Hansen talks more crap

[Mattshark]

In hindsight I probably should have said Insua is worse than Konchesky

You should also learn the difference between fact and opinion.

[Fierce]

It is not a fact and never will be.

Is so and always will be

[Roboklopp]

In hindsight I probably should have said Insua is worse than Konchesky

But he isnt.

[redemption]

I'm not sure what he says deserves the title you gave it, or indeed that the article has. I disagree with the idea that we have seen anything particularly positive but I think you have to accept that at the end of last season the team and squad was not in a good way.

I still think that the main issues last season were fitness related (and actually a lot of teams suffered in the same ways for some reason last year). We were however lacking in experienced attacking options which made the impact of ****wittery from Riera and injuries to Gerrard and Torres more severe than they should be. The majority of the blame (IMO) lies with the owners and the fact that Rafa had not been given time to get a production line of younger players in place but the fact remains that we were not in a great position when Roy took over.

[danperkins]

Nothing wrong with anything Hansen has said whatsoever. Haha anyone notice when he is mentioning good signing in Poulsen and Miereles that he doesn't mention The Konch

As for the Aqua argument, fact is that last season alone we spent £19.4 million on Aquilani including his wages and he flopped horribly, figures were released by Roma and he was on 85 grand a week apparently, this has been posted before on few different forums. So it was a 20 million quid waste of money for last season , either injured or below par and wasn't even fit to lace Alonso's boots. In our situation with finances the way they were/are that IMO was the nail in Rafa's coffin, posted when we signed him that Rafa will live or die by this signing, and seems it was the latter that happened, just one bad signing too many for Rafa.

[danperkins]

But he isnt.

Time will tell and we can compare both players performances for LFC, IMO Konch is better than Insua but both are average footballers.

[Roboklopp]

Except that's not fair on a manager who had shown steady signs of improvement in all but his last season. Even under Moores, Houllier got time to right his management after the abortion of a summer that ended up in letting Duff go to the Chavs & chucking £20m at Diouf, Diao & Cheyrou.

Plus that was a big net spend summer for GH, whereas Rafa was down about £20m after selling Keane back & selling Xabi & limited in his manouvres much more.

[Roboklopp]

Time will tell and we can compare both players performances for LFC, IMO Konch is better than Insua but both are average footballers.

No idea how you form that opinion.

[DannyMan2006]

Time will tell and we can compare both players performances for LFC, IMO Konch is better than Insua but both are average footballers.

[Fierce]

Yeah I'm not sure Konchesky has done enough in his 3 games so far to be classed as better than Insua; but the latter was rubbish last season and I'm sure that whilst I don't think Konchesky is quite good enough for us either, I think he'll prove to be a much better option than Inusa

That said, I think that unless Insua desperately wanted to go, it was a mistake to ship him out given his age. Whilst I don't think he's very good now, he's still very young

[danperkins]

Except that's not fair on a manager who had shown steady signs of improvement in all but his last season. Even under Moores, Houllier got time to right his management after the abortion of a summer that ended up in letting Duff go to the Chavs & chucking £20m at Diouf, Diao & Cheyrou.

Plus that was a big net spend summer for GH, whereas Rafa was down about £20m after selling Keane back & selling Xabi.

Mate he didn't sign a good player in 2 years and last season was a stain on the club itself. One bad signing too many. We can argue til the cows come home but Rafa wanted Alonso gone, he got that wish, it was his responsibility to bring in a replacement for Alonso, instead he brought in a player who was nothing like Alonso and Rafa said he gives the team more going forward etc

So Rafa bought Aqua, he was injured, Rafa said that Aqua would have cost £30 million quid if he wasn't injured which is ludicrous in itself considering Aqua has done nothing of note in his career, so we spent 19.4 million on an injured player including wages and Aqua spent the season either injured (from when we bought him) or way off par and clearly couldn't cut it like so many players that have played i Serie A throughout their careers.

It happened and along with a car wreck of a season saw Rafa's departure. Roy comes in to a team lacking in confidence and continuity, Cole gets sent off in first game, we sign 2 or 3 players late in window and 2 have zero premier league experience, Masch ****s off with fantastic timing and we have a horrendous fixture list for first 5 games. Its all relative.

Roy has had some bad luck and he has also made some mistakes, next 5 games are crucial and there can be "NO" excuses from now on in, pressure is on and Roy and the team including the new signings have to deliver, lets hope they do or we're ****ed!

[DannyMan2006]

Yeah I'm not sure Konchesky has done enough in his 3 games so far to be classed as better than Insua; but the latter was rubbish last season and I'm sure that whilst I don't think Konchesky is quite good enough for us either, I think he'll prove to be a much better option than Inusa

That said, I think that unless Insua desperately wanted to go, it was a mistake to ship him out given his age. Whilst I don't think he's very good now, he's still very young

You could argue that keeping him instead of Aurelio would have been the right choice..........

[danperkins]

No idea how you form that opinion.

Em, well we have seen how Insua played for us, now lets see how Konch plays for us, and in time then and only then can we form a proper opinion of whom was the better option for LFC, pretty self explanatory mate ya know.

[danperkins]

You could argue that keeping him instead of Aurelio would have been the right choice..........

You could be right mate, although i never rated Insua at least he would have been fit majority of the time, Aurelio is no good to us being constantly injured, and lets face it he most likely will only play 10 games or so going on his horrific injury record.

Such a pity as Aurelio would be banker first choice LB and when he gets run of games he is actually a very good player, just made of glass. Feel sorry for him but at end of day not doing LFc any favours.

[Jack D Rips]

You could be right mate, although i never rated Insua at least he would have been fit majority of the time, Aurelio is no good to us being constantly injured, and lets face it he most likely will only play 10 games or so going on his horrific injury record.

Such a pity as Aurelio would be banker first choice LB and when he gets run of games he is actually a very good player, just made of glass. Feel sorry for him but at end of day not doing LFc any favours.

He's on a pay per play contract though isnt he?. If so he's not costing us a lot