Dalglish defends record in second spell at Anfield

[Assassin]

It's really 'only' the Carroll and Downing transfers that were a proper disaster. We lost a good 25m on those two in transfer sum.

Money aside. The most important thing we lost was progression and that progression is double the amount of time they where with us

[Gingawaria]

It's really 'only' the Carroll and Downing transfers that were a proper disaster. We lost a good 25m on those two in transfer sum.

Adam we recoupled most of, and we needed someone for the position at the time - but well most of us kinda knew he was not quite good enough. But gave us depth. Henderson is a cracking signing, loved him from day one, real potential there. Coates was a good price for Uruguay under 21's captain and a huge prospect touted everywhere - sometimes they just don't quite work out unfortunatly. Enrique is still a valuable member of the squad.

Can't disagree with any of that really.

[Myo]

I think what I was most upset about with kenny was the persistance of playing hendo (through no fault of his own) and **** form players at that time week in and week out downing and adams over in form guys that kept on consistently delivering such as kuyt and maxi...it was so befuddling...that was what pissed me off the most...

[kev776]

We've been through all of this a hundred times. He's got a point on the cup finals - he gave me my first trip to the new wembley, and I'll always remember that from his second spell. It's important for the development of a side to actually win something too, so they've got that experience of getting over the line.

The problem wasn't the signings themselves, it's how overpriced they were. Downing for £10m and on £60k a week and he would still be here now, Henderson is going to be a really decent player, and Carroll was the hottest young English striker at the time and I was definitely pleased we'd signed him on that deadline day. I still think he'll be a top striker when he gets to about 29/30 if he can ever stay fit, players of his build often don't really fulfil their potential until their late twenties/early thirties.

Would Dalglish have signed them for those prices without Comolli? I suppose we'll never know. I'm happy with Rodgers now though, and think we're really starting to build something, it'd be great to get Kenny back as an ambassador though if Brendan is happy with it.

Good post, my thoughts aswell.

[kev776]

Money aside. The most important thing we lost was progression and that progression is double the amount of time they where with us

A good point that many seem to miss.

[Robbie-9-Fowler]

It's really 'only' the Carroll and Downing transfers that were a proper disaster. We lost a good 25m on those two in transfer sum.

Adam we recoupled most of, and we needed someone for the position at the time - but well most of us kinda knew he was not quite good enough. But gave us depth. Henderson is a cracking signing, loved him from day one, real potential there. Coates was a good price for Uruguay under 21's captain and a huge prospect touted everywhere - sometimes they just don't quite work out unfortunatly. Enrique is still a valuable member of the squad.

Carroll was the biggest transfer **** up, ever IMO. Mainly because even in a drunken state, I don't think a single person on this forum would have allowed that transfer, we had 2 people in Kenny and Comolli that were supposed to be football people. At least the likes of Torres and Shevchenko had some kind of reputation and form that lasted longer than a month.

Henderson was overpriced for me but what annoyed me most about that one was we bought him for that price and played him right wing. Another position we really needed to improve on if we weren't going to play Maxi, so why not use the money to buy a winger?

Enrique for me is good value and I agree about Coates, worth the risk.

[Darkon]

Carroll was the biggest transfer **** up, ever IMO. Mainly because even in a drunken state, I don't think a single person on this forum would have allowed that transfer, we had 2 people in Kenny and Comolli that were supposed to be football people. At least the likes of Torres and Shevchenko had some kind of reputation and form that lasted longer than a month.

Henderson was overpriced for me but what annoyed me most about that one was we bought him for that price and played him right wing. Another position we really needed to improve on if we weren't going to play Maxi, so why not use the money to buy a winger?

Enrique for me is good value and I agree about Coates, worth the risk.

Carroll was a huge waste of money I agree. At the time our owners came out saying that the Torres/Carroll affair all came down to us valuing Torres at 15m more than Carroll, and for it to happen that's the difference needed. So say we got 30m for Torres and paid 15m for Carroll, nobody would really be talking much about it today, although the bottom line for the club would be exactly the same...

It's just a bigger picture than what we paid for Carroll, which seems to be forgotten. The only real winners in the matter is Newcastle sadly :/

It was more worrisome that the two biggest signings didn't take us forward one step. On paper it looked good with a good crosser and Carroll brought in, but it never worked out for a number of reason.

I still hold however that Kenny's second spell here was not as catastrohic as some made/make it out to be and personally I at the time thought he should have gotten some more time to set his team and style - but wans't so to be. And that's fine, because we got one good manager right now and playing some decent footy and starting to get results.

[Robbie-9-Fowler]

Carroll was a huge waste of money I agree. At the time our owners came out saying that the Torres/Carroll affair all came down to us valuing Torres at 15m more than Carroll, and for it to happen that's the difference needed. So say we got 30m for Torres and paid 15m for Carroll, nobody would really be talking much about it today, although the bottom line for the club would be exactly the same...

It's just a bigger picture than what we paid for Carroll, which seems to be forgotten. The only real winners in the matter is Newcastle sadly :/

It was more worrisome that the two biggest signings didn't take us forward one step. On paper it looked good with a good crosser and Carroll brought in, but it never worked out for a number of reason.

I still hold however that Kenny's second spell here was not as catastrohic as some made/make it out to be and personally I at the time thought he should have gotten some more time to set his team and style - but wans't so to be. And that's fine, because we got one good manager right now and playing some decent footy and starting to get results.

To me the first part is just an excuse, the 2 deals were separate and yes we would have been up in arms if we sold Torres for £30m.. Nothing would have stopped us from selling Torres for £50m and doing a different deal for other players, we could have easily for example spent £20m on a better player, there is no link, just excuses.

To spend £90m and go backwards is pretty **** by anyone's standards, he was great when he first came in, the football was better, the atmosphere was amazing but in the 2nd season he just stopped with all the basics that had us playing great. Added to that those signings and there was just no way he could have stayed unfortunately, how could we seriously have given him more money after that.

[calvoboy]

Carroll was the biggest transfer **** up, ever IMO. Mainly because even in a drunken state, I don't think a single person on this forum would have allowed that transfer, we had 2 people in Kenny and Comolli that were supposed to be football people. At least the likes of Torres and Shevchenko had some kind of reputation and form that lasted longer than a month.

Henderson was overpriced for me but what annoyed me most about that one was we bought him for that price and played him right wing. Another position we really needed to improve on if we weren't going to play Maxi, so why not use the money to buy a winger?

Enrique for me is good value and I agree about Coates, worth the risk.

I think in Henderson he just saw a great player in the making and wanted to give him as much game time as possible to help him develop. If he'd known his job was under threat he probably wouldn't have played him so much.

For Carroll all people see now is the £35m, but if we'd signed him for £20m and Torres had gone for £35m, as was originally bid on the day then we'd have been no better off. It just would have 'felt' better.

[edit - think I replied to the wrong post there, but you can't delete posts on here can you?]

[Neil Young]

Money aside. The most important thing we lost was progression and that progression is double the amount of time they where with us

Possibly. I don't think that's down to individual signings though. At least it's not fair to pick on the failures and say they cost us progression but ignore the successes, qualified or not.

I can't help thinking we want it both ways. People criticise him for playing Henderson when he wasn't doing well but perhaps we're now getting the benefit of that period in Henderson's career. It was the same when Benitez persisted with Lucas - too many were too critical too soon.

The progression of individuals sometimes comes at the cost of results for the team.

Where Dalglish went wrong for me, obvious transfer mistakes aside, is that we stopped making progress as a team. Appearances can be deceptive but there seemed to be no clear plan so every week more and more people became concerned about where we were going strategically. Basically he was losing the faith of the fans and intensifying the doubts the owners had when they appointed him and perhaps even when they gave him a longer contract.

[Robbie-9-Fowler]

I think in Henderson he just saw a great player in the making and wanted to give him as much game time as possible to help him develop. If he'd known his job was under threat he probably wouldn't have played him so much.

For Carroll all people see now is the £35m, but if we'd signed him for £20m and Torres had gone for £35m, as was originally bid on the day then we'd have been no better off. It just would have 'felt' better.

[edit - think I replied to the wrong post there, but you can't delete posts on here can you?]

I think I did, but yeah as I said why would singing someone for £20m have meant getting £35m for Torres that was our selling price we could have bought someone else for the same or less or more, it wasn't some crazy 3 way deal that stipulated a £15m difference.

[Norbs]

At what point would you sack this manager?

1959-60 Div2 3
1960-61 Div2 3
1961-62 Div2 1 CHAMPIONS
1962-63 Div1 8
1963-64 Div1 1 CHAMPIONS
1964-65 Div1 7
1965-66 Div1 1 CHAMPIONS

Answer above

[Assassin]

Possibly. I don't think that's down to individual signings though. At least it's not fair to pick on the failures and say they cost us progression but ignore the successes, qualified or not.

I can't help thinking we want it both ways. People criticise him for playing Henderson when he wasn't doing well but perhaps we're now getting the benefit of that period in Henderson's career. It was the same when Benitez persisted with Lucas - too many were too critical too soon.

The progression of individuals sometimes comes at the cost of results for the team.

Where Dalglish went wrong for me, obvious transfer mistakes aside, is that we stopped making progress as a team. Appearances can be deceptive but there seemed to be no clear plan so every week more and more people became concerned about where we were going strategically. Basically he was losing the faith of the fans and intensifying the doubts the owners had when they appointed him and perhaps even when they gave him a longer contract.

This was the progression I was referring too. The some of the signings we made during that period. Did not deliver and this really stunted our progress

[Neil Young]

Possibly but it's all insignificant compared to the damage wrought by the cowboys. We didn't make progress under Dalglish in many ways but I think it's disproportionate to say we'd be much further forward now. It;s their legacy that we're recovering from.

And the failure to invest in the squad over that period will continue to cost us for quite some time yet. Even when we do get back into Europe we'll find it tough as the coefficient will be close to zero. I know some will blame Benitez and Hodgson and Purslow and Dalglish but the cowboys were running us into the ground and we narrowly escaped administration. Any damage others did is minimal in comparison.

Dalglish steadied the club and I think it's easy to underestimate how important that has been. Yes, the full season and the signings he made that summer were not good but I don't think it did us that much damage really. It's hard to calculate of course but I don't think we lost that season and got set back by another.

[Darkon]

Possibly but it's all insignificant compared to the damage wrought by the cowboys. We didn't make progress under Dalglish in many ways but I think it's disproportionate to say we'd be much further forward now. He steadied the club and I think it's easy to underestimate how important that has been. Yes, the full season and the signings he made that summer were not good but I don't think it did us that much damage really. It's hard to calculate of course but I don't think we lost that season and got set back by another.