Jay Spearing

[Shaggy]

mental - he seemed to come from nowhere as well...i'd never heard of him before that game - not like say, if connor coady was called up on saturday due to injure crisis....i'd think, hmmm well he's youth/ressie captain etc

Plessis just seemed to appear, play a blinder for that one game, then dissappear

Really? That's weird. He was around for ages, came to us from Lyon with a small fanfare and did well for the ressies. He'd really earned that call up.

[Phoenix07]

I'm not saying it would have been easy to get in the team and I'm not talking about replacing the likes of Mascherano, Alonso, Gerrard, Sissoko or Lucas with him, but players like Plessis, Hobbs, El Zhar were getting game time, while Jay Spearing wasn't. If he wasn't considered as good as those players why did we keep him?

All those players are playing in the lower leagues and were Rafa signings while Spearing and Guthrie players who came through the youth system and are both currently playing at Premiership level weren't getting games. I'm not having a go at Rafa, I liked him, but I think it's a valid point.

According to LFC History, Plessis played 8 times during Rafa's reign, including 3 league games. Spearing played 5 times, 3 of them in the league, El Zhar played 2 times, 21 of them in the league.

Spearing was doing pretty good for the reserves IIRC. He was loaned out to Leicester in 2009/10 and played a further 7 times for them. I don't think he showed enough promise for Rafa. El Zhar was definitely a strange one though.

Kenny seems to like Spearing and put him in against Everton, his third game back after Hodgson's debacle. Must have a lot of faith in him.

[dww]

I'm not saying it would have been easy to get in the team and I'm not talking about replacing the likes of Mascherano, Alonso, Gerrard, Sissoko or Lucas with him, but players like Plessis, Hobbs, El Zhar were getting game time, while Jay Spearing wasn't. If he wasn't considered as good as those players why did we keep him?

It's not really sensible to compare across positions though is it? El Zhar and Hobbs were hardly keeping Spearing out of the team. Plessis is a fair point but it is totally possible that he was ahead at one stage in his development and then regressed/stopped progressing. Spearing has clearly stepped up. It may be that he was kept as he was thought to have the ability but needed to develop some aspects of his game to make it in the the PL. It seems that the problem sometimes is that people expect the same trajectory from all players.

All those players are playing in the lower leagues and were Rafa signings while Spearing and Guthrie players who came through the youth system and are both currently playing at Premiership level weren't getting games. I'm not having a go at Rafa, I liked him, but I think it's a valid point.

It's a perfectly valid one. It's just that IMO the evidence doesn't really support the idea that a bias against local players was the reason. The alternative possibility that trying to get better players in from elsewhere was bad idea, I'm also not convinced of. Judging youth development is clearly a hard thing to attempt, especially when so many other factors were at play in teh club at the time.

Guthrie got as many (if not more) games for us than Plessis surely? I agree that having more options took away some options but I think that is at least to some degree compensated in the fact that greater competition for places makes young players realise what they have to do to make it. Plessis fitted the missing elements of the players we had (i.e. he was tall, athletic and looked at lower levels good in the air) whereas Spearing didn't.

At youth levels to an extent it is about having a number of prospects ready to be tried. Singling out individuals is the wrong way to try to analyse it. For all we know Spearing may have been an arse to Rafa or not taken his instructions well. The problem for Rafa was that few homegrown players were of the level ready to be considered. As his reserve team structure gave more a chance I think it was clear that those that impressed (Kelly, Robinson) got a fair shout against those players bought in. I really don't think we missed a generation of Fowlers and Mcmanamans.

[RedAndWhite]

difference is though spearing is 24 this year and has only really broken into the squad last year, and only featuring much this year due to a horrific injury to Lucas and as I say, imo, us not buying a top box to box midfielder i felt we needed.

He's only made 40 appearences (according to wiki), since joining the first team in 2008 (5 seasons) aged 23

Maybe his real problem is that four years for us is only one for him. So while we think he is 24 he is actually only six........

[PTP]

and @shaggy - tbh it's seems so long ago....but i do remember thinking at the time...Plessis, where the **** has he come from....maybe not so much before the game, i might have been thinking, hmm promising young lad be good to see how he does....however after the game i thought we had just found the next patrick viera so was probably thinking..."we're the **** did he come from, and if he can do that, why haven't we seen him sooner"

[Exiled_red]

It's not really sensible to compare across positions though is it? El Zhar and Hobbs were hardly keeping Spearing out of the team. Plessis is a fair point but it is totally possible that he was ahead at one stage in his development and then regressed/stopped progressing. Spearing has clearly stepped up. It may be that he was kept as he was thought to have the ability but needed to develop some aspects of his game to make it in the the PL. It seems that the problem sometimes is that people expect the same trajectory from all players.



It's a perfectly valid one. It's just that IMO the evidence doesn't really support the idea that a bias against local players was the reason. The alternative possibility that trying to get better players in from elsewhere was bad idea, I'm also not convinced of. Judging youth development is clearly a hard thing to attempt, especially when so many other factors were at play in teh club at the time.

Guthrie got as many (if not more) games for us than Plessis surely? I agree that having more options took away some options but I think that is at least to some degree compensated in the fact that greater competition for places makes young players realise what they have to do to make it. Plessis fitted the missing elements of the players we had (i.e. he was tall, athletic and looked at lower levels good in the air) whereas Spearing didn't.

At youth levels to an extent it is about having a number of prospects ready to be tried. Singling out individuals is the wrong way to try to analyse it. For all we know Spearing may have been an arse to Rafa or not taken his instructions well. The problem for Rafa was that few homegrown players were of the level ready to be considered. As his reserve team structure gave more a chance I think it was clear that those that impressed (Kelly, Robinson) got a fair shout against those players bought in. I really don't think we missed a generation of Fowlers and Mcmanamans.

The comparison across positions was probably a silly one on my part (although I do seem to remember us trying Hobbs in centre midfield despite him being a CB). Guthrie played less games for us than Plessis (according to wikipedia)

Perhaps this is hindsight but I look at players like Spearing, Guthrie, Hammill, Darby etc (all youth players) who all got little or no game time while the likes of Plessis, El Zhar and Hobbs got games ahead of them. When you see that Spearing, Guthrie and Hammill are all at Premiership clubs whilst the others are playing at lower levels. It certainly makes me ask questions - I know that determaining a players potential ability is never easy and we're not talking about players of world class potential but it seems that we made alot of mistakes in this period. The two tier youth system we had - were Rafa signed young players and brought them to Melwood, while arguably better and older players at the academy were left there, and the well documented issues between Rafa and Heighway IMO must have had some effect on the progress of youngsters from the academy to the first team squad. Spearing and Darby were only promoted to Melwood after Heighway left the academy and subsequently we've seen alot more players progress, whether this is because the players are much better than previously or whether something or someone was blocking players progress I don't know for certain. Personally I think that issues between Rafa and Heighway affected the progress of players of Spearing's generation to some extent whether these issues were political or football skill related I don't know. This is just my opinion obviously.

[dww]

There may well be something in what you say but without insider knowledge I don't know how you separate factors like whether Heighway was teaching players to play one way when Rafa wanted them to play another, from a political problem between the two. For me the only case where there is no obvious explanation in terms of ability or fit for the teams needs is El Zhar vs Hammill.

I'd think the inclusion of Darby (on loan at Rochdale) in your list is a bit odd. In terms of getting chances who kept him out - Kelly and Robinson (homegrown) and Barragan (playing for Valencia now).

[Exiled_red]

There may well be something in what you say but without insider knowledge I don't know how you separate factors like whether Heighway was teaching players to play one way when Rafa wanted them to play another, from a political problem between the two. For me the only case where there is no obvious explanation in terms of ability or fit for the teams needs is El Zhar vs Hammill.

Like I say it is some what supposition, I'm not one for conspiracy theories but I think there could be something to it. As you say seperating difference in playing style from political decisions is difficult.

I'd think the inclusion of Darby (on loan at Rochdale) in your list is a bit odd. In terms of getting chances who kept him out - Kelly and Robinson (homegrown) and Barragan (playing for Valencia now).

I was including Darby because IIRC he was one of the best regarded prospects in the youth team of that era. It obviously didn't work out for him. True Kelly and Robinson kept him out but Kelly only made 4 appearences under Rafa, and Robinson 1. While Barragan never made a first team appearence for us. We also had some dross in this era (Degen) Darby it seems is one we got right as players such as Kelly, Flanagan and Robinson have all over taken him.

[The Birdman]

Today showed he is nowhere near good enough against top 6 teams.
Not the mistake for their 2nd goal because everyone misplaces passes but the ease that Utd walked through us straight down the middle in first half was embarrasing.
Welbeck strolled past him as if he wasn't there and he had no idea where Rooney was half the time.
Chris and the rest can argue all they like but Jay isnt good enough for us if we are serious about getting back in the top 4

[Mostar]

He was never meant to be our first choice but Lucas injury and our inability of strengthen in January made him our only DM option.

He shouldn't be used as a scapegoat not now not in the future as he give us his best even if that may not be always good enough.

[doogle]

Today showed he is nowhere near good enough against top 6 teams.
Not the mistake for their 2nd goal because everyone misplaces passes but the ease that Utd walked through us straight down the middle in first half was embarrasing.
Welbeck strolled past him as if he wasn't there and he had no idea where Rooney was half the time.
Chris and the rest can argue all they like but Jay isnt good enough for us if we are serious about getting back in the top 4

I think people generally agree that he's not a 1st team player but I don't think we will get a much better player who will want to play 2nd behind Lucas

[Daniel 7]

The difference between Lucas and Spearing is as pronounced as the difference we saw between Mascherano and Sissoko.

His passing is poor. He tries hard and soforth, but not getting in an experienced DM to help out in central midfield is yet another goof from this management team.

[Exiled_red]

He didn't have the best of games today but he's a good squad player

[Icon]

He didn't have the best of games today but he's a good squad player

I always read that as not good enough...

[danperkins]

He had a mare today