Topic: Dani Pacheco

[conman]

Yeah because that worked so well, no trophies and 7th place. You're proving my point for me. Thank you!

your custom title says it all

[Sangria]

I don't know why you want me to list "wide attackers" which we have in the squad.

Having an actual or perceived lack of depth in this area doesn't add any weight to Pacheco's claims to a place in our team, only the player himself can earn that, and I can't see any evidence that he has. It is also June, so we can't know yet what our final options in that area are going to be. If you are about to suggest that its somewhere where we need to strenghthen then I'd completely agree, if you're about to suggest that Pacheco is the answer, then I respectfully disagree.

My suggestion is that Pacheco can be a cheap answer until we can find a better one. Dismissing the youngsters we already had as not good enough and moving them on without looking at the composition of the squad was what left us with 16 year old Jack Robinson as the most senior specialist LB we had at the club. A 16 year old as the most senior player in a position we couldn't play without, at a club that sacked the manager for not qualifying for CL football. But never mind my lectures on the need to make do with what we have on a budget until we can afford better. Let's just dump everything we think "isn't good enough", and worry about the consequences of an unbalanced squad in late August. That worked well last time didn't it?

[mb1111]

your custom title says it all

You getting all personal says more.

[Il Capitano]

So Rafa was scared to play a brilliant 19 year old because he didnt get on with the board? Ooookkk. Weird how he still played experienced veterans Insua and Ngog in the same season but ok. Didnt seem to mind giving Daniel Ayala a start either....

The alternatives were an injured Aurelio and an injured Torres. Because of the financial situation the club was in.

[conman]

So Rafa was scared to play a brilliant 19 year old because he didnt get on with the board? Ooookkk. Weird how he still played experienced veterans Insua and Ngog in the same season but ok. Didnt seem to mind giving Daniel Ayala a start either....

Torres was injured, Nemeth was injured, Keane was sold. We had one striker left, his name was David NGog.
Aurelio was injured, we had one left back fit to play, his name was Emiliano Insua

[conman]

You getting all personal says more.

it's good that i'm making sense though

[mb1111]

Torres was injured, Nemeth was injured, Keane was sold. We had one striker left, his name was David NGog.
Aurelio was injured, we had one left back fit to play, his name was Emiliano Insua

Not true. We had Dirk Kuyt, he could have played upfront and the midfield been changed around with the likes of Babel, Riera, Benayoun etc at the club.

Aurelio was on the bench plenty of times. We saw Insua get terrorised time after time as Aurelio watched from the bench.

[DTLFC92]

Depends how much of a chance you thinking coming on on 75, 84, 74, 78, 81, 112 and 73 is really (and most of those games were meaningless or over). It's not much of one for me and if Sterling is doing similar at the same age I'll be worried about him making it.

It's more of a chance than most of our young players got. If Rafa hadn't rated him, he'd have been nowhere near the first team. Like many were.

And with the comparison to Sterling. Why? Sterling is a more talented player at his age than Pacheco was. Do you understand that players develop at different rates? Some will be ready for first team football before others, not to mention, I remember Pacheco struggling with the physical side of the game over here for the first couple of seasons.

[Cpt_Reina]

Any minute now mb1111 will be paid a visit by Karl Pilkington's alter ego.

[stewy17]

My suggestion is that Pacheco can be a cheap answer until we can find a better one. Dismissing the youngsters we already had as not good enough and moving them on without looking at the composition of the squad was what left us with 16 year old Jack Robinson as the most senior specialist LB we had at the club. A 16 year old as the most senior player in a position we couldn't play without, at a club that sacked the manager for not qualifying for CL football. But never mind my lectures on the need to make do with what we have on a budget until we can afford better. Let's just dump everything we think "isn't good enough", and worry about the consequences of an unbalanced squad in late August. That worked well last time didn't it?

Sorry, when was Jack Robinson the most senior left back at the club?

and what does this have to do with Pacheco?

[NZ Red]

There must be some reason why the past few managers haven't given him game time, but it's just such a bizarre situation because he's looked so bright whenever he came on for us in the first team (and also on the loan spell at Norwich) and has played internationally at every youth level for the world's best footballing nation. Further, we have a lack of depth in the position he plays, and his style would presumably suit Rodgers' system. Seems a foolish move to get rid of him when he's a young player that has seemingly so much going for him, but then again there must be some reason why no one has taken a particular interest in him (would just be interesting to know what that is).

[Fluke]

Cpt Reina and Sangria. There's discussion and then there's beating a dead horse.

I'm almost certain I've used the phrase incorrectly, but my point is, people like mb11.. whatever, they aren't actually listening to any of the points you make, hence why they don't reply with anything resembling coherent thought.  It's all well and good to discuss a topic with someone who disagrees, but it's all but a waste of time and probably just a bit draining (it is to read) hacking down the same mindless dribble post after post.

If it wasn't clear, I rate Pacheco based on what I've seen.  I'll concede I haven't seen much of him and he may well fail, just as any intelligent poster who doesn't rate him might concede the reverse.  I hope he gets the chance, if he doesn't, well best of luck to him.

I'd like to say "I trust the judgement of those in-charge" the way I did with Rafa and then Kenny, but that trust left with Kenny.  It might be some time before it is back but I hope Rodgers brings it back.  Of course, for that to happen he has to have the people he wants, so if he doesn't want Dani, so be it.

[Il Capitano]

There must be some reason why the past few managers haven't given him game time, but it's just such a bizarre situation because he's looked so bright whenever he came on for us in the first team (and also on the loan spell at Norwich) and has played internationally at every youth level for the world's best footballing nation. Further, we have a lack of depth in the position he plays, and his style would presumably suit Rodgers' system. Seems a foolish move to get rid of him when he's a young player that has seemingly so much going for him, but then again there must be some reason why no one has taken a particular interest in him (would just be interesting to know what that is).

Well said mate. A post that isn't nonsense. mb1111, take note.

[Fluke]

Sorry, when was Jack Robinson the most senior left back at the club?

and what does this have to do with Pacheco?

When Enrique was injured and we had Johnson playing on the left most games.  Not the most senior at the club, but the most senior available (apparently Aurelio killed Kenny's dog).

It relates to what can happen if you don't have strength in depth.

[conman]

Cpt Reina and Sangria. There's discussion and then there's beating a dead horse.

I'm almost certain I've used the phrase incorrectly, but my point is, people like mb11.. whatever, they aren't actually listening to any of the points you make, hence why they don't reply with anything resembling coherent thought.  It's all well and good to discuss a topic with someone who disagrees, but it's all but a waste of time and probably just a bit draining (it is to read) hacking down the same mindless dribble post after post.

I agree, same type trolls on the Rafa threads.
There's always one, or more likely 2!

[Grobbelrevell]

I've said it many times before, I like Pacheco and I think he has a lot of potential. My frustration (and i'm sure Dani's) up to now is that he hasn't really been afforded an opportunity to prove it (or otherwise).

Whether he'll get that now is open to debate, but one thing is certain - he's far more suited to a Brandan Rodgers style of football than a Roy Hodgson one.

[Fluke]

I've said it many times before, I like Pacheco and I think he has a lot of potential. My frustration (and i'm sure Dani's) up to now is that he hasn't really been afforded an opportunity to prove it (or otherwise).

Whether he'll get that now is open to debate, but one thing is certain - he's far more suited to a Brandan Rodgers style of football than a Roy Hodgson one.

Not sure why, but this made me laugh. 

That's a compliment to the kid as good as any, haha.

[mb1111]

Not true. We had Dirk Kuyt, he could have played upfront and the midfield been changed around with the likes of Babel, Riera, Benayoun etc at the club.

Aurelio was on the bench plenty of times. We saw Insua get terrorised time after time as Aurelio watched from the bench.

Thought you two wouldnt have a comeback to that and now the personal stuff starts. Surprise, surprise.

[Sangria]

When Enrique was injured and we had Johnson playing on the left most games.  Not the most senior at the club, but the most senior available (apparently Aurelio killed Kenny's dog).

It relates to what can happen if you don't have strength in depth.

It was worse than that. Purslow's attempt to sell Insua to Fiorentina because "he wasn't good enough", without looking at the state of the squad after the sale, as stewy17 advocates we should do with Pacheco, left us with Robinson as the most senior LB we had at the club, even before taking the possibility of injuries into account. When Purslow belatedly realised what he did, he offered Aurelio a 2 year contract, because the alternative was to have a 16 year old as the most senior player in a position we couldn't do without. That's what happens when you decide to get rid, not good enough, without taking into consideration the state of the squad after your decision. And yet stewy argues that that's exactly what we should do.

[Fluke]

Rafa very very rarely played Kuyt up front 08-09.  He didn't see him as that type of player at that point.

From memory, Insua had his first run of 3-4 games around the December mark, and that was because of an Aurelio injury.  I remember him being quite impressive, which warranted a bit of rotation when Aurelio was fit again.  Aurelio played every big game he was fit for, and Insua was hardly getting skinned whilst Aurelio watched from the bench.

[Fluke]

It was worse than that. Purslow's attempt to sell Insua to Fiorentina because "he wasn't good enough", without looking at the state of the squad after the sale, as stewy17 advocates we should do with Pacheco, left us with Robinson as the most senior LB we had at the club, even before taking the possibility of injuries into account. When Purslow belatedly realised what he did, he offered Aurelio a 2 year contract, because the alternative was to have a 16 year old as the most senior player in a position we couldn't do without. That's what happens when you decide to get rid, not good enough, without taking into consideration the state of the squad after your decision. And yet stewy argues that that's exactly what we should do.

That's a really good point, I'd completely forgotten the timing of that.  Although, I guess the plan was always to bring in the replacement in that window, so it wasn't exactly defcon 4.  I was definitely gutted at the time though.

[RyanBabel19]

Bring him back.

Seeing Raheem get his first games in the first team really reminded me of Danis first games for liverpool. With Raheem it was so refreshing to see some real pace in our side, he was so quick and coupled with that he was also looking to get on the ball at any opportunity. With Dani it was that he was the only player following up his passes every time, every pass was followed with movement into space for a return of some sort.

We have nothing to lose by bringing him back. This whole 'not getting a game at rayo speaks volumes' amuses me because by that logic rafa must be terrible because he's still not managing another club and hodgson must be one of the greatest managers around since he went from us into a new job quickly and then became england manager straight from there.

We have nothing to lose by bringing back Pacheco and everything to gain. The way some talk about him you would think he was 32 years old, i say bring him back, it improves the squad and gives us another option very different to the ones we currently have. The kid knows where the goal is and seems well suited to english football, he has good vision and great ability. I think he suits Rodgers style of football, i've had a keen interest in him since we first bought him and he clearly has bags of talent. I see no reason to sell him

[stewy17]

When Enrique was injured and we had Johnson playing on the left most games.  Not the most senior at the club, but the most senior available (apparently Aurelio killed Kenny's dog).

It relates to what can happen if you don't have strength in depth.

I'm not sure this is what Sangria was getting at because Robinson wasn't 16 last year, but if it is then he wasn't the most senior Left back at the club was he? he was just the fittest.

I again do not disagree that we require strength in depth, but I do have doubts that Pacheco would provide that depth, or that he'd be willing to be a 3rd / 4th choice player for the club for another season, or that it would be beneficial to keep him around for another season without being able to provide him with ample first team football.

the clubs and the players decisions over the past 3 years haven't given the lad the requisite playing time to develop as a player.

I would love to believe that he can turn up to training on Monday and hit the ground running and be at the level of the other players and have the ability to make a difference for Liverpool next season, I just don't think he will. I'd anticipate that we'll make at least one signing in his are and that he's most likely to now be behind Stirling and Suso who are probably going to be 3rd or 4th choice players in the attacking midfield.

[mb1111]

Rafa very very rarely played Kuyt up front 08-09.  He didn't see him as that type of player at that point.

From memory, Insua had his first run of 3-4 games around the December mark, and that was because of an Aurelio injury.  I remember him being quite impressive, which warranted a bit of rotation when Aurelio was fit again.  Aurelio played every big game he was fit for, and Insua was hardly getting skinned whilst Aurelio watched from the bench.

We are talking about 09/10.

[banksybanks]

Let him have a chance in pre-season, if his attitude's right, and he performs, give him a chance to step up. If not, get rid of him.

[Fluke]

We have nothing to lose by bringing back Pacheco and everything to gain. The way some talk about him you would think he was 32 years old,

Worst case is we sell in a couple years for a decent amount (a la your namesake - albeit with Dani we'd be making a tidy profit).

[Fluke]

We are talking about 09/10.

That's interesting, considering he specifically mentioned Nemeth being injured.

Nemeth played for Athens that year.

[Kovai Red]

Let him have a chance in pre-season, if his attitude's right, and he performs, give him a chance to step up. If not, get rid of him.

Pre-season is not the place where you judge a player, especially a young player.

[mb1111]

That's interesting, considering he specifically mentioned Nemeth being injured.

Nemeth played for Athens that year.

It's not my fault someone doesnt know their history!

[stewy17]

It was worse than that. Purslow's attempt to sell Insua to Fiorentina because "he wasn't good enough", without looking at the state of the squad after the sale, as stewy17 advocates we should do with Pacheco, left us with Robinson as the most senior LB we had at the club, even before taking the possibility of injuries into account. When Purslow belatedly realised what he did, he offered Aurelio a 2 year contract, because the alternative was to have a 16 year old as the most senior player in a position we couldn't do without. That's what happens when you decide to get rid, not good enough, without taking into consideration the state of the squad after your decision. And yet stewy argues that that's exactly what we should do.

I'm out of this thread now, you're putting words in my mouth and trying to use triggers like "purslow"  to make me look like a soft c*nt and that I in anyway advocate his practices. You're not the first to do it in this thread either.

Keep peddling your shite about purslow and insua, I never advocated EVER leaving the club weak in any positions, I never even advocated that we should "get rid" of Pacheco, I merely said I don't think he has a future here, that is all.

If you want to be a smart arse and compare it to the robinson situation, what difference is it having Robinson as a back up player as opposed to Pacheco? why would pacheco with his extremely limited first team experience be any better a replacement than a Stirling or a Robinson?

[conman]

It's not my fault someone doesnt know their history!

i've given up on this merry go round.

I was talking about 08/09, maybe we got our wires mixed up.
And i can't be arsed going back to see where the misunderstanding came from.

[mb1111]

i've given up on this merry go round.

I was talking about 08/09, maybe we got our wires mixed up.
And i can't be arsed going back to see where the misunderstanding came from.

Hahah dont try that one mate, you've known all along we've been talking about Pacheco in 09/10.

[conman]

Hahah dont try that one mate, you've known all along we've been talking about Pacheco in 09/10.

have it your way

[Fluke]

If it helps, I came in late but thought it was 08-09 aswell.

Regardless, 09 is the more relevant season, because we were talking about Rafa giving a player their breakthrough, and Insua did in 08-09...

[mb1111]

I thought posts like the below made it obvious what season was talked about.

Nah, 6 sub appearances in a whole season is hardly anything.

In a season where Rafa was fighting his battle off the pitch and trying to keep hold of his job because of faltering performances I doubt placing all his faith in a young inexperienced lad was top of his to do list.

Completely ignoring the context of his final season all you want

no trophies and 7th place.

Anyway, this is boring. If Rafa does take the Samp job it'll be interesting to see how much he pays us for him and how he then does in Serie A.

[Fluke]

I thought posts like the below made it obvious what season was talked about.

Anyway, this is boring. If Rafa does take the Samp job it'll be interesting to see how much he pays us for him and how he then does in Serie A.

Touche.

Apparently I switched gears between seasons back and forward without realising.

[jimmyjr86]

If only Dani hadn't been away with Spain when we played Arsenal in the cup a few years back. Rafa was going to start him. Could've been different. It's all about timing and that little bit of luck. Dani's had fuck all of that.

Assist off the bench in Europa, and a few more sub appearances Rafa gets sacked. Another assist from the bench and a few more games then the Northampton Fiasco. Not to mention Simeon Jackson having a Michael Ricketts like hot streak.

End of the day no one knows if he's good enough to play for us as we havent seen enough of him in a red shirt. I just hope he gets that chance.

[Fluke]

End of the day no one knows if he's good enough to play for us as we havent seen enough of him in a red shirt. I just hope he gets that chance.

[ziggyy]

Still feel that he should be given a chance.

Young, cheap and definitely has better 'potential' than the 20mil training cone... 

[Wilmo]

Still feel that he should be given a chance.

Young, cheap and definitely has better 'potential' than the 20mil training cone...

Who's that in reference to?