Every season it seems there is a player in the Liverpool squad who has the supporters exclaiming “Why does the manager keep selecting him? Can’t he see the player is useless?” The very sight of those players’ names on the team sheet would have supporters writing off their team’s chances and groans would accompany every misplaced pass, missed scoring chance or defensive cock-up that followed. Last season, that player was undoubtedly Lucas. In the past the mantle has gone to the likes of Cheyrou in 2002-03, Biscan in 2003-04, Josemi and later Pellegrino in 2004-05, Crouch in the first half of 2005-06, and Pennant in the first half of 2006-07.
In 2007-08, that player was Andriy Voronin.
When news broke last summer of Voronin’s loan move to Berlin, I was elated and relieved at the removal of the possibility of the player being selected. The only disappointment for me was that the move wasn’t permanent but I was optimistic it would become so eventually.
Now, following the player’s worrying proclamations of his determination to return and conquer the Premiership, I had the nightmarish experience of seeing him back in the red shirt against St Gallen on Wednesday night and it looks as though the Ukrainian will be back in the squad for the forthcoming season.
I am trying to be fair in how I view that proposition. In 2007-08, I developed such apathy for the player but was it justified?
Voronin arrived in the same summer as Fernando Torres and was always going to suffer by comparison. Already at the club were crowd-favourite Peter Crouch and Dirk Kuyt who had yet to be converted into a right-sided midfielder. For me, all three should have been selected before Voronin and so it became an instant irritation whenever Voronin got in the first team.
That season, Liverpool entered September top of the Premiership with the 6-0 rout of Derby leading supporters to wonder whether we might finally offer a title challenge. Then Rafa “rested” Torres for back to back League games against Portsmouth and Birmingham selecting Voronin instead and consecutive nil-nils followed. In both games, Voronin missed clear cut chances and wasted further opportunities to give us a lead. We would never occupy top spot again that season and from that point reverted to our accustomed status as onlookers in the title race. From that moment I began to think the player was not good enough for our football club and that sense increased with every ineffective performance that followed.
Seeing the player repeatedly selected ahead of crowd-favourite (and the far more effective) Peter Crouch – a factor that ultimately forced the beanpole striker to quit Anfield for Portsmouth – really compounded my frustrations.
I remember exploding with rage (metaphorically obviously) during the 1-1 draw with Arsenal in the Champions League quarter-final first leg when after replacing Torres late in the game, Voronin stood lazily ball-watching as an Arsenal player sauntered past him. I couldn’t believe that a player brought on to keep possession in the Arsenal half as the clock wound down could threaten everything his teammates had achieved up to that point by showing such indifference to an Arsenal attack and I launched into a venomous tirade about how the player was not fit to wear the shirt. I couldn’t understand why the manager didn’t share my frustrations or why he had brought on Voronin instead of Crouch.
By the end of the campaign, I felt such resentment for the player that I refused to even celebrate his goals against Blackburn and Tottenham. When the summer came, I was desperate for him to be off-loaded.
Ironically, there were times last season when I was forced to concede it might have been better for Liverpool to have retained Voronin in their squad given the lack of attacking resources available in Torres’ absence through injury. Indeed it is difficult to see how Voronin might have been worse than Keane in the first half of the season, while in the second half he might have proven a better attacking option to replace Torres than Babel. However, that reflects more on the standard of the backup strikers than it does on my valuation of Voronin’s talents.
With no sign of Rafa bringing in another striker and, based on the evidence of Wednesday night, with no indication the likes of Nemeth and Pacheco are ready for the step up into the first team, maybe Voronin will have his uses next season. The worry is that the manager will use him more than is necessary as he did in September 2007 and if that happens then who knows, maybe Voronin will once again become that player about whom the supporters exclaim “Why does the manager keep selecting him? Can’t he see the player is useless?” At least it will give Lucas a break!
Saturday, 18 July 2009
Karma
Poor old Chelsea ("old" being the key word these days). Can you imagine how irritating, frustrating and ultimately concerning Man City's pursuit of John Terry must be for them? There they were minding their own business and focussing on trying to improve for next season, when some third-rate club that was never previously considered a rival attracts some mad rich bloke intent on frittering away his personal fortune with no chance of a financial return on his investment and suddenly this cocky other club are waging a very public campaign to unsettle Chelsea's best player and captain offering him mega money and promises of success if he quits his "spiritual" home and signs for them.
What goes around comes around.
What goes around comes around.
Monday, 13 July 2009
Xabi or not Xabi: that is the question
I’ve heard that the Japanese use the same word to mean “crisis” and “opportunity”. Whether it’s true or not I can’t say but there is certainly truth in the suggestion the two are related.
Today the Liverpool Echo reported that Xabi Alonso has told Benitez he wants to leave Liverpool to join Real Madrid. If true, that plunges Liverpool into a crisis. Alonso is a key player in Benitez’s side. Much of the attacking play goes through him and he is critical to making the preferred formation (4-2-2-1-1), which gets the best out of players like Steven Gerrard and Dirk Kuyt, so successful. When Lucas and Mascherano have played together, the formation doesn’t work so well but pair Alonso with either and it works (albeit much better when Alonso is paired with Mascherano).
With Man Ure and Chelsea entering transitional seasons and Arsenal treading water, Liverpool have an excellent chance of ending their 20-year title drought if they can retain the successful elements from last season’s team. Alonso was undoubtedly one of those key elements.
If Alonso can be persuaded to stay or Real are not prepared to meet Liverpool’s £35 million valuation for the player, Rafa should keep him at Anfield for another year. However, if Alonso is determined to go and Real offer £35 million, it would be understandable for Rafa to let him go.
What impact the Spaniards departure has on the immediate fortunes of the club then depends on how Rafa exploits the opportunity it presents. Reinvest the money well and Liverpool could end up Champions in which case we will all reflect that Alonso’s defection was one of the best things that could have happened to the club. Squander the money and we will look like a badly managed club whose best players want away and can be prized away.
Not replacing Alonso is not an option. There is insufficient quality and depth in the squad to cope without a replacement. Lucas cannot fill Alonso’s boots while Jay Spearing is a different sort of player entirely and Plessis is inferior even to Lucas. However, it is not necessarily the case that Rafa would need to buy a like-for-like replacement.
Players like Alonso are not easy to find and even tougher to sign. If one could be purchased who was similar in style and quality – and I can’t think of a single player in Europe who fits that description – it would reduce the impact of the change on the rest of the team. The 4-2-2-1-1 formation could stay and for most players there would be stability in terms of tactics, positions, etc.
A different solution might be to drop Gerrard back into midfield and sign a striker or forward to play either behind Torres where Gerrard has played or up front with him in a 4-4-2 formation. 4-4-2 would get the best out of Gerrard’s attacking capabilities if he were dropped back to play alongside Mascherano. While Gerrard is good enough to play anywhere on the park, I believe you get more out of Gerrard by giving him a free role and certainly his partnership with Torres is one of the best around. However, David Villa has also struck up a fine partnership with Torres for Spain. If he could be signed for £30 million, Liverpool would get plenty of goals from Spain’s front two while Gerrard would contribute more goals than Alonso ever did from midfield.
Bringing in a highly sought after big star like Villa would dispel any notion that we were in decline and selling our best players – it would simply look like good business.
As sorry as I would be to see Alonso go, the facts are he has had one excellent season and two lousy ones in the last three years; he has never scored as regularly as he should, and he is something of a liability when it comes to zonal marking (as Tim Cahill and Branislav Ivanovic exposed last season). I would rather he stayed but losing him doesn’t have to be a crisis if Rafa makes the most of the opportunity it presents.
Today the Liverpool Echo reported that Xabi Alonso has told Benitez he wants to leave Liverpool to join Real Madrid. If true, that plunges Liverpool into a crisis. Alonso is a key player in Benitez’s side. Much of the attacking play goes through him and he is critical to making the preferred formation (4-2-2-1-1), which gets the best out of players like Steven Gerrard and Dirk Kuyt, so successful. When Lucas and Mascherano have played together, the formation doesn’t work so well but pair Alonso with either and it works (albeit much better when Alonso is paired with Mascherano).
With Man Ure and Chelsea entering transitional seasons and Arsenal treading water, Liverpool have an excellent chance of ending their 20-year title drought if they can retain the successful elements from last season’s team. Alonso was undoubtedly one of those key elements.
If Alonso can be persuaded to stay or Real are not prepared to meet Liverpool’s £35 million valuation for the player, Rafa should keep him at Anfield for another year. However, if Alonso is determined to go and Real offer £35 million, it would be understandable for Rafa to let him go.
What impact the Spaniards departure has on the immediate fortunes of the club then depends on how Rafa exploits the opportunity it presents. Reinvest the money well and Liverpool could end up Champions in which case we will all reflect that Alonso’s defection was one of the best things that could have happened to the club. Squander the money and we will look like a badly managed club whose best players want away and can be prized away.
Not replacing Alonso is not an option. There is insufficient quality and depth in the squad to cope without a replacement. Lucas cannot fill Alonso’s boots while Jay Spearing is a different sort of player entirely and Plessis is inferior even to Lucas. However, it is not necessarily the case that Rafa would need to buy a like-for-like replacement.
Players like Alonso are not easy to find and even tougher to sign. If one could be purchased who was similar in style and quality – and I can’t think of a single player in Europe who fits that description – it would reduce the impact of the change on the rest of the team. The 4-2-2-1-1 formation could stay and for most players there would be stability in terms of tactics, positions, etc.
A different solution might be to drop Gerrard back into midfield and sign a striker or forward to play either behind Torres where Gerrard has played or up front with him in a 4-4-2 formation. 4-4-2 would get the best out of Gerrard’s attacking capabilities if he were dropped back to play alongside Mascherano. While Gerrard is good enough to play anywhere on the park, I believe you get more out of Gerrard by giving him a free role and certainly his partnership with Torres is one of the best around. However, David Villa has also struck up a fine partnership with Torres for Spain. If he could be signed for £30 million, Liverpool would get plenty of goals from Spain’s front two while Gerrard would contribute more goals than Alonso ever did from midfield.
Bringing in a highly sought after big star like Villa would dispel any notion that we were in decline and selling our best players – it would simply look like good business.
As sorry as I would be to see Alonso go, the facts are he has had one excellent season and two lousy ones in the last three years; he has never scored as regularly as he should, and he is something of a liability when it comes to zonal marking (as Tim Cahill and Branislav Ivanovic exposed last season). I would rather he stayed but losing him doesn’t have to be a crisis if Rafa makes the most of the opportunity it presents.
Thursday, 9 July 2009
Are Madrid for Real?
Just who the hell do Real Madrid think they are? Last week their club President was imposing deadlines of “until August” to complete the signing of Xabi Alonso and this week their director general, Jorge Valdano is moaning that Liverpool’s valuation of their player is “too high for our tastes, and, therefore, we see the player further away now. But everything can be turned back around.”
Does Valdano think his comments will inspire Liverpool to lower their valuation just so a player who the Liverpool manager views as key to his plans and whom the club does not want to sell, can join Madrid? What does Valdano mean by “further away”? Exactly how far away is “NOT FOR SALE” and how is that “further away” than on 14th June when Liverpool released an official statement on 14th June stating:
“Despite repeated media speculation on the futures of Xabi Alonso and Javier Mascherano, Liverpool has received no official approach or offer from any club regarding the players.
"Neither is for sale and furthermore Liverpool has no interest in the long list of Spanish based players being linked with a move to Anfield as part of any deal."
Real’s tactic is simple: ignore the player’s current club’s willingness to sell the player and seduce the player through the media in the expectation that the player will demand the ‘dream’ transfer.
That is why Real, for all their talk of signing Alonso, have never actually made Liverpool an official bid for the player. That is why Kaka was shamefully used to urge Alonso to join him in Madrid during his post-signing press conference. That is why Perez and Valdano have continually disregarded Liverpool’s stance that the player is not for sale by talking about a “potential” transfer.
The sad truth is, over the years, this same approach has proven repeatedly successful. Hopefully, Alonso will reject their overtures but if he did ask to be allowed to join Real, Liverpool would be well within their rights to demand that on top of Alonso’s proper transfer value, they receive suitable compensation for the inconvenience in having to replace a key player with whom the club did not wish to part company. If Real were prepared to pay £80 million for Cristiano Ronaldo and £56 million for Kaka, I would estimate Alonso’s current value to be in the region of £30 million. With compensation added, that figure should increase to somewhere between £40-45 million.
Given Real have ripped us off three times previously – paying nothing for McManaman, paying a derisory £8.5 million for Owen and throwing in Nunez as part of the Owen deal – we should screw them for every last penny if they force us to deal over Alonso. Or better still, just tell them to sod off.
Does Valdano think his comments will inspire Liverpool to lower their valuation just so a player who the Liverpool manager views as key to his plans and whom the club does not want to sell, can join Madrid? What does Valdano mean by “further away”? Exactly how far away is “NOT FOR SALE” and how is that “further away” than on 14th June when Liverpool released an official statement on 14th June stating:
“Despite repeated media speculation on the futures of Xabi Alonso and Javier Mascherano, Liverpool has received no official approach or offer from any club regarding the players.
"Neither is for sale and furthermore Liverpool has no interest in the long list of Spanish based players being linked with a move to Anfield as part of any deal."
Real’s tactic is simple: ignore the player’s current club’s willingness to sell the player and seduce the player through the media in the expectation that the player will demand the ‘dream’ transfer.
That is why Real, for all their talk of signing Alonso, have never actually made Liverpool an official bid for the player. That is why Kaka was shamefully used to urge Alonso to join him in Madrid during his post-signing press conference. That is why Perez and Valdano have continually disregarded Liverpool’s stance that the player is not for sale by talking about a “potential” transfer.
The sad truth is, over the years, this same approach has proven repeatedly successful. Hopefully, Alonso will reject their overtures but if he did ask to be allowed to join Real, Liverpool would be well within their rights to demand that on top of Alonso’s proper transfer value, they receive suitable compensation for the inconvenience in having to replace a key player with whom the club did not wish to part company. If Real were prepared to pay £80 million for Cristiano Ronaldo and £56 million for Kaka, I would estimate Alonso’s current value to be in the region of £30 million. With compensation added, that figure should increase to somewhere between £40-45 million.
Given Real have ripped us off three times previously – paying nothing for McManaman, paying a derisory £8.5 million for Owen and throwing in Nunez as part of the Owen deal – we should screw them for every last penny if they force us to deal over Alonso. Or better still, just tell them to sod off.
Monday, 6 July 2009
Assessing the "threat" from City
A few people have told me they expect Man City to challenge for a top four spot next season with some going as far as to suggest they’ll be contenders for the title. I can’t see it myself. Chelsea have proven it is possible to buy success and it may well happen for City in the not too distant future but I believe next season and the season after are too soon for it to happen.
When Abramovich purchased Chelsea, they had just finished in the top four and already had players such as Fat Frank Lampard and John Terry who would be key players in the success the club went onto achieve. By comparison, City finished 9th in the season before the Arab bought in and their best players were probably Micah Richards and Richard Dunne. With all due respect, it’s hard to see that pair being key to a title-winning campaign.
Despite being in a better position and shape than City when the respective money men arrived, it took Chelsea a season of progress and the spending of over £200 million on players before the league was eventually won. It should also be noted that in the season Chelsea did win the league and the one that followed, they were significantly aided by the strength (or comparative lack of) of their opponents. At that time, Man Ure were in transition having finished outside the top 2 twice in the previous 3 seasons; Arsenal were defending champions which, given they have failed to retain the title in 9 attempts since 1938, effectively ruled them out, and Liverpool were as far away from challenging for the title as they had been since the Souness years.
City will need to compete with a Man United side that has just won 3 league’s on the bounce and reached 2 consecutive Champions League Finals; a resurgent Liverpool that just achieved the unwanted distinction of becoming the best performing team not to win the league title; a Chelsea side containing some of the best players of 5 years ago and still likely to spend big on quality players before the summer ends, and an Arsenal side which, despite looking incapable of challenging the other three next season, hasn’t finished outside the top four under Arsene Wenger (13 seasons now). The big four are, along with Barca and possibly Real next season, currently the strongest teams in Europe with each having reached at least one Champions League Final in the last four seasons. That is the size of the task facing City.
Watching City’s antics in this transfer window has so far provoked a variety of reactions: a sense of jealousy at the unlimited spending money at their disposal; annoyance that it enables them to bid for players of a calibre they have not earned the right to attract, and amusement when those same players flatly reject them.
Kaka, Samuel Eto’o, Carlos Tevez, John Terry… These are all players too good to ever turn out for Man City. To their credit, Kaka and Eto’o have recognised that fact and proven that classy footballers would rather earn sky-high salaries at European super clubs than earn super sky high salaries at a team few on the continent have even heard of.
It begs the questions, just what sort of player would sign for City and, where does that leave them looking ahead to next season?
It seems unlikely John Terry would consider swapping Chelsea for City but should, as the media claim he is likely to, Carlos Tevez move to the City of Manchester Stadium, he would be doing so for one reason alone – money. Tevez complained over his lack of first team action at Old Trafford after Berbatov was signed for £30 million to increase competition that already included Wayne Rooney and Cristiano Ronaldo. City already have Robinho, Santa-Cruz, Bellamy, Jo and Benjani and were hoping to sign Eto’o as well as Tevez. True, Tevez would expect to figure ahead of the likes of Bellamy, Jo and Benjani but there are no guarantees he will figure more than Robinho, Santa-Cruz and anyone else they sign between now and the closure of the transfer window. Throw in the fact that, having failed to qualify for any European competition next season, City will play fewer games than Man Ure average each season and it is clear that City represents a huge risk if first team football is high on Tevez’s list of priorities.
The truth is, any player good enough to be wanted by the top clubs in Europe is going to choose to play for one of the top clubs in Europe unless they value money over prestige, success and involvement in the Champions League.
That means the only players City can hope to sign are the self-interested mercenaries out there. Will those players give every ounce of sweat for the City cause? No. Will those players care where the club finishes next season? No. Will those players have respect for a manager like Mark Hughes who, with all due respect, is hardly one of the stellar names in football management? No. Will those players even deign to return from international duty on time? Possibly not and yes, I am referring to Robinho.
City’s transfer strategy limits them to players of a certain type of mentality of which Robinho is the embodiment. Disloyal, disrespectful and disinterested in everything other than their bank balance. Money will buy many things but they do not include team spirit, respect for club traditions, motivation and determination to succeed.
For that reason, give me a Dirk Kuyt over a Robinho any day.
When Abramovich purchased Chelsea, they had just finished in the top four and already had players such as Fat Frank Lampard and John Terry who would be key players in the success the club went onto achieve. By comparison, City finished 9th in the season before the Arab bought in and their best players were probably Micah Richards and Richard Dunne. With all due respect, it’s hard to see that pair being key to a title-winning campaign.
Despite being in a better position and shape than City when the respective money men arrived, it took Chelsea a season of progress and the spending of over £200 million on players before the league was eventually won. It should also be noted that in the season Chelsea did win the league and the one that followed, they were significantly aided by the strength (or comparative lack of) of their opponents. At that time, Man Ure were in transition having finished outside the top 2 twice in the previous 3 seasons; Arsenal were defending champions which, given they have failed to retain the title in 9 attempts since 1938, effectively ruled them out, and Liverpool were as far away from challenging for the title as they had been since the Souness years.
City will need to compete with a Man United side that has just won 3 league’s on the bounce and reached 2 consecutive Champions League Finals; a resurgent Liverpool that just achieved the unwanted distinction of becoming the best performing team not to win the league title; a Chelsea side containing some of the best players of 5 years ago and still likely to spend big on quality players before the summer ends, and an Arsenal side which, despite looking incapable of challenging the other three next season, hasn’t finished outside the top four under Arsene Wenger (13 seasons now). The big four are, along with Barca and possibly Real next season, currently the strongest teams in Europe with each having reached at least one Champions League Final in the last four seasons. That is the size of the task facing City.
Watching City’s antics in this transfer window has so far provoked a variety of reactions: a sense of jealousy at the unlimited spending money at their disposal; annoyance that it enables them to bid for players of a calibre they have not earned the right to attract, and amusement when those same players flatly reject them.
Kaka, Samuel Eto’o, Carlos Tevez, John Terry… These are all players too good to ever turn out for Man City. To their credit, Kaka and Eto’o have recognised that fact and proven that classy footballers would rather earn sky-high salaries at European super clubs than earn super sky high salaries at a team few on the continent have even heard of.
It begs the questions, just what sort of player would sign for City and, where does that leave them looking ahead to next season?
It seems unlikely John Terry would consider swapping Chelsea for City but should, as the media claim he is likely to, Carlos Tevez move to the City of Manchester Stadium, he would be doing so for one reason alone – money. Tevez complained over his lack of first team action at Old Trafford after Berbatov was signed for £30 million to increase competition that already included Wayne Rooney and Cristiano Ronaldo. City already have Robinho, Santa-Cruz, Bellamy, Jo and Benjani and were hoping to sign Eto’o as well as Tevez. True, Tevez would expect to figure ahead of the likes of Bellamy, Jo and Benjani but there are no guarantees he will figure more than Robinho, Santa-Cruz and anyone else they sign between now and the closure of the transfer window. Throw in the fact that, having failed to qualify for any European competition next season, City will play fewer games than Man Ure average each season and it is clear that City represents a huge risk if first team football is high on Tevez’s list of priorities.
The truth is, any player good enough to be wanted by the top clubs in Europe is going to choose to play for one of the top clubs in Europe unless they value money over prestige, success and involvement in the Champions League.
That means the only players City can hope to sign are the self-interested mercenaries out there. Will those players give every ounce of sweat for the City cause? No. Will those players care where the club finishes next season? No. Will those players have respect for a manager like Mark Hughes who, with all due respect, is hardly one of the stellar names in football management? No. Will those players even deign to return from international duty on time? Possibly not and yes, I am referring to Robinho.
City’s transfer strategy limits them to players of a certain type of mentality of which Robinho is the embodiment. Disloyal, disrespectful and disinterested in everything other than their bank balance. Money will buy many things but they do not include team spirit, respect for club traditions, motivation and determination to succeed.
For that reason, give me a Dirk Kuyt over a Robinho any day.
Friday, 3 July 2009
Michael Owen - the worst kind of scum
What an absolute little shit Michael Owen is.
It was Liverpool Football Club that turned him from being a school boy in Chester to being a multi-millionaire and global superstar and he repays us by signing for our biggest and most hated rivals.
What goes through that stupid boy’s mind? He doesn’t need the money and he’s got nothing to prove to the England manager (who basically doesn’t rate him) so why permanently alienate all Liverpool fans who may in time have forgiven his defection to Madrid and come to remember him as the boy who scored the goals that won the FA Cup.
Is he hoping to finally win a league medal by making just enough appearances sandwiched around his annual spate of injuries? And if he was to win that medal through being in the right squad at the right time rather than as a result of his own ability and efforts, will that really justify betraying fans who once idolised him, chanted his name and paid his wages?
Did he fail to heed the fact that the last man to play for both clubs, Paul Ince, ended up despised by both sets of supporters? Does he think Old Trafford’s prawn sandwich brigade will be any more tolerant of his impotent performances on returns from injury than the self-styled ‘best fans in the world’, a.k.a. the Toon Army, were?
Given the player was a free-agent having fleeced Newcastle worse than he did Liverpool, I had considered whether he might be a decent signing for us but concluded he would not. For every goal spree he enjoyed in his time at Liverpool, the player endured a hapless period where chances were squandered and the team suffered. 2000-2001 was probably his best season beginning in form with 6 goals in the first 5 games and ending on fire with 9 in the last 6 including that brace against Arsenal at the Millennium Stadium. Overall that season, Owen netted a then personal best 24 goals but it is easy to overlook the fact that from November to February inclusive, he scored just 5 goals. That four-month period included some memorably impotent performances against Middlesbrough at home (0-0) and Crystal Palace away (1-2) which had Clinton Morrison mocking Owen’s finishing.
Then there were the penalties. In Houllier’s final season at the club, Owen’s inability to convert a spot-kick led to our elimination from the FA Cup to newly promoted Portsmouth. In total, Owen took 23 penalties for the club in competitive games scoring just 13 – a pathetic conversion rate of just 57%.
I can’t help but think back to the second-leg Champions League quarter-final of 2002 – regarded by many as the moment Houllier’s reign went into decline. In most people’s eyes, Houllier’s substitution of Dietmar Hamann for Vladimir Smicer was the reason we lost the late winner that saw Bayer Leverkusen triumph 4-3 on aggregate but earlier in that game Michael Owen missed a series of very presentable chances including one-on-ones that, if converted, might have seen Liverpool progress comfortably. Had we progressed, Houllier’s claim that we were “10 games from greatness” might have been proven correct. Of course, it might not have but the point remains that Owen’s profligacy meant we never got to find out.
When we won the Champions League in 2005, beating Bayer Leverkusen en route, the key factor was that players scored goals at crucial times. That wins you the biggest prizes just as missing the big chances when they come along leads to failure.
Given Owen’s proneness to injury, frequent spells of poor form, and the simple fact that Rafa wouldn’t want that type of player in his Liverpool team, I concluded that I would not want to see Michael back at Anfield. By that token, I should conclude he will prove inadequate for Man Ure but if I am wrong and he has an Indian summer left in his career, from our point of view he is at the worst possible club to experience it.
Personally I wish him two trophyless years of injuries, missed chances, dreadful form and comically unsuccessful penalties resulting in apathy from the Mancs to go with the contempt he has now earned from us. On the positive side, in every season since 1997 the team Michael has played in has failed to win the League so let’s hope that continues until 2011.
It was Liverpool Football Club that turned him from being a school boy in Chester to being a multi-millionaire and global superstar and he repays us by signing for our biggest and most hated rivals.
What goes through that stupid boy’s mind? He doesn’t need the money and he’s got nothing to prove to the England manager (who basically doesn’t rate him) so why permanently alienate all Liverpool fans who may in time have forgiven his defection to Madrid and come to remember him as the boy who scored the goals that won the FA Cup.
Is he hoping to finally win a league medal by making just enough appearances sandwiched around his annual spate of injuries? And if he was to win that medal through being in the right squad at the right time rather than as a result of his own ability and efforts, will that really justify betraying fans who once idolised him, chanted his name and paid his wages?
Did he fail to heed the fact that the last man to play for both clubs, Paul Ince, ended up despised by both sets of supporters? Does he think Old Trafford’s prawn sandwich brigade will be any more tolerant of his impotent performances on returns from injury than the self-styled ‘best fans in the world’, a.k.a. the Toon Army, were?
Given the player was a free-agent having fleeced Newcastle worse than he did Liverpool, I had considered whether he might be a decent signing for us but concluded he would not. For every goal spree he enjoyed in his time at Liverpool, the player endured a hapless period where chances were squandered and the team suffered. 2000-2001 was probably his best season beginning in form with 6 goals in the first 5 games and ending on fire with 9 in the last 6 including that brace against Arsenal at the Millennium Stadium. Overall that season, Owen netted a then personal best 24 goals but it is easy to overlook the fact that from November to February inclusive, he scored just 5 goals. That four-month period included some memorably impotent performances against Middlesbrough at home (0-0) and Crystal Palace away (1-2) which had Clinton Morrison mocking Owen’s finishing.
Then there were the penalties. In Houllier’s final season at the club, Owen’s inability to convert a spot-kick led to our elimination from the FA Cup to newly promoted Portsmouth. In total, Owen took 23 penalties for the club in competitive games scoring just 13 – a pathetic conversion rate of just 57%.
I can’t help but think back to the second-leg Champions League quarter-final of 2002 – regarded by many as the moment Houllier’s reign went into decline. In most people’s eyes, Houllier’s substitution of Dietmar Hamann for Vladimir Smicer was the reason we lost the late winner that saw Bayer Leverkusen triumph 4-3 on aggregate but earlier in that game Michael Owen missed a series of very presentable chances including one-on-ones that, if converted, might have seen Liverpool progress comfortably. Had we progressed, Houllier’s claim that we were “10 games from greatness” might have been proven correct. Of course, it might not have but the point remains that Owen’s profligacy meant we never got to find out.
When we won the Champions League in 2005, beating Bayer Leverkusen en route, the key factor was that players scored goals at crucial times. That wins you the biggest prizes just as missing the big chances when they come along leads to failure.
Given Owen’s proneness to injury, frequent spells of poor form, and the simple fact that Rafa wouldn’t want that type of player in his Liverpool team, I concluded that I would not want to see Michael back at Anfield. By that token, I should conclude he will prove inadequate for Man Ure but if I am wrong and he has an Indian summer left in his career, from our point of view he is at the worst possible club to experience it.
Personally I wish him two trophyless years of injuries, missed chances, dreadful form and comically unsuccessful penalties resulting in apathy from the Mancs to go with the contempt he has now earned from us. On the positive side, in every season since 1997 the team Michael has played in has failed to win the League so let’s hope that continues until 2011.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
