and them being in the CL a season or 2 back has obviously made them a more attractive prospect to players.

  21. I'm sure Liverpool board didn't all sit around a table and go "what rubbish players can we sign to get us in the CL" They obviously thought a player like Aspas would be able to offer something to the team, and to be fair to the guy we are only 5 games in to the season, so we cant exactly write him off just yet.
    As I've already said in other posts, Spurs have just invested there money better, but that's not due to being more ambitious.
    Liverpool have invested well over £100 million in recent years, which is very ambitious, yes some of it was badly invested, but that isn't a lack of ambition, that's a failure by the people who scout the players, and sign them.

  22. No thanks. He wasnt impressed with what he seen at spurs, he was impressed by the amount of zeros at the end of his signing on bonus. An average player, who brings nothing different to a team. A mid table journeyman IMO. Let him enjoy his capital one football with spurs. We need top level players.

  23. Not the fact that they were in CL but the fact that they have more of a chance to qualify for CL is what attracts the players. They were not as big club as Liverpool and revenues/fanbase/pressure wasn't even close to Liverpool and yet they managed to spend money in equal terms which shows much higher ambitions then Liverpool. Anyway, we can agree to disagree. I don't think we are going forward.

  24. please Brendan do not sign that tosser there has got to be at least a hundred better midfielders out their that actually WANT to play for LFC please get out there and find one, be your own man for christs sake.