Mamadou Sakho

[G]

I really am amazed that apparently I'm the only one who has ever read anything in the media about our transfer being done by committee. I read it many times that Rodgers didn't have the final say, I read it in the summer that he finally does. I don't keep notes and bookmark links in case people question an opinion I form based on what I read so I can allay their fears about my sanity. It's an opinion. It's not strange, just different to yours. Feel free to join the Rattle and check Barretts posts about Rodgers view on Sakho.

[dom9]

I really am amazed that apparently I'm the only one who has ever read anything in the media about our transfer being done by committee. I read it may times that Rodgers didn't have the final say, I read it in the summer that he finally does. I don't keep notes and bookmark links in case people question and opinion I form based on what I read so I can alay their fears about my sanity. It's an opinion. It's not strange, just different to yours. Feel free to join the Rattle and check Barretts posts about Rodgers view on Sakho.

I've only ever read that Rodgers didn't have the final say on here.

Which means it's probably bollocks.

[CJ]

Jay thingy who shaggy says has very good sources has posted on twitter numerous times that Rodgers doesn't rate sakho.

[G]

I've only ever read it on here.

Which means it's probably bollocks.

So because you haven't seen it anywhere else means it never happened? If you've seen it on here its not people making it up. It's them expressing something they read somewhere else. I've read it in the media, from journo's particularly in the early months of Rodgers tenure and it's been in the background ever since, brought up when the need occurs. Of course none of that means it's true either. But it's possible, so I can choose to believe it.

[CJ]

I don't agree with you G but I think some of the reaction has been a bit over the top.

as always reason from Mr loy.

[G]

We even have people thinking Sakho isn't actually injured such is the distrust of anything Sakho/Rodgers related. The truth is out there if only Mulder and Scully could bloody find it.

[MrMichael]

**** me. I'm allowed an opinion and because you find it insulting doesn't mean it's not possible. He never gave Assaidi a chance either. Could've been ****e or he could've been signed without his consent. Never played Sahin in his proper position either.

Of course your reasons are very possible but so are mine. People can believe what they want and others can try their hardest not to be insulted by it.

Our transfer structure was clearly different to the norm we expect. Nobody would have talked about it in the press if it was a black and white as other clubs are. It was clearly different so it's not a stretch to assume that some players could have been signed when the manager would have preferred others.

In fairness to Rodgers he didn't fancy Skrtel much for a while but loves him now. I don't think Sakho has got a fair crack in actual games and he has a certainly not been any worse than any others in the games he has played.

I never even came close to saying you weren't allowed an opinion, I just expressed mine, which I am equally allowed, that an illogical and unsourced twitter rumour is a crock of **** and really does insult Rodger's entire managerial thinking. Assaidi, crikey come on now he can hardly get a start for Stoke, and Sahin did nothing to demonstrate why he should have been played ahead of our other options.

Are you really trying to tell me that you believe Rodgers makes selection decisions based on some petty phoney war being played out behind the scene at Anfield, and that even if he didn't approve of a player's signing he consciously would choose when stuck with that player to instead select someone of lesser ability just because he hadn't got his way? That is just an absurd view imo.

[Myo]

I never even came close to saying you weren't allowed an opinion, I just expressed mine, which I am equally allowed, that an illogical and unsourced twitter rumour is a crock of **** and really does insult Rodger's entire managerial thinking. Assaidi, crikey come on now he can hardly get a start for Stoke, and Sahin did nothing to demonstrate why he should have been played ahead of our other options.

Are you really trying to tell me that you believe Rodgers makes selection decisions based on some petty phoney war being played out behind the scene at Anfield, and that even if he didn't approve of a player's signing he consciously would choose when stuck with that player to instead select someone of lesser ability just because he hadn't got his way? That is just an absurd view imo.

Amen...

[G]

I never even came close to saying you weren't allowed an opinion, I just expressed mine, which I am equally allowed, that an illogical and unsourced twitter rumour is a crock of **** and really does insult Rodger's entire managerial thinking. Assaidi, crikey come on now he can hardly get a start for Stoke, and Sahin did nothing to demonstrate why he should have been played ahead of our other options.

Are you really trying to tell me that you believe Rodgers makes selection decisions based on some petty phoney war being played out behind the scene at Anfield, and that even if he didn't approve of a player's signing he consciously would choose when stuck with that player to instead select someone of lesser ability just because he hadn't got his way? That is just an absurd view imo.

I'm saying he hasn't got a fair chance, whatever the reasons. I stick by that.

[dom9]

I never even came close to saying you weren't allowed an opinion, I just expressed mine, which I am equally allowed, that an illogical and unsourced twitter rumour is a crock of **** and really does insult Rodger's entire managerial thinking. Assaidi, crikey come on now he can hardly get a start for Stoke, and Sahin did nothing to demonstrate why he should have been played ahead of our other options.

Are you really trying to tell me that you believe Rodgers makes selection decisions based on some petty phoney war being played out behind the scene at Anfield, and that even if he didn't approve of a player's signing he consciously would choose when stuck with that player to instead select someone of lesser ability just because he hadn't got his way? That is just an absurd view imo.

Yep.

[kev776]

I don't believe that. He's the manager. He picks the team

If he doesn't want a player, then they don't get signed. Because if he doesn't want them then he doesn't play them and the price paid for them might just as well have been spent on cola cubes

Not always true, at Bayern the committee picks the players and the First team trainer trains them and selects the best available 11. The trainer has an input of course but who is bought and sold is decided elsewhere.

[RichC]

I think Henderson is a prime example that Rodgers can change his mind on players and is willing to give chances.

Sakho just needs to get his head down and work if he does that then he's every chance of having a good career at Anfield

[frank the tank]

I think Henderson is a prime example that Rodgers can change his mind on players and is willing to give chances.

Sakho just needs to get his head down and work if he does that then he's every chance of having a good career at Anfield

[dom9]

I think Henderson is a prime example that Rodgers can change his mind on players and is willing to give chances.

Sakho just needs to get his head down and work if he does that then he's every chance of having a good career at Anfield

Indeed. The manager spends almost every day with these guys. In training, in one on one meetings, team meetings, travelling, watching them play in the games (the bit which we can also see obviously, but the operative word being "bit"). He's got way more insight into whether a player is good enough to play than just about everyone else.

But this debate is more about whether Rodgers wanted Sakho in the first place.

I'll do some more digging later if I get a chance.

[Shaggy]

I think Henderson is a prime example that Rodgers can change his mind on players and is willing to give chances.

Sakho just needs to get his head down and work if he does that then he's every chance of having a good career at Anfield

Agree with this - Brendan has shown is willing to give players a chance - but I also agree to a point with G. We have a transfer committee and Brendan has to agree to every player that signs, sure. But he can give his blessing to any incoming transfer with varying degrees of enthusiasm. It seems clear there are targets and signings that are more driven by Brendan, and others who are more driven by the committee. I'm sure Brendan gave the nod to Sakho but I can't imagine it was the same degree of enthusiasm and agreement than with, say, Lovren.

There's been a few signings that appear more down to the work of the committee - Luis Alberto, Assaidi, Sahin and now Sakho. Only my opinion.