Brendan Rodgers

[Maxiedge]

No worries - I think I questioned you at the time Guess we all want Liverpool to win is all

yeah exactly

[DannyMan2006]

The worst thing is that Rodgers has gone from binning of Carroll to fielding a style of play most suited to Andy Carroll.

[Sarb]

The worst thing is that Rodgers has gone from binning of Carroll to fielding a style of play most suited to Andy Carroll.

It's a Plan B he never believed in. When Plan A doesnt work, adjust Plan A to make it work

[DannyMan2006]

It's a Plan B he never believed in. When Plan A doesnt work, adjust Plan A to make it work

Indeed.

I actually think the signing of Lambert made sense, as we did need to mix it up when teams parked the bus. But he should never have become Plan A. When Rodgers came he did inspire confidence. He said the right things and was fresh and exciting. He was inventive and above all, he had a limited set of players playing football the right way.

He came in and whilst the football wasn't the most exciting, i could see what he was aiming for. He then signed a couple of players, gave us a little extra cutting edge and we looked a team.

This time round, we've started to play like we're hanging on for dear life. Pragmatic & dire football I'd most associate with relegation fodder or mid table ****e. All the exciting & attacking players have been sacrificed, and in have come "trusted" players. Yes, he was right to bring in Lucas & Kolo, but did he have to change his way of playing completely? Lucas played against Spurs when we thrashed them away last year as well as in the entertaining games in which we were the better side in away defeats to City & Chelsea.

It's been sad to see and as I said in another thread, grinding out wins is fine if you win. Against Basle it blew up in his face.

[Sarb]

Indeed.

I actually think the signing of Lambert made sense, as we did need to mix it up when teams parked the bus. But he should never have become Plan A. When Rodgers came he did inspire confidence. He said the right things and was fresh and exciting. He was inventive and above all, he had a limited set of players playing football the right way.

He came in and whilst the football wasn't the most exciting, i could see what he was aiming for. He then signed a couple of players, gave us a little extra cutting edge and we looked a team.

This time round, we've started to play like we're hanging on for dear life. Pragmatic & dire football I'd most associate with relegation fodder or mid table ****e. All the exciting & attacking players have been sacrificed, and in have come "trusted" players. Yes, he was right to bring in Lucas & Kolo, but did he have to change his way of playing completely? Lucas played against Spurs when we thrashed them away last year as well as in the entertaining games in which we were the better side in away defeats to City & Chelsea.

It's been sad to see and as I said in another thread, grinding out wins is fine if you win. Against Basle it blew up in his face.

I actually feel sorry for him. Only a few months ago his reputation was booming. He was being linked with working for England. The players like Hendo, Flanagan etc were playing brilliantly. Such a quick demise though, it's sad to see.

Gutting to think how good we were when we last went to Old Trafford and now are pretty awful. He has orchestrated a massive demise though, both in results and style of play. A stubborn streak really.

He could have gone defensive but still kept a balance with attacking. Just seems like he has to do either extreme. His decisions are just baffling now. You can almost guess his team selections. Not sure why he has gone the way he has.

[G]

Rodgers transfer choices and commitee talk by James Pearce from the Echo in this interview. From 4.10 for the committee stuff. http://www.anfieldhq.com/exclusive-i...ond-interview/

[S-RED]

"do not seem to have a definitive way of playing" that's the problem with the team at present + we've started to play like we're hanging on for dear life. Pragmatic & dire football; which I put down to the Chavs, palace & Newcastle games after the league was lost.

the confidence has disappeared & BR is not helping this by having a back 4 & 4 C/m's playing.

As the KOP were screaming after 20mins the other night ATTACK,ATTACK,ATTACK,ATTACK, ATTACK. This is the only way we can play

[McDermotX]

Neville..........few valid points, but I'd be reticent to give Rodgers 200m and see what came out on the other side.
Swansea and Southampton wouldn't have complained anyway.

The former Manchester United defender was discussing the Merseyside club’s failure to qualify for the knockout stages of the Champions League following Tuesday night’s disappointing draw with Basel.

And ahead of Liverpool’s trip to Old Trafford to face their bitter rivals on Super Sunday, he says the summer outlay of over £100million is small fry when you take into account the money they received for the sale of Luis Suarez to Barcelona.

He said: “They obviously sold Luis Suarez for £65m and spent (around) £100m on five or six players, so they spent £40m. That’s not even touching the sides of what the big European teams do, and are spending when they’re really going for it.

“When you’re talking about a big club and Liverpool winning European Cups over the last 30 years, building a new 65,000-seater stadium; £40m net is not ‘going for it'.”

Brendan Rodgers paid large fees for Adam Lallana, Emre Can, Alberto Moreno, Lazar Markovic, and the injured Mario Balotelli over the summer, but none of those players started against Basel.

And while Neville says the manager must take responsibility for the signings, he says Rodgers hasn’t been given the budget that many of his rivals, including Louis van Gaal, have enjoyed.

He added: “Man United have done it, City have done it, Chelsea have done it, Real Madrid will do it.

“If you want to go big, go big, and that’s not big! So the idea that he’s spent a lot of money in great club terms, he’s not. He’s spent £40m.

“They took a star off Brendan Rodgers and he’s got five in return and he’s obviously picked them so he has to take responsibility for that. And he’ll accept that I’m sure.

“Big is going to sign a player for £80m. He hasn’t gone big; he’s touched the sides a little bit. The net spend is £40m, and I don’t see that as big net spend for Liverpool Football Club.

“If they measure themselves in terms of a club winning the Champions League, then they need to spend like one. Then they’ve got to enter that level and that level is not £40m net spend.”

[S-RED]

All well & good, but FFP ****s with that theory, unless you don't sign 5 players for 100mill & buy just 2. That's all well & good, but then the squad is too small; we are stuck swimming against the tide in a stream trying to join a river

[Sarb]

Cant really take Neville seriously on this kind of thing. He'd love LFC to be blown to oblivion

[McDermotX]

Big clubs don't worry about FFP all the same. Padding out the squad with mediocrity is a fool's errand, and will ultimately cost us down the line, both monetarily and in silverware.

Not saying we don't need to be aware of our place in the pecking order, but frankly, the majority of transfers this club has been involved with over the decade and more have been a disgrace. You dont need to be buying 80m players, but when you process through the latest line of dross, you're in the same ballpark, with ****all to show for it.

[Norbs]

He'd love LFC to be blown to oblivion

So what? He's not pulled any punches and at least he's correcting the idiots in the press going on about our £100m spending spree as if it was net spend.

[Kenneth]

So what? He's not pulled any punches and at least he's correcting the idiots in the press going on about our £100m spending spree as if it was net spend.

****, he said net spend

[Sarb]

So what? He's not pulled any punches and at least he's correcting the idiots in the press going on about our £100m spending spree as if it was net spend.

No one in the press is referring to the £100m as net spend. Net spend is a ridiculous argument. He has spent over £200m on players. Dont care what the net spend is

[Vermilion]

Yeah i agree, net spend has nothing at all to do with the judging of signings made, it's a financial thing, seperate to actually judging what we got for the money we spent on new players.

We are looking at the amount of money spent on new players, and what quality we got, that's nawt to do with overall net spend. imo. look at what we spent and then judge what we got, then assess BR/The Comitee's judgement.

I mean if you've got one of the worlds rarest cars in your garage, with buyers queueing up to buy it for a hefty price, if you sold that car and spent the money on ten more different cars, and still broke even, if those cars are **** and don't work, it doesn't exactly make you a good salesman just because you haven't lost money, and if those are the types of cars you buy, then business wont be great going forward.