Topic: Objectivity and the January transfer window

[Paul JH]

Reading something before about Carlton Cole possibly joining us in January, and noticed lots of negativity (to be fair, I can see why!) and it got me thinking about the transfer window and if and when we bring in new players.

So far, Hodgsons signings, 3 out of 4 at least, have been poor. Cole hasn't done anything, not helped by the manager telling the world that he's 'not a very confident lad'. And the least said about Konchesky and Poulsen the better. Meireles on the other hand has been great. But the one thing at least two of those have in common is that combined with being poor so far, any mention of them is usually followed by how clueless Hodgson is in his transfers, again, given that three out of four he made have been poor, understandable.

The way things are in here at the moment, with every game followed by the usual doom and gloom regardless of results, or performances (Tottenham away), and in my opinion anyway, there's not much objectivity anymore about anything while Hodgson is in charge, does that mean that any new player that comes in January will be on a hiding to nothing with the fans? i.e. he's a 'Hodgson' signing, and as such, shite?

More than giving him millions to spend in January, it worries me more that players signed by him will have the fans on their case from the off because of people's feelings towards Hodgson.
Obviously, Meireles has been good so far, but then when people praise him, he suddenly WASN'T a Hodgson signing, he was the boards.

I wouldn't give him millions to spend in January, because I'm hoping we get a better manager long term, but if he DOES get money to spend, I don't hold out much hope at the moment for the fans not crucifying whoever he does get after one or two bad performances.

I ask this question because if anything, I think this is the worst we've ever been as a fan-base for welcoming new players. IF we went for Carlton Cole, I can already hear the sighs and moans after his first missed chance...

[JWAlonso]

After all two season's ago, we were linked with the likes of David Villa, David Silva, Aguero ect, now it is Carlton Cole, Chales Nzogabia ect ... Big difference.

[exiledintheusa]

After all two season's ago, we were linked with the likes of David Villa, David Silva, Aguero ect, now it is Carlton Cole, Chales Nzogabia ect ... Big difference.

Thats the problem with being 'linked' to players, who really ever believed that Villa or Aguero were coming? Now, I fully believe that Carlton Cole will be coming, sad, sad times.

[Paul JH]

Guess the first two replies pretty much answers my question then...

[rob1408]

I think the appointment of comolli will be a buffer of sorts, while Hodgson will have a say I expect the Frenchman will ultimately decide, regardless of what Hodgson tells the press.  In my opinion Comolli probably has more power at the club than Hodgson and is an indication that Roy is on borrowed time and if any major disagreement about recruitment arises it won't be Hodgson who is backed by NESV.

To answer your question I think the type of signings we make will idicate who is in charge and as such who should be blamed.

[STORMTROOPER]

people shouldn't be judging joe cole at all. hes been suspended 3 games and then injured for 3 weeks.  judge cole at the end of the season.  the same with konchesky and poulsen for that matter.

[MrGrumpy]

Meireles on the other hand has been great.

I don't think he has set the world on fire, though to be fair he has been played out of position a fair bit.

To my mind, there is no point in buying any player who is worse than the players in the squad in that position. This to my mind rules out Carlton Cole.

[tommyLFC]

If Hodgson signed Carlton Cole I think he would face an uphill struggle. But thats because the last thing we need is a striker who rarely scores and seems to be another big headed twat, not because Hodgson signed him. If Hodgson signed , for example, Gary Cahill I think he would be given time because he is a good player and a good pro.

I'll admit that when Poulsen and Konchesky signed I held the fact they were "Hodgson men" against them. But because they are Hodgson men means they are not up to our level. So basically, if Hodgson keeps aiming for players who he would have/did sign for Fulham, then yes they will face an uphill struggle and deservedly so.

[Paul JH]

people shouldn't be judging joe cole at all. hes been suspended 3 games and then injured for 3 weeks.  judge cole at the end of the season.  the same with konchesky and poulsen for that matter.

That's not the question is it?
All I was saying is so far, they've been poor.

[LiverpoolForever]

Paitence has gone in terms of football , there was a time when we would give new players a season to settle before judging them , not anymore it seems.

Its difficult for any player to settle the way the club is at the moment , not playing well , not great tactics but i think you are right the manager situation does make it even harder for new players.The objectivity and balance has gone though as well.Last season everyone was saying how hard it was for Rafa with no money and he would of gone for better players if he had more cash , i honestly think the same with Roy.If he had millions , would he have gone for Poulsen and Konchesky?

Objectivity has gone on most subjects , but with his signings in January , if they dont hit the ground running then they will get what his other signings are getting already.

[stockdam]

I'd welcome any new players if they bring something we need to the club.

In my opinion we aren't that badly off up front. Another good striker would be nice and maybe somebody that can run midfield.

I think our defence is our weak area.

I do not want to see Jova, Maxi, Babel, Lucas leaving as these are better players than a lot of fans think.

I'd like to see two experienced players who can add a bit of bite to midfield and up front. We need at least one leader in defence and maybe more, somebody like Sami.

My main hope is we bring in some youngsters who have pace and who will develop into very good players.

I want pace and excitement.........not middle of the road players.

[Paul JH]

To answer your question I think the type of signings we make will idicate who is in charge and as such who should be blamed.

But that in itself mate is my point. 'Blamed'? For what? People seem to have no patience with any new signing, even less so now Hodgson is the manager.

[GorstStreetBoy]

I think Meireles serves as evidence that if a player comes in and does well and shows effort and promise he will be given a fair crack of the whip. Hodgson being given any credit is another matter. I suspect any January signings that we deem a success will be viewed as Comolli signings. Any failure will be deemed a Hodgson signing.

[amir87]

If a new signings a good player he's a good player.

I thought Poulsen and Konchesky were massively shit before we signed him and I've yet to see any reason to change my mind. A complete waste of £9m.

Meireles is a very good player and one, when played in central midfield, looks like a brilliant signing for the price we paid for him.

Roy should be praised for anyone who does well for us and face the criticism when a player is completely shite. He's the manager so the majority of the burden will always fall on him.

[LiverBirdKop]

But that in itself mate is my point. 'Blamed'? For what? People seem to have no patience with any new signing, even less so now Hodgson is the manager.

Easy one. Hodgson burned through a year or two of patience in 3 months. Carlton Cole? ffs

[Paul JH]

then yes they will face an uphill struggle and deservedly so.

Why 'deservedly' though? If we signed him and he played well, would the fact that he was a Hodgson or mid-table signing still mean we should deservedly give them shit after one missed chance for example?

[underdog]

Guess the first two replies pretty much answers my question then...

I think the trouble is that often the level of the player chased or signed is taken as showing the ambition of the man in charge, right or not. Signing Konchesky and Poulsen was a kick in the balls for a lot of fans, even more so when we have seen how they have performed so far, it's not even as if they were cheap as such. It would be a less bitter pill to swallow if the manager was saying "this is all I had to spend" instead of acting like we just signed world class.

The Cole signing is an odd one as a hell of a lot of fans were happy with that move (I wasn't but could understand those who would be) but now he hasn't done much more people seem to accept maybe we are paying too much for him at the very least.

Like you named, the success has been Meireles, which as much as Roy supporters would love him to get credit for it's hard to do when Roy admitted he wasn't even sure where his best postion was even though he has played the same position his whole footballing life.

[Robert_B]

I cannot see Comolli signing off on us buying Carlton Cole, not in a million years. This gives me reassurance.

[Milly]

people shouldn't be judging joe cole at all. hes been suspended 3 games and then injured for 3 weeks.  judge cole at the end of the season.  the same with konchesky and poulsen for that matter.

to be honest i don't think Joe Cole's good enough for the level we want to be at, i think Chelsea knew this and we got another "my mate" signing like Robbie Keane....

[Paul JH]

He's the manager so the majority of the burden will always fall on him.

I think you are missing the point of the original post here. I didn't say he shouldn't. Of COURSE the burden is on him if they are shite.

The point of the post, as rob1408 understood and said above, is people holding the fact they are 'Hodgson' signings against them BEFORE they sign. So anyone coming in January, regardless, is a 'Hodgson' signing, so already has a 'blot' against them before they've kicked a ball.

[Baz1LFC]

I will be heartbroken if we go for carlton cole.

[Dr Manhattan]

I have not once seen anyone refer to Raul Meireles as someone signed by 'the board'.

[Matt8Pie]

I understand your point but you can't really speculate on that, I think.

First off, there's been an increasing uncertainty in the past week or so about Roy's future. The rumours of an impending appointment of both David Dein and Frank Rijkaard, Comolli being appointed a little while ago and the media glancing an eye on Roy's performances suggest that he may not be here that much longer. I get the feeling from a few people's educated opinions on the boards that NESV may be looking to move Roy on in time for the January transfer window for a couple of reasons - the first being they don't trust him with the money to adhere to their approach and the second being that they don't want players in the team that the future manager won't necessarily have agreed to.

Secondly, assuming Roy does last until January, it depends on the kind of player(s) he brings in. Say we got David Villa and he flopped in the Premier League, I don't think people would be cursing it as a "Roy Hodgson signing". It would simply be a case of the player not adapting to the English game from most people's perspectives. Obviously, that sort of signing isn't going to happen and I appreciate your initial concerns about the fanbase jumping on any player's back who joins because it is highly likely should the scenario you mentioned happen. There seems to be a somewhat mutual agreement in terms of certain players on RAWK (the likes of Hazard, Mata, etc) and if we managed to get one of those players in January and he failed to meet expectations, would it be regarded as a "Roy signing"? I'm not entirely sure.

I think it would be perceived as a risk taking a younger player from a foreign league and bringing him into the demanding style of the EPL. I think the blame would fall more on Comolli's shoulders should a player like that find his way to Liverpool in January and flop this season.

However, in saying that, I genuinely don't think Roy has it in him to have an eye for good talent. Look at his past acquirements even before coming to Liverpool and you will see the types of players he bought...players suited to just "do a job". Look at the Fulham setup, for example. We can all see it, and I highly doubt NESV are blind to it.

If Roy lasts until January and brings in the types of players we'd expect him to such as Carlton Cole, et al, then yes, they would be lambasted as "Roy Hodgson signings" because they would be brought in to do just as he wants and that's to do a job. Konchesky was brought in to do a job for Roy and it hasn't worked out, unsurprisingly.

As I said, I think it's too early to speculate. It's a big "if" and I honestly, honestly don't believe Roy will make a signing that will light up Anfield and continue to do so after Hodgson's departure. And for that reason, I believe any player he brings in will be criticised. Let's talk about it when or if any players come in and if Roy is here.

[Timbo0151]

I'm as interested in the January window as I was last night. And as interested as I will be on Monday.

Sorry - the Roy thing won't go away.

There is no future until he's gone.

So, I'm currently not interested.

Sorry.

[tommyLFC]

Why 'deservedly' though? If we signed him and he played well, would the fact that he was a Hodgson or mid-table signing still mean we should deservedly give them shit after one missed chance for example?

Ok, lets take Bobby Zamora as an example instead of Cole. I don't think Zamora is up to the standard of this football club, just like I don't think Hodgson is. If this transfer happened i would see it as an average manager buying an average player for a very good club. This would piss me off. Now, it may be harsh to say he deserves it (to be dismissed as an average player, not be given abuse or god forbid booed) but this whole situation won't be resolved until Hodgson goes and he takes his average players with him. Hodgson needs to aim higher and if he went and signed someone like Andy Carroll (maybe not the best example but he's top scorer and I'm struggling for inspiration...) I think he would start with a clean slate and not be connected to the "regime" that sees our club in this position.

[Paul JH]

I have not once seen anyone refer to Raul Meireles as someone signed by 'the board'.

Like these you mean?

If it were HIS choices in the 1st place. Who knows- Purslow might've just gleaned a glance over some of Rafa's targets- and went- "Okay, Uncle Roy... You can have that one and ah... thatta one".

Quite. Must admit the thought had crossed my mind re. Raul. No such excuse for Konchesky sadly.

Anyone else get the feeling that Roy doesn't even want Raul in the team? He even mentioned when we signed him how he knew very little of him so was more than likely a Purslow signing.

[amir87]

I think you are missing the point of the original post here. I didn't say he shouldn't. Of COURSE the burden is on him if they are shite.

The point of the post, as rob1408 understood and said above, is people holding the fact they are 'Hodgson' signings against them BEFORE they sign. So anyone coming in January, regardless, is a 'Hodgson' signing, so already has a 'blot' against them before they've kicked a ball.

Ah I see what you're saying. Well personally speaking, I see them all as 'Hodgsons' signings because he's the manager and so has to have the final word on whether to sign the player up.

[Paul JH]

Ok, lets take Bobby Zamora as an example instead of Cole. I don't think Zamora is up to the standard of this football club, just like I don't think Hodgson is. If this transfer happened i would see it as an average manager buying an average player for a very good club. This would piss me off. Now, it may be harsh to say he deserves it (to be dismissed as an average player, not be given abuse or god forbid booed) but this whole situation won't be resolved until Hodgson goes and he takes his average players with him. Hodgson needs to aim higher and if he went and signed someone like Andy Carroll (maybe not the best example but he's top scorer and I'm struggling for inspiration...) I think he would start with a clean slate and not be connected to the "regime" that sees our club in this position.

Good post mate, and agree with you completely to be honest. That's what I was getting at. It would be harsh, and will be, but as you say, as long as he's here, it will happen.

[Not2Xabi]

To my mind, there is no point in buying any player who is worse than the players in the squad in that position. This to my mind rules out Carlton Cole.

Based on your argument, it would certainly render him a "pointless" signing.

[Paul JH]

I understand your point but you can't really speculate on that, I think.

First off, there's been an increasing uncertainty in the past week or so about Roy's future. The rumours of an impending appointment of both David Dein and Frank Rijkaard, Comolli being appointed a little while ago and the media glancing an eye on Roy's performances suggest that he may not be here that much longer. I get the feeling from a few people's educated opinions on the boards that NESV may be looking to move Roy on in time for the January transfer window for a couple of reasons - the first being they don't trust him with the money to adhere to their approach and the second being that they don't want players in the team that the future manager won't necessarily have agreed to.

Secondly, assuming Roy does last until January, it depends on the kind of player(s) he brings in. Say we got David Villa and he flopped in the Premier League, I don't think people would be cursing it as a "Roy Hodgson signing". It would simply be a case of the player not adapting to the English game from most people's perspectives. Obviously, that sort of signing isn't going to happen and I appreciate your initial concerns about the fanbase jumping on any player's back who joins because it is highly likely should the scenario you mentioned happen. There seems to be a somewhat mutual agreement in terms of certain players on RAWK (the likes of Hazard, Mata, etc) and if we managed to get one of those players in January and he failed to meet expectations, would it be regarded as a "Roy signing"? I'm not entirely sure.

I think it would be perceived as a risk taking a younger player from a foreign league and bringing him into the demanding style of the EPL. I think the blame would fall more on Comolli's shoulders should a player like that find his way to Liverpool in January and flop this season.

However, in saying that, I genuinely don't think Roy has it in him to have an eye for good talent. Look at his past acquirements even before coming to Liverpool and you will see the types of players he bought...players suited to just "do a job". Look at the Fulham setup, for example. We can all see it, and I highly doubt NESV are blind to it.

If Roy lasts until January and brings in the types of players we'd expect him to such as Carlton Cole, et al, then yes, they would be lambasted as "Roy Hodgson signings" because they would be brought in to do just as he wants and that's to do a job. Konchesky was brought in to do a job for Roy and it hasn't worked out, unsurprisingly.

As I said, I think it's too early to speculate. It's a big "if" and I honestly, honestly don't believe Roy will make a signing that will light up Anfield and continue to do so after Hodgson's departure. And for that reason, I believe any player he brings in will be criticised. Let's talk about it when or if any players come in and if Roy is here.

Good post mate.

[tommyLFC]

Out of interest, would people call Brede Hangeland an average Hodgson man or a good signing? I wonder would an obviously talented player suffer the same fate?

[CHOPPER]

Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Basically Roy's time thus far.


As for the transfer window, January is a notoriously shite time to buy players.

[Timbo0151]

The fact that Roy is in charge cannot be escaped from the OP.
I admire your attempt to bring something new to the table - something to discuss.

But it's all irrelevant really, surely?

No-one is interested in anything Roy has to say anymore.

As much as some of us want to ensure the threads don't turn into a Roy debate - it's unavoidable.

If we can't seriously trust his judgement on the players and squad he already has. If we can't trust his inconsistencies when talking about his players then how can we be honest in assessing any potential signings?

If we can allow a manager to be laughed at for promising to finish in the top four - how can we have anymore faith in a manager "hoping" to be in the top half of the table come January?

The whole situation stinks of shit. And I'm sorry to piss on the thread but - it's the way I feel.

Nothing will change my mind until radical change in the summer.

[Mr Dilkington]

Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Basically Roy's time thus far.


As for the transfer window, January is a notoriously shite time to buy players.

I agree with your first line, however i feel the 2nd line is a bit of a myth, there are bargains to be had at the midway point of the season, if you look closely enough.

[Not funny reecehenebry]

Out of interest, would people call Brede Hangeland an average Hodgson man or a good signing? I wonder would an obviously talented player suffer the same fate?

Gods does no one get it.

It's not about players as such as the way we play or don't play.

Roy could bring in Kaka and Messi and we would still play old age football. Not that either would ever play for roy.

[Not funny reecehenebry]

I agree with your first line, however i feel the 2nd line is a bit of a myth, there are bargains to be had at the midway point of the season, if you look closely enough.

Maxi was a great buy, midseason. Evra and Vidic also.

[r1ch]

The biggest deciding factor in my evaluation of a player, on the whole, is how much they cost.

My Dad sucks up the Sky drivel every day and just couldn't understand me when I suggested a scenario where I'd sell Torres and Gerrard and keep Lucas and Jovanovich. On that alone, most would call me crazy, but put bids totalling £100M for Torres and Gerrard and I'd hope many see some justification. Add the prospect of bids of £4M for Lucas or £2M for Jovanovich and I'd hope everyone agrees. Example figures yes, and extreme examples definitely, but it illustrates my point.

Yes we might be linked with Carlton Cole - that in itself is not a disaster. At £3-4M and a bench warmer, I'd go as far to say it offers us an alternative we don't have - a Bendtner to Arsenal, or a Crouch to Tottenham so-to-speak. At £6-8M I think we could do better, and for the £10M+ that's being touted, I'd say someone's gone freaking nuts.

So in summary, no, I don't think a Roy signing will be doomed before he gets here - there's plenty more important factors than who buys him.

[GorstStreetBoy]

Correct me if Im wrong but didnt NESV or Fenway or whatever they are calling themselves say that any signings would only be bought in the result of a consensus being reached bteween the key footballing decision makers? of which Hodgson is only one. Surely that would mean any players purchased on thier watch will be 'concensus signings' and not 'Hodgson signings' or 'board signings' so one single man cannot take the credit or blame, and players cant carry the stigma of being 'Hodgson signings' anyway. Perhaps the idea of the manager signing the players is so ingrained here that as a fanbase we will never buy into the idea and carry on attributing new signings solely to the manager? 

[Stigathedump]

I think we should be patient and see what happens, I'm not sure Roy has much to say with regards to transfers these days??  The best signing we made last year was Raul, and he was a complete shock....nobody had a clue we were signing him.  Maybe there'll be more under cover quality signings completed in Jan.  I'm sure NESV have some suprises up there magical sleeves,

[tommyLFC]

Gods does no one get it.

It's not about players as such as the way we play or don't play.

Roy could bring in Kaka and Messi and we would still play old age football. Not that either would ever play for roy.

I think you are the one that doesn't get it. This thread asks whether Hodgson's signings will be given a fair crack by supporters because of our views on Hodgson. Yes we all agree with what you say, but the topic is a specific part of that.