Liverpool legend Mark Lawrenson has launched a scathing attack on controversial Sunderland star - and one-time Liverpool target - Lee Cattermole, arguing that Gus Poyet should 'cut his losses' and sell the combative midfielder during the january transfer window.
Cattermole received the SEVENTH red card of his career during Sunderland's 1-0 defeat to Hull City at the weekend, and in his column for The Mirror today, Lawro raged:
"Cattermole is a total and utter liability.
"To his fans, to his team and to the managers whose plans he has left in tatters with his poor disciplinary record.
"He has had seven Premier League red cards – five as a Sunderland player in the last three years. Any footballer with a record as shocking as that needs to take a long hard look at himself and ask why".
Cattermole's discplinary record is clearly an issue, but this outrage is (arguably) a little over the top. Steven Gerrard also has accrued seven red cards during his career (Six for LFC; One for England), but you never heard Lawro - or any other ex-Red - slate the Reds captain in such vociferous fashion.
Lawro may have it in for Cattermole, but former Sunderland team-mate Jordan Henderson has only good things to say about the midfielder. In a recent interview, he enthused:
"He [Cattermole] was captain when I was there and tended to lead by example in training. He demanded everybody worked hard at all times. You get certain people who are just like that naturally, they want to help as much as they can. He’s very vocal on the pitch and will try to get everybody doing their jobs"
If Kenny Dalglish had got his way, Cattermole would've played for Liverpool. In 2011, the Reds reportedly pursued the midfielder, with Dalglish willing to pay up to £10m for his signature.
Cattermole is the archetypal Dalglish signing: British, overpriced, and physically-suited to the rough and tumble of the Premier League. It certainly would've been an interesting transfer, though I'm not sure the King would've endeared himself to the Anfield faithful if the deal had gone through.
Having said that, I'd rather LFC had spent £10m on Cattermole than £35m on Andy Carroll. I also would've taken Cattermole over Charlie Adam...
Author: Jaimie K
Cattermole received the SEVENTH red card of his career during Sunderland's 1-0 defeat to Hull City at the weekend, and in his column for The Mirror today, Lawro raged:
"Cattermole is a total and utter liability.
"To his fans, to his team and to the managers whose plans he has left in tatters with his poor disciplinary record.
"He has had seven Premier League red cards – five as a Sunderland player in the last three years. Any footballer with a record as shocking as that needs to take a long hard look at himself and ask why".
Cattermole's discplinary record is clearly an issue, but this outrage is (arguably) a little over the top. Steven Gerrard also has accrued seven red cards during his career (Six for LFC; One for England), but you never heard Lawro - or any other ex-Red - slate the Reds captain in such vociferous fashion.
Lawro may have it in for Cattermole, but former Sunderland team-mate Jordan Henderson has only good things to say about the midfielder. In a recent interview, he enthused:
"He [Cattermole] was captain when I was there and tended to lead by example in training. He demanded everybody worked hard at all times. You get certain people who are just like that naturally, they want to help as much as they can. He’s very vocal on the pitch and will try to get everybody doing their jobs"
If Kenny Dalglish had got his way, Cattermole would've played for Liverpool. In 2011, the Reds reportedly pursued the midfielder, with Dalglish willing to pay up to £10m for his signature.
Cattermole is the archetypal Dalglish signing: British, overpriced, and physically-suited to the rough and tumble of the Premier League. It certainly would've been an interesting transfer, though I'm not sure the King would've endeared himself to the Anfield faithful if the deal had gone through.
Having said that, I'd rather LFC had spent £10m on Cattermole than £35m on Andy Carroll. I also would've taken Cattermole over Charlie Adam...
Author: Jaimie K
5 Red cards in the last 3 years is awful.
ReplyDeleteSG's red cards were 12-11-8-3 years ago, a big difference, also I think some were in friendlies, coz 1 of those was in July, and the other 3 were all in early august, thats a strange fact I think.
P.S: I only included the red cards received when he was playing for LFC.
Seriously?
ReplyDeleteYou're comparing Gerrard's 15 year LFC career to Cattermole's 7 year one?
Cattermole has 5 red cards in the last 3 years, not 7 in 15, mostly at the beginning of a career.
Poor. Very poor.
So now Suarez is not messing up enough for you to write a spread about so you are turning your attention to SG now??! You are really running out of things to write about. Stick to the Transfer rumors.
ReplyDeletegive up writing jk your an idiot pal well replied about gerrards cards accumalating over 15 years...jk do something useful with u life and buy a nice length of rope and go swing from the nearest bridge you wont be missed one bit mate.....thanks. ynwa
ReplyDeleteTruth be known Cattermole has had a couple of them red cards through reputation and Gerrard has probably got away with a couple of reds because of his name
ReplyDeleteStrongly agree, we need experience and quality and NOW!
ReplyDeleteSpot on! No point in just buying promising players anymore.We have young guys at almost almost positions. As u rightly said, the strategy now should be to buy experienced players who can have an immediate impact. Lets start playing champions league football on a regular basis. Then, along with our history it wont be a problem to attract new talent.
ReplyDeletethe idea was go get Experienced midfielders to back our strikers , when that failed we threw our wallet on defenders ....lots of defenders..still have nightmares after the 5-defender game against arsenal.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how many Red Cards Lawrenson would have by now if he was playing within todays rules, or how many Crazy Horse would have had????
ReplyDeleteAlso Gerrard gets away with much worse than Cattermole does week in and week out. And what about Carragher he was a liability but he didn't get red cards because of the team he played for. Lawrenson ought to keep his big gob shut! By the way, he is a crap pundit and he's getting money for old rope!
You have to gamble. You have to buy promising players. You have to buy a lot of them. Every top club does this; it's especially important for clubs that want to get close to the very top level, to compete long-term with Arsenal and Dortmund, if not with Real Madrid and Bayern Munich. You do it in the hope that one or two of them, out of however many is necessary, will stick: will have not only the talent but the character and temperament to win and to keep a regular first team spot. You can't just channel your transfer spending into buying mature players to meet immediate first team needs, because that's a gamble of another kind, which pays off just as infrequently, and at a still higher risk to the health of the club.
ReplyDeleteOverall I think Liverpool's transfer policy in the last 18 months has been excellent. We have pursued important players whilst improving the squad and the reserves, upping the game of every single player involved in our teams. Some supporters and commentators can fixate on individual cases too much, for all kinds of reasons, and not always see the whole picture, which is, irrefutably, of a not only rapid but deep and thorough improvement of the management of the club's playing staff, in which the transfer activity has performed a very important role.
I agree it has been excellent to go get strike talent, Sturridge, and shore up a leaky defense, which we did. No the need, the glaring need, is box-to-box mid-fielders who can drive a team forward. We need this now.
ReplyDeleteI don't have nightmares about the Arsenal game. It was an uphill slog from the start. Johnson getting sick just prior to game time didn't help. We had our chances...just didn't capitalize. I'm still optimistic.
ReplyDeleteIt also does not pay off to buy experienced players all the time.
ReplyDeleteSpurs bought Eriksen and Soldado who both came with big reputations and people were ridiculing LFC for not signing these players yet they have failed to make a positive so far.
That makes Eriksen and Soldado bigger gambles as their transfer fees were higher and most probably are earning 3 times the wages?
Any signing is a gamble but if you look back at Aquilani who was experienced and compare that to the signing of Luis Alberto then which signing is more of a gamble?
You keep going on about Eriksen being a flop but it's just not true in the slightest. You just want it to be. Using your reasoning, the same could apply to Coutinho, who has just one assist all season.
ReplyDeleteEriksen has one goal and two assists for Spurs, and he's only been on the losing side once when playing. He is no way a flop. Is Coutinho also a flop? No. Like Eriksen, he is supremely talented, and he will get back into the swing of things sooner rather than later.
I'm sure most fans would take Eriksen right now. He is a superb player with great experience for his age, and you have no credible basis upon which to run him down.
How can LFC's transfer policy be 'excellent' when only 3-4 of Rodgers buys are actually successes (so far).
ReplyDelete* Mignolet, Sturridge, Coutinho and Toure are the only undoubted successes (IMO)
* None of the other signings have consistently convinced yet.
* The summer transfer window for 2012 was an unmitigated disaster: Allen, Borini, Sahin, Yesil and Assaidi. Three of those are no longer at the club, and none of those 5 even play regularly.
* Summer 2013 transfer window is looking similarly bleak. Aspas looks out of his depth, and can't get in the team (though to be fair, he's played out of position); Alberto barely gets any game time; Cissokho is average; Moses is good, but is also neutered by being played out of position; Ilori has no chance of getting any pitch time, and Sakho still looks a bit wobbly in possession.
Like Dalglish, Rodgers has wasted tens of millions on players the club didn't need and/or he's wasted the players he's bought by playing them out of position.
A more effective transfer policy would (IMO) be spending bigger on one or two proven quality players/players with undoubted potential to make an impact, and promoting young players from the academy to fill out the squad.
One other thing: I still can't understand the logic behind getting rid of Suso - who had some experience in the Premier League - and then spending £7m on Alberto, a very similar type of player. It makes no sense whatsoever.
I never said Eriksen is a flop, I said he has failed to make a positive impact which is true. He has nlot even made the starting eleven of late!
ReplyDeleteHow can Eriksen not be regarded as a gamble which was my main point?
In a very simplistic way, what I'd say about the Suso/Alberto issue is this:
ReplyDeleteRodgers wants both players but knows that he won't have the time to play both (he's having enough trouble finding time for Alberto).
He's not going to sign Alberto and then send him out on loan, so the only option is to loan out Suso.
One could make the case that he didn't need Alberto in the first place, but that's a different issue that I'm not going to get into here because I'm holding out my verdict until we give him more time.
Someone with Eriksen's proven history, and the quality of his development (Ajax; lots of international experience etc) is arguably much less of a gamble than, say, Alberto, who cost £7m but has zero experience.
ReplyDeleteEriksen also has lots of Champions League experience, which will bode well for him. £12m for Eriksen is not (IMO) a gamble. How many other 21 year olds in world football have the experience he does at that age? very few, if any.
How can Eriksen be less of a gamble? If Eriksen fails which can still happen then Spurs are stuck with a young player on massive wages. Alberto cost less and is on much much much lower wages. He was never going to walk in to the starting eleven but next season he will be settled just like Jordan Henderson now is and will play a bigger part than he is now.
ReplyDeleteHow you can just right off the likes of Alberto and Ilori is being very premature but if that is the way you feel then so be it.
Lots of fans are willing to give these youngsters a chance. I would rather see them grow with time than see them fail straight away.
First, your argument is predicated on unsubstantiated speculation: you don't know that Eriksen is on 'massive wages' - that's just supposition on your part. He may be on very reasonable wages for all you know. He may even be on similar wages to Alberto.
ReplyDeleteI haven't written off Alberto and Ilori, so please don't twist my words. I've highlighted how difficult it will be for them to get pitch time this season, and that is true. Not all slow starters come good. Henderson is the exception, not the rule.
My point about Eriksen is that - given his copious experience (CL/International/Domestic) he is much more likely to succeed than Alberto/Ilori, both of whom have zero experience, and are both in a new league, and not playing regularly.
I want both Ilori and Alberto to succeed, but there is nothing right now to suggest that is going to happen. That's not their fault, it's just the way the club is set-up, and the way Rodgers runs the team.
Dozens of young players have come in over the last 10 years, and the majority have failed. That's a historical fact, and there's no point ignoring that.
Alberto is the same age as Coutinho, who is a regular for LFC. The bottom line is if BR thought Alberto was good enough, he'd be playing him in most games.
You have your view, I have mine. I trust my instincts on players, and I'm rarely wrong. That is not arrogance, it is a fact, and it's simply based on observation, and seeing the writing on the wall. Almost every player I've put in the 'not going to make it column' over the last seven years has failed to make it. I said the same things (early in their LFC careers, and sometimes prior to signing) about Aquilani, Keane, Dossena, Voronin, Degen, Morientes, Cole, Allen, Pellegrini, Borini, Assaidi, Coates, Carroll, Zenden, Pennant, Kromkamp, Palletta, Barragan and many others, and like you, LFC fans were on my case, arguing that they would all come good; they just needed time etc.
Where are these players now? None of them made it at LFC, and in some cases, it wasn't their fault, just like it's not Ilori's fault he's not even given the odd sub appearance.
Calling Ilori and Alberto 'mid-level gambles" clearly tells me that you want them to succeed...
ReplyDeleteWell stated...
ReplyDeleteI believe we've only won at the Emirates one time since the place was built, and if I'm not mistaken, we were very lucky in that win.
While I'm disappointed we couldn't at least snag a point, I can't say I was expecting to win the game, especially given Arsenal's form over the past 10 months.
I just wish we played better overall... but as you said, we had our chances and didn't capitalize.
You can interpret that however you like. They are mid-level gambles. Doesn't mean I want them to fail. Coutinho was also a mid-level gamble, and he's done okay.
ReplyDeleteSent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
Now Coutinho has only done okay?
ReplyDeleteI can see many disagreeing with you here...
With respect, you are one if the biggest pedants on this site (!) You constantly steer discussions into pointless, antagonistic cul de sacs. When I say 'he's done okay', it's clearly a figure of speech.
ReplyDeleteSent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
Coutinho is much more talented than Eriksen but wait, Coutinho was also a mid-level gamble?
ReplyDeleteEach to their own as they say.
You just don't get it, do you? At the time Coutinho signed, he was an unknown quantity. Hardly anyone had even heard of him, let alone knew the depth of his potential. I certainly didn't. That's why he was a mid level gamble. But let me guess: you followed PC's career befoee LFC abd knew all about him, right?
ReplyDeleteIt's a matter if debate whether Coutinho is more talented than Eriksen.
Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
why this constant attack on KD, now even using tabloid gossip as yet another pretext
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that signing quality players is necesary and we should have that as a focus I am not convinced that the youth and first team recruitment are connected. Yes we signed Aspas in the same window as Ilori but did we not also try and sign Di Costa, Mhkitarian and Willian? We even signed first team players in Ilori's position and not for peanuts. Truth is I believe that if a club and scouts see a player that looks to have the potential to be a great player and in a season or so time we may well have a lot more competition then definitely sign him. Haven't Arsenal been doing this for some time? Ramsey anyone? I think there is a common mistake to think of all recruitment as connected. It may not be and we may be looking at certain players and thinking, lets get them in to the club where they will be playing and training in a way we want (continuity at all age levels has been mentioned before) with a view of ironing out, or identifying flaws in their games to work on. Then bring them in in cups. We have less cups unfortunately. Having a lot of "potential" in a youth setup should not mean you shouldn't look for more. Unfortunately you cannot create great players, only help them become great. IMO anyway.
ReplyDeleteMainly because that is your opinion Jamie. We have to wait and see who is a success or not.
ReplyDeleteIt's a very fair assumption that Erikson is on much much higher wages than Alberto though is it not?
ReplyDeleteWe always need to be bringing in young talent.
ReplyDeleteWe (and they, the young talent) need to expect and accept that they may not play right away, possibly seasons at a time.
my previous message was deleted for reasons I do not understand as it did not conflict with the rules above. My point is very clear any pretext to criticise KD is used even when the information is based on tabloid gossip. We should remember the great things achieved rather than looking for spurious reason to undermine our greatest player and second most successful manager.
ReplyDeleteCan you please move the agenda on to something constructive rather than remorselessly negative
Typically speaking a gamble is determined by how much you bet.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the players that are being discussed were all bought for under 10m, that speaks mid-level gamble to me.
Especially when compared to what we paid for Allen, Downing, Henderson, and (like a cockroach, it never dies) the Andy Carroll Disaster.
Well said!
ReplyDeleteWhy is it a fair assumption? Based on what?
ReplyDeleteObviously it's my opinion, which why I include 'IMO' in my post. So why make the point? It's pointless. perhaps you'd prefer it if everyone put 'IMO' after every third word?
ReplyDeleteI should have added...at the present.
ReplyDeleteI can immediately think only of one club who've done better in signing and integrating as many first team players in key positions over the last couple of years, and that's Man City; and even they struggled last season, and are taking time to cohere in this.
ReplyDeleteTry looking at it this way: you're saying we've signed a goalkeeper, a defender, a play-maker, and a striker, who have all been undoubted successes? All in the space of a year. I mean, seriously. That's actually pretty amazing.
Like you, I'm optimistic that we'll soon be able to add Sakho to that list. I think he's been tremendous in the last couple of games; and Moses has been, in my estimation, an astute loan. I think if I was a first team regular at the club, turning up for work every day and comparing things now to how they were 18 months ago, well, I'm damn sure I'd be working a lot harder to keep my place in the team now than I was then.
I'm not saying that I think we're the finished article. I hope a major signing sticks soon; a midfielder who can lift the whole side's level consistently, and find the crucial goals and touches of class that will enable us to win tight games against accomplished sides. But those players, those signings, don't come around all that often. It doesn't do any harm to make sure they come into a dressing room with a healthy culture of competition, even a bit of fear, a sense that the exit isn't too far away for those who don't make the grade!
Interesting how lawrenson's nasty little snipes at Liverpool have stopped now Kenny is back ?.
ReplyDeleteMore shite reporting
ReplyDeleteGERRARD'S RED CARDS ARE OVER HOW LONG YOU NOB ?
ReplyDeleteGerrard's red cards are over how long long ? think my friend before comparing Gerrard to Cattermole.
ReplyDeleteTruth be told I didn't read past the second line (perhaps I should have) as it looked to be a regurgitation of another article which I didn't quite agree with for the same reason. Didn't read the IMO but I suppose it goes without saying. One point not mentioned in that article was how few players ere signed i the first season for Rodgers compared to that of Rafa and Houlier or how many of the signings were loans.There is clearly a different strategy and writing off young players or considering them not successes this early in to their careers is crazy. I know you say "so far" but does that not negate your own point? If e are buying younger players as a club rather than finished articles then the so far is the most important part of the text. In my opinion ;P
ReplyDeleteI know you like to point to the non signing of Erikson as terrible business but do you not think that if he would be on so low a wage as Alberto we or anyone else for that matter would not have pulled out all of the stops to sign him? I would be very surprised if his four year deal was not very lucrative and if that itself does not contain a decent some of the money from the discrepancy between the perceived value actual money payed in his purchase was (al a Joe Cole) and or a good signing on fee. Just an assumption but I maintain its a fair one.
ReplyDeleteI still think that what is good for the player and what is good for the club are not the same thing. If we stick strictly to what is good for the club then having lots of young talent come through the ranks is hardly a problem. If we're not getting those players to the next level because of shortcomings in how we train and manage them then sure, something might need to change, but it could equally be true that these young players most often turn out to not be good enough. The success rate of promising young footballers is frightening low, only the truly world renowned prodigies are not considered significant risks.
ReplyDeleteI don't see value in religiously sticking with only the players we've got and banging our proverbial heads against a brick wall trying to make them come good. There is only so much you can do, at some point the player either becomes good enough or they don't. Going out and bringing in more young talent isn't going to hurt the club, it's just going to potentially increase the rate of failure. While failure to promote a young player might be seen as something to try and improve it's actually not a problem just in itself. If the goal is to bring 2-3 young players through the academy to the first team over a 3 year period then what difference does it make if we sign 50 young players or 100? The failure rate is higher but if the end result is what you aim for then that failure rate becomes somewhat irrelevant. It's awful for those young players to not make it through but if we're clinical about the whole thing then that doesn't really matter to the club. It's harsh for those players but there is a point at which you can say it's not really the club's problem.
I agree with Greg's post - there seems to be an erroneous assumption that our buying of young players or "mid-range gambles" reduces our ability to bring in the experienced players we also need. That just doesn't seem to be true. We're chasing young players, mid range players AND those quality experienced players. We're trying to get all of them at the same time, it just turns out that signing a 20-25 million pound superstar is a little more difficult than an 8- 10 million pound squad player. That should be obvious enough to anyone. I absolutely think it's the case that buying Aspas, Alberto and Illori had no impact on our targeting of quality first-teamers. It's just that signing those guys turned out to be easy, while signing some other team's star player was hard.
It may not be their fault but that doesn't mean they were good enough for Liverpool either. These players are brought in and given a chance. They may not play that much first team football but they train multiple times a week and it's there that they get a very clear chance to show their quality. It's entirely reasonable to suggest that if a player can't show their quality in training then they won't show it during a game. So if players ultimately didn't play enough games then it's very often going to be because they just are not good enough. Naturally the responsibility still comes back to the manager who signed the player in the first place but that doesn't take away from the simple requirement that the player himself needs to be the one to show and produce that quality. No one else can make them do that.
ReplyDeleteI'd agree that players need competitive game time to stay sharp, it becomes difficult to maintain your edge only by training at 80% of full game intensity. Players who simply stop playing altogether will slowly lose confidence and levels of quality that mean they end up on a downhill slide. But that is a part of football, it's the hard reality. For many of these players, coming into a system like Liverpool and having the challenges of adapting to a new tactical approach should provide plenty of motivation and fuel to push them to be competitive. They should grow as players, show consistent improvement and then they are given a chance to play a few minutes or maybe a cup game or two. And truly good footballers will always give 100% in training, they will be mentally strong and they won't lose any of that edge despite not playing as much as they like. They'll get game time in the reserves and so the excuses for failure quickly run out. That's the path laid out for Alberto and Illori and I would assert very clearly that the number one contributing factor in their success will be their own ability on the pitch. If they have to be coddled and guided for every tiny step then maybe they're not cut out to be PL level footballers. In which case we let them go and move on.
Your opinion seems slightly unbalanced here, I think. Rodgers could go out and sign two 30m players, if such players would actually be willing to play for us. Didn't happen with Willian (who didn't do anything for Chelsea yet) and Mkhitaryan ...
ReplyDeleteI think Rodgers is forced to gamble on those 7-12m signings and hope that at least some of them will work out. Worked with Coutinho and Sturridge (and Mignolet). The resell value of these three players lalone easily justifies his transfer approach.
Also: If the transfers of Aspas, Alberto et al. don't work out eventually, they could be sold at a relatively small loss hopefully.
BIG LOSS.....LFC workhard to get sign Tiago Ilori and Sebastian Coates but finaly they refused to used both of them.Open your eyes both players are future stars need to polished carefully.Give a times to prove for us. They also versatile players.Why not try to use S.Coates CDM or Holding ball because he is so dangerous about tackle and genius,briliant to helping foward areas?Coates look can give big impact because during under K.Daglisg he also can played Midfielder and score the goal.Please bare in mind that before joining Sporting Lisbon, Tiago Ilori playing as striker.Can you snift his big potential?No need to draw the money again for spending high risk players.
ReplyDeleteCoates was given chances and the premiership didn' suit his game.Illori will be a great player for lfc he is doing phsyical work and should appear in jan .LFC is an ideal place for any young player they will get a chance a first team football if they are skillfull and comfartable on the ball then they will be surrounded by similar players .Stop moaning about any little negative spin you can find or imagine .Suso ibe illori alberto sterling yesil sturridge great future for LFC....YNWA
ReplyDeleteIf you want to stick your head in the sand, so be it. LFC is clearly not the 'ideal place' for any young player. Suso? Farmed out on loan. Wisdom? Loaned. Sterling? Not in the first team, and on the verge of a loan. Ilori? Nowhere near the first team. You say he will 'appear in January'. Explain how he will fit into the team, and at whose expense. Alberto? It's November and he's barely featured.. Yesil? Made a couple of appearances then never heard from again. Borini? Farmed out on loan. Provide some logical reasoning for your views.
ReplyDeleteHello JK, your site is my first point of call when I get on a computer cos of our mutual love for LFC. But labelling LFC plays mid-level gambles especially when we are talking about kids is in my opinion totally wrong. Yes they may not turn out to be the wonder kids we hope, but slamming a sledge hammer on their morale before they are given a chance is totally unacceptable. Look at Henry when he first joined Arsenal, or Ramsey over the last 2 seasons, but see how they turned out cos of their managers patience/persistence. I'm sure this players go through the fan sites too, the article was a fine piece, but ruined by the closing remark.
ReplyDelete