Liverpool FC's Academy is world famous. Producing young stars like Steven Gerrard, Michael Owen and lately Daniel Pacheco and Emiliano Insua. The site in Kirkby has been the home to many young players since it was built in 1998, leaving Melwood as the reachable dream.
As the young are snapped up quick in modern football, they are promised much and encouraged to dream as richly as they can. The top of the game is theirs for the taking, the cup wins, the glory and the money. But have we let ourselves down at Liverpool FC?
Yes, it is still one of the premier clubs to train in as a young player, but do we have what it takes to offer them the dream they crave?
This summer has seen the club sell or try to sell several of it's young stars. Eniliano Insua very nearly made the switch to Serie A, talks broke down over personal terms with Fiorentina. Krisztián Németh, a very talented finisher, from Hungary, sold for purely financial reasons, Liverpool FC stated. Mikel San José Dominguez, sold to Athletic Bilboa, another talented youngster who wanted away. Daniel Pacheco, the star of the U-19 European Championships, finished top goal scorer, scoring in the final, has courted a transfer back to Spain. Chris Mavinga, the rising talent from PSG, has revealed dissatisfaction at not being picked despite winning the U-19 European Championships.
It seems that the youngsters are rebeling with the departure of Rafa Benitez, a man who must have promised them much only to be sacked. Is it only natural for these players to want to transfer away or do they hold bitterness towards a club who promised much but can only deliver a little.
With the sale of Nemeth to Olympiacos, we see a sale garnered purely for financial reasons, something not that familiar at Liverpool a few years ago.
What we have to be realisic about is that our youth are going to want to catch the glory and currently at Liverpool FC, we can't offer them that. I'm sure the years ahead will be much more fruitful, but I can't help wondering if the youth will be far gone by then.
Thursday 26 August 2010
Wednesday 25 August 2010
Hicks and the £230 million wallet.
It was revealed yesterday that the co-owner of Liverpool FC, Tom Hicks, has asked for a loan of £230 million. This loan is supposedly for his acquisition company, Hicks Acquisition II. The newspaper article suggested that Hicks has several investors lined up for some takeover or purchase.
As revealed earlier in the year by Business Week, Hicks has set up this second company buy no information is available for what exactly it will be used for. http://j.mp/dlftTs
The figures to have a similarity to the £230 million of loan that Hicks & Gillet owe RBS. does this mean that Hicks intends on paying off the loan and splitting the club into multiple owners? Or does he intend to buy out Gillet and pay off some of the loan due on October 6th? I suppose we will not be told until the money is used.
Rules and regulations state that an acquisition company can only be running for 11 months before being liquidated and the shares redeemed. So Hicks has many more months before he is pushed to a decision.
With the bid war seemingly spiralling into trash talk, can Liverpool FC afford to see any more financial tinkering under Hicks? Should we be pressuring the board to accept the one bid that has apparently passed Due Diligence? With Kenny Huang admitting that "not scrap of paper was submitted to Liverpool FC" for CIC's bid, can we trust a board who would not release any information to the fans?
This money that Hicks has set up is a large amount and can only be planned for either Liverpool FC or another venture. If it is used for Liverpool FC then I fear for the financial security as any more money given to a man who has claimed bankruptcy is wild money.
As events off the pitch reach a low similar to that of last season, fans are left wondering if anyone will want to sort out the mess that Liverpool FC is now in. Strapped for cash and finding form difficult, we face an uncertain future, made more uncertain by the loan of £230 million to Tom Hicks. A man who has ran a once streamlined club into the ground and has bankrupted a sporting giant in the States.
We can only hold out hope and continue to fight.
As revealed earlier in the year by Business Week, Hicks has set up this second company buy no information is available for what exactly it will be used for. http://j.mp/dlftTs
The figures to have a similarity to the £230 million of loan that Hicks & Gillet owe RBS. does this mean that Hicks intends on paying off the loan and splitting the club into multiple owners? Or does he intend to buy out Gillet and pay off some of the loan due on October 6th? I suppose we will not be told until the money is used.
Rules and regulations state that an acquisition company can only be running for 11 months before being liquidated and the shares redeemed. So Hicks has many more months before he is pushed to a decision.
With the bid war seemingly spiralling into trash talk, can Liverpool FC afford to see any more financial tinkering under Hicks? Should we be pressuring the board to accept the one bid that has apparently passed Due Diligence? With Kenny Huang admitting that "not scrap of paper was submitted to Liverpool FC" for CIC's bid, can we trust a board who would not release any information to the fans?
This money that Hicks has set up is a large amount and can only be planned for either Liverpool FC or another venture. If it is used for Liverpool FC then I fear for the financial security as any more money given to a man who has claimed bankruptcy is wild money.
As events off the pitch reach a low similar to that of last season, fans are left wondering if anyone will want to sort out the mess that Liverpool FC is now in. Strapped for cash and finding form difficult, we face an uncertain future, made more uncertain by the loan of £230 million to Tom Hicks. A man who has ran a once streamlined club into the ground and has bankrupted a sporting giant in the States.
We can only hold out hope and continue to fight.
Tuesday 24 August 2010
Manchester City FC v Liverpool FC 23/08/2010
Last night was a night of football that I have rarely seen from Liverpool FC. We were hampered on the ball, lacklustre in defence, visionless in midfield and closed down too easy up front. With the flow of the game always in Manchester City FC's favour, we never looked like we got out of second gear.
We can't escape the news that emerged from Melwood, Mascherano would not only like to leave, he would like to be seated in the stands, unplayable due to a reason we know nothing about. We can only assume that he is aggrieved we haven't tried to sell him as much as he would like. Mascherano has a long history of discontent if nothing is going his way. The paltry offer from Barcelona, £13 million plus Hleb, is deemed by all of Liverpool to be a bit of an insult. This is a player who is captain of his country and one of the finest midfielders of his generation. Did this affect the player's ability to perform on the pitch? We will never know but it must have had some impact.
The game itself was full of frustration. Easily dominated in the midfield due to the powerful influence of Yaya Toure and the decent positioning of Barry, it was always going to be too much for Gerrard to comfortably leave Lucas alone. Micah Richards was a powerhouse and frequently bullied Torres off the ball, Ngog did not fare much better against an improved Kompany and Lescott. The wings constantly cut inside and made the play far too narrow which suited the five-man City midfield. Jovanovic did little but run around and created no link up play between Agger and Torres, for me the Jury is still out on him as I have seen little of the former Belgian player of the year to warrant the hype.
Manchester City's fluid lines and simple triangles put pressure on the rigidity of the straight 4-4-2 that Hodgson implemented. Before the match I was expectant of a creative partnership between Ngog and Torres. The reality was a lack of understanding between the two forwards, there was no spark nor one pass to get inspired by. Tevez on the other hand was much improved, providing the essential link between the midfield and the final third. He constantly dropped deep and built an attack by passing the ball into a heavy midfield then creating space behind Liverpool's defence. Toure provided the neccessary passing excellence when Tevez surged forward, frequently finding Milner or Adam Johnson who gave both our full backs a torrid night.
Glen Johnson provided much of the nights frustrations as he seemed to hesitate on the ball for too long, was caught in possession and failed to track Milner or Adam Johnson when they switched. He looked uninspired and nervous passing it forward. To be fair to him the person who should have been immediately infront of him was Kuyt, who ran much of the game from the middle of the park, ending up behind Johnson.
The only decent chances Liverpool had, shots by Gerrard out side the box, and a shot by Torres were either blocked by defenders or saved dramatically well by Hart. That was Liverpool's best spell and it included Gerrard getting into a decent space and servicing the players in the box, when we lost the ball though, we looked very fragile as we missed the reading of the game of a Mascherano style figure and were subject to a swift counter attack.
3-0 doesn't flatter Manchester City. The first goal, a Milner pull back for a Barry finesse finish, was simply poor positioning by Kuyt and Skrtel. The Micah Richards/Tevez header/faint touch was down to, dare I say it, poor goalkeeping by Reina! He looked like he was sucked into the arrival of Tevez. A penalty, finished off the scoring, in my opinion, the penalty was very soft to concede. Adam Johnson looked very unsteady on his feet and really, should have been left to it by Skrtel as he was unlikely to get a decent cross in.
The 4-4-2 that Hodgson tried, failed so utterly that I would be very surprised to ever see it erected again with the current squad. If Mascherano had played then Gerrard may have been more confortable surging forward, knowing that a decent general had anchored himself in the midfield. That loss of a clear link between midfield and attack led to both Torres and Ngog either coming deeper or being serviced by Jovanovic or Kuyt, who looked skittish and unprepared. Hodgson will no doubt resort to the much favourable 4-5-1 without Joe Cole or the 4-2-3-1 with him.
Well done Roy for experimenting and proving all those critics of Liverpool FC's formation wrong. Sky Sports and Newspaper pundits will no doubt be very silent on the idea of a strike partner for Torres now. He is best when supplied from the midfield by a roaming Gerrard style figure.
I know I have painted Manchester City in a very favourable light and, truth is, they were very good, especially on the wings, but Liverpool were so poor by their own standards that any team would have looked good. We need to solve the formation curiosity, buy a left back and sell Mascherano for a decent price.
We can't escape the news that emerged from Melwood, Mascherano would not only like to leave, he would like to be seated in the stands, unplayable due to a reason we know nothing about. We can only assume that he is aggrieved we haven't tried to sell him as much as he would like. Mascherano has a long history of discontent if nothing is going his way. The paltry offer from Barcelona, £13 million plus Hleb, is deemed by all of Liverpool to be a bit of an insult. This is a player who is captain of his country and one of the finest midfielders of his generation. Did this affect the player's ability to perform on the pitch? We will never know but it must have had some impact.
The game itself was full of frustration. Easily dominated in the midfield due to the powerful influence of Yaya Toure and the decent positioning of Barry, it was always going to be too much for Gerrard to comfortably leave Lucas alone. Micah Richards was a powerhouse and frequently bullied Torres off the ball, Ngog did not fare much better against an improved Kompany and Lescott. The wings constantly cut inside and made the play far too narrow which suited the five-man City midfield. Jovanovic did little but run around and created no link up play between Agger and Torres, for me the Jury is still out on him as I have seen little of the former Belgian player of the year to warrant the hype.
Manchester City's fluid lines and simple triangles put pressure on the rigidity of the straight 4-4-2 that Hodgson implemented. Before the match I was expectant of a creative partnership between Ngog and Torres. The reality was a lack of understanding between the two forwards, there was no spark nor one pass to get inspired by. Tevez on the other hand was much improved, providing the essential link between the midfield and the final third. He constantly dropped deep and built an attack by passing the ball into a heavy midfield then creating space behind Liverpool's defence. Toure provided the neccessary passing excellence when Tevez surged forward, frequently finding Milner or Adam Johnson who gave both our full backs a torrid night.
Glen Johnson provided much of the nights frustrations as he seemed to hesitate on the ball for too long, was caught in possession and failed to track Milner or Adam Johnson when they switched. He looked uninspired and nervous passing it forward. To be fair to him the person who should have been immediately infront of him was Kuyt, who ran much of the game from the middle of the park, ending up behind Johnson.
The only decent chances Liverpool had, shots by Gerrard out side the box, and a shot by Torres were either blocked by defenders or saved dramatically well by Hart. That was Liverpool's best spell and it included Gerrard getting into a decent space and servicing the players in the box, when we lost the ball though, we looked very fragile as we missed the reading of the game of a Mascherano style figure and were subject to a swift counter attack.
3-0 doesn't flatter Manchester City. The first goal, a Milner pull back for a Barry finesse finish, was simply poor positioning by Kuyt and Skrtel. The Micah Richards/Tevez header/faint touch was down to, dare I say it, poor goalkeeping by Reina! He looked like he was sucked into the arrival of Tevez. A penalty, finished off the scoring, in my opinion, the penalty was very soft to concede. Adam Johnson looked very unsteady on his feet and really, should have been left to it by Skrtel as he was unlikely to get a decent cross in.
The 4-4-2 that Hodgson tried, failed so utterly that I would be very surprised to ever see it erected again with the current squad. If Mascherano had played then Gerrard may have been more confortable surging forward, knowing that a decent general had anchored himself in the midfield. That loss of a clear link between midfield and attack led to both Torres and Ngog either coming deeper or being serviced by Jovanovic or Kuyt, who looked skittish and unprepared. Hodgson will no doubt resort to the much favourable 4-5-1 without Joe Cole or the 4-2-3-1 with him.
Well done Roy for experimenting and proving all those critics of Liverpool FC's formation wrong. Sky Sports and Newspaper pundits will no doubt be very silent on the idea of a strike partner for Torres now. He is best when supplied from the midfield by a roaming Gerrard style figure.
I know I have painted Manchester City in a very favourable light and, truth is, they were very good, especially on the wings, but Liverpool were so poor by their own standards that any team would have looked good. We need to solve the formation curiosity, buy a left back and sell Mascherano for a decent price.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)