Topic: PL: West Ham 3 vs 2 Liverpool Fornals 5’, 67’, Trent 41 Zouma 75’ Origi 83’

[Sammy5IsAlive]

In terms of the game, I thought we did ok and if things had gone our way with some of the refereeing decisions/Mane's chances we could easily have won. As it is the loss was frustrating but it's hardly the end of the world - Moyes has done a good job there and has made them a real handful and their fans seem finally to have bought into the new stadium. It's a tough place to go and on the weekend we weren't quite at it.

For the moment we are right in the mix at the top of the table so I'm a little confused by some of the hand-wringing we are seeing in here.

On the wider discussion re spending in the summer, one big thing that I'm not sure has been brought up in the thread is all the contract extensions we sorted over the summer. As far as I am aware we gave new, bigger, contracts to Alisson, TAA, VVD, Robertson, Fabinho, Henderson and Elliott. I think it is fair to say that represents a pretty significant outlay. If you add in the Konate signing this summer and the Thiago/Jota signings from last summer we've got 9 out and out first team players and our most promising young player signed up for the long term. For me at least that represents a decent summer's work.

If we have a problem in midfield I don't think it is through lack of investment in the summer, more that three of the players that we have already sunk significant sums of money into (in terms of transfer fees and wages) can't stay fit for any consistent period of time. I guess it depends on your perspective whether you see that as bad luck or as poor decisions in terms of recruitment. 

[Jm55]

Sure - you can only register so many players for a season I think everyone knows that.
But the idea players under contract aren't asked to move on and then moved on to upgrade the suqad is obviously not right.
It happens constantly in football - players are told to find another club, the vast majority towards the end of a season. Most of the time this will be done amicably and the club they play for will help - sometimes it isn't - but that's a normal process.
The vast majority of players that move clubs still move under contract rather than as free agents, every player that moves on loan does so under contract.

If you want to make argument that we had too much committed in wages to players and couldnt increase the wage bill anymore (for example) then I can buy that...or if you want to argue we were happy with all the squad members and didnt want to get new players in or couldn't upgrade them .. that's also an arugment ....  but the squad being full so we wanted to do something but couldnt is a nonsnense.

I think the point is that certain players probably were asked to move on but given the way the market went we didn’t receive a suitable offer for them so we stuck with what we had.

[Magix]

I think the point is that certain players probably were asked to move on but given the way the market went we didn’t receive a suitable offer for them so we stuck with what we had.

Yep. I think Klopp's style is to tell those players (the Origi's, Minamino's) that he won't stop them if they want more game time and wish to move on. Then the transfer people would put the feelers out for buyers. It's very likely Klopp wanted Gini to stay, but once the contract negotiations came to an impasse, he adapted and made provisions for Elliot to be given more game time, fast-tracked into the first team. Chances are Klopp would like a fresh face or two in midfield and other areas, but he's more than willing to work within the club's financial constraints.

[LiamG]

Decent analysis here
https://www.coachesvoice.com/cv/west-ham-3-liverpool-2-premier-league-tactical-analysis/

Shows how they focused most their attacks down their left hand side (our Right)[

[El Lobo]

Great comeback to al's challenge ! game, set and match

His challenge? I didn't see a challenge Johnny, but must just be me missing it   

That has got absolutely nothing to do with what I posted though has it. That is what you do though. Invent a comment someone hasn't made and the look to make snide comments about it.

I replied to a comment about there being rules to stop a club having too many players and that you have to sell a player before you can register another.

Its got everything to do with it Al, because you're not that obtuse to think that keyop literally meant 'you can't sign players if you've already got enough to fill your 'roster'. And with respect mate....thats what YOU do. Instead of discussing the point which is quite clearly being made, you jump on any slight error someone has made with what they're saying, and stick yourself on it as if its more important for you to win than actually discuss what is clearly intended to be discussed.

It'd be good for you to address the point he's actually making, which is practically you can't just stockpile players. And frankly, even the sports washers don't put themselves in a position where they've got senior players on big money not able to play in the PL or CL.

And also.....there aren't any specific rules against it, but FIFA have the below rules for transfers:

Article 15, allows an ‘established professional’ to terminate his contract on the grounds of ‘sporting just cause’ if he has appeared in fewer than 10% of the official matches in which his club has been involved during the season. If a sporting just cause is found, sporting sanctions (see below) won’t be imposed, though compensation may be payable. A player can only terminate his contract on this basis in the 15 days following the last official match of the season of the club with which he is registered.

So we can probably get away with Nat Phillips not being considered an established professional, and I'd expect Adrian won't be kicking off if he doesn't play in 10% of our games this season. But if we had Naby Keita just getting a few league cup and FA Cup games I'd suggest he may well invoke that clause.

[JackWard33]

And yet it happens all the time where a player can't get offloaded for a variety of reasons and then alternative plans have to be made.  We know LFC had an accepted offer for Origi and he didn't want to go.    So to say that it's a fait accompli once the player is told just isn't true.   I'd argue in the last couple of years you're starting to see it more and more due to the stratification of the wages at the top end while also the willingness of players to move on a bosman seems to be increasing as well.

This may well be right in terms of the current situation with some players - harder to say going forward as the market returns to normal. I definitely think shorter contracts will become the norm.

Its still not really applicable to us last Summer - the implied argument is that we wanted to upgrade certain players/positions but none of our players would leave under any circumstances (are people genuinely arguing that if Minamino had been told he didn't have a future at the club in early summer he'd have dug his heels in and refused to move - for example) - its just not credible.
As I said its fine to argue why we might not wanted to have brought in more players and agree or disagree with the decision but 'no room at the inn' just isn't an argument here

[El Lobo]

This may well be right in terms of the current situation with some players - harder to say going forward as the market returns to normal. I definitely think shorter contracts will become the norm.

Its still not really applicable to us last Summer - the implied argument is that we wanted to upgrade certain players/positions but none of our players would leave under any circumstances (are people genuinely arguing that if Minamino had been told he didn't have a future at the club in early summer he'd have dug his heels in and refused to move - for example) - its just not credible.

As I said its fine to argue why we might not wanted to have brought in more players and agree or disagree with the decision but 'no room at the inn' just isn't an argument here

I think he probably would have happily gone yeah.

There's probably a few 'caveats' to that though.

Firstly, I can't imagine the manager would ever be so cut and dry as that. Jose Mourinho maybe, but I just dont see Klopp having a conversation with a player which was essentially 'I dont want you, I dont rate you, you won't play so you should really leave' unless its someone like Sakho or Balotelli. I'd guess its a lot closer to 'Look, you know I like you, but you might not play as much as you like this season so if we get any offers it might be worth considering'. The first approach doesn't help to create the tight knit squad we have.

Secondly, and particularly for Origi and Minamino, are the opportunities almost guaranteed to come their way this season. They know about the AFCON, they know they'll play in the cups. They know come January there's a great chance we'll have to use them. Origi has experience of coming from absolutely nowhere to playing a key role in a title challenge and a CL win. And why not? Even this season between them they have double the amount of goals Rashford and Sancho have between them.

Exactly the same with Naby and Ox. They know they'll get plenty of football if they stay fit. They've all witnessed what happened last season with injuries, who played a lot of games in defence. Considering this is almost guaranteed to be the biggest and best club they play for, why wouldnt they dig their heels in? Oxlade-Chamberlain has played for Arsenal, he's moved to Liverpool. He's just turned 28. Does it genuinely surprise people that he'd rather try for the last two years of his contract to try and rescue his career here instead of moving somewhere like Southampton or Wolves?

For every one of the players we'd have 'wanted' to sell in the summer, they've all got their chance this season already (Phillips, Williams, Origi, Ox, Minamino, Keita).

Thirdly, if we put ourselves in a position of saying 'We absolutely dont want this player, we're very clear about that' I very much doubt we'd have been as good at selling as we have over the last 4/5 years. There's no way we're getting the money we did, for example, for the likes of Solanke and Brewster if we'd vocally told the player that we just don't want them.

[keyop]

I can totally understand wage bill concerns, financial constraints, not finding targets we want or being priced out of them etc etc.... but 'we already have enough players so we don't want to buy players' .. is a new one

If you want to make argument that we had too much committed in wages to players and couldnt increase the wage bill anymore (for example) then I can buy that...or if you want to argue we were happy with all the squad members and didnt want to get new players in or couldn't upgrade them .. that's also an arugment ....  but the squad being full so we wanted to do something but couldnt is a nonsnense.

Where did I say either of these things?

The point I was making is that it's not as simple as many people seem to think, and we can't just get rid of players and buy more whenever we want.

Why do you think Karius and Origi have been around for so long and it took us so long to shift Grujic? Any team after Liverpool is usually a step down, so if you don't want to take a pay cut, or we can't find a buyer, then you can just see out your contract on Liverpool wages, regardless of whether you are in our matchday squads for the season, or out on loan.

If you take a look at Transfermarkt (pretty much the best information on all the transfers happening across Europe), you'll clearly see that for any given club, the number of arrivals and departures is broadly the same every single season. There are sometimes minor differences where a team lets more players go at the end of their contracts and doesn't bring the same number in, but broadly speaking all clubs are balancing their numbers every year.

Below is an example for the seasons under Klopp - most are loan moves in/out but I've added the notable main squad changes in each case.

2021/22: Arrivals 11, Departures 10. Konate/Elliot in and Shaq/Gini out
2020/21: Arrivals 16, Departures 13. Thiago/Jota/Tsimikas in and Lovren/Lallana/Clyne out
2019/20: Arrivals 13, Departures 14. Minaminio/Van den Berg in and Ings/Mignolet out
2018/19: Arrivals 15, Departures 18. Keita/Alisson/Fabinho/Shaqiri in and Can/Solanke/Klavan/Ward out
2017/18: Arrivals 14, Departures 15. Salah/Virgil/Ox/Robertson in and Coutinho/Sahko/Lucas/Wisdom out
2016/17: Arrivals 20, Departures 18: Mane/Gini/Matip/Karius in and Benteke/Skrtel/Allen/Ibe out

The narrative from some about lack of investment is rubbish, when you can clearly see the investment we made between 2016 and 2019, which we inevitably couldn't sustain due to the increased wages of the players we brought in, and the small matter of a global pandemic hitting our finances. Many of these players turned out to be so good that we also tied them down to long term improved deals over the last 2 years - a significant factor often overlooked when people want to blame FSG for everything and moan about lack of big transfers coming in.

The reason the arrival/departure numbers look so high compared to the number of new players we see in the premier league/champions league squads is because many of the departures and arrivals are in fact the same player, as their loan deal ended and they immediately went out on loan to a different club.

As others have stated, there is also a growing trend for players to see out their contract - either because they want to stay at a top club and keep their high wages for longer, or they want to get a big signing on fee at a new club (which often comes with a free transfer to compensate for the lack of transfer fee and reduced wages).

So my point still stands - we can't simply go out and buy 2 midfielders (for example) to replace Ox and Keita, as they are still under contract. We could take them out of the match day squads, but of course we wouldn't do that as they cost £80m, are on big wages, and won't get any game experience, so hence would just rot away and leave on a free or very little return. We have to protect our investments, even if they are often injured or out of form.

The only clubs that can do what some people on here seem to be wishing for are City, Chelsea and PSG, who buy shit loads of players for big fees and wages, and are happy for some of them to gather dust on the bench, or in the reserves, or on loan deals. It's well reported that Chelsea play this system by hoovering up talent and sending them out on loan so no-one else can buy them, then cherry pick the ones they want and sell the ones they don't want on for a profit.

So, in light of the above facts and clear evidence of an almost (but not quite) 1 in 1 out policy, do you still think my original posts are nonsense?

[mrantarctica]

This may well be right in terms of the current situation with some players - harder to say going forward as the market returns to normal. I definitely think shorter contracts will become the norm.

Its still not really applicable to us last Summer - the implied argument is that we wanted to upgrade certain players/positions but none of our players would leave under any circumstances (are people genuinely arguing that if Minamino had been told he didn't have a future at the club in early summer he'd have dug his heels in and refused to move - for example) - its just not credible.
As I said its fine to argue why we might not wanted to have brought in more players and agree or disagree with the decision but 'no room at the inn' just isn't an argument here

Not so sure about that. I'm with the other poster's in thinking that JK more than likely will utilise anyone who is training well and impressing. I think all the players know that they'll get their chance with JK if they put the work in, but if they aren't playing and really want to leave then he likely won't stand in their way too much either, as long as the deal works for both parties - club and player. I doubt he tells anyone they are 'surplus to requirements' in that sense. Exceptions are for players who don't have the right attitude. They are given a polite thank you and sent on their merry way.

Bring in players in is a lot more complicated than just going out and buying players. It's about finding the right type of player, who then wants to move, and then having the financials come through. Squad balance is important too. I just think that a lot of things have to line up before we bring someone in. JK has already said multiple times that he prefers to have a somewhat smaller squad rather than a big squad with some big name players who just warm the bench.

I suspect in January we won't do a whole lot in the window. Maybe one or two players will move here or there (i.e. I think we'll get a new loan for Rhys, and I think Nat Phillips will head away probably on loan) and we'll be lucky to get any big signing in, perhaps a player that can cover the front 3 given that 2 out of 3 are going to AFCON, but even then I suspect we won't spend for the sake of it.

End of this season, I'd have thought we'll do a bit more business than this time around and try to recharge some aspects of the squad to deal with ageing players and the natural decline that accompanies every player. Most top teams have cycles where they are strong, and the key is to identify when you enter a waning period for the cycle and recruit appropriately so that you never really notice too much difference from when the team was the strongest to when the decline starts

[Magix]

This may well be right in terms of the current situation with some players - harder to say going forward as the market returns to normal. I definitely think shorter contracts will become the norm.

Its still not really applicable to us last Summer - the implied argument is that we wanted to upgrade certain players/positions but none of our players would leave under any circumstances (are people genuinely arguing that if Minamino had been told he didn't have a future at the club in early summer he'd have dug his heels in and refused to move - for example) - its just not credible.
As I said its fine to argue why we might not wanted to have brought in more players and agree or disagree with the decision but 'no room at the inn' just isn't an argument here

I don't think someone like Minamino, with his low transfer fee and wages, is much of a factor in our transfer proceedings. But we (Lord Edwards) likely want to maximise the margins and sell him off for a good fee, and hold out for one. Shaq was sold off for smallish sum cos (1) he wanted to leave (2) he's already 30 (3) didn't quite fit into our style of play with availability issues (4) not that many clubs with deep pockets were after him (5) and we had Elliot waiting in the wings.

I think the two players which impacted potential incoming were/are Ox and Origi, at least based off the rumour trail in the summer. If one of the two moved, for a fee close enough to our estimation, we might have gotten one player in.

It's all speculative anyway.

[JackWard33]

So, in light of the above facts and clear evidence of an almost (but not quite) 1 in 1 out policy, do you still think my original posts are nonsense?

The only thing I think is nonsense is the argument that we wanted to bring in more players this summer but had a full squad so we couldn't.
So if you're arguing that I think its nonsense - if you're not then I don't.

I'm not arguing as to whether we should have or not or who it would've been or what are other constraints were.
And I'm not commenting on whether its easy or difficult - I'm sure its all difficult which is why Edwards and others are paid handsomely for their efforts...

If we'd wanted to and had the means to we could have, regardless of number of players on the books which is a practical obstacle to be over come but not a credible reason as to why we didn't do more business

[El Lobo]

Excellent posts as per keyop and mrantarcitica

[harleydanger]

There’s not a thing wrong with our squad. There’s maybe 3 or 4 stronger squads in the world and they’re owned by nation states and gangsters. If you wants kids like Eliot and Jones playing for us and not leaving for Dortmund then this is the way to do it.

We seem to have adjusted tactics and it’s either destroying teams or leaving us wide open.

[Eeyore]

Its got everything to do with it Al, because you're not that obtuse to think that keyop literally meant 'you can't sign players if you've already got enough to fill your 'roster'. And with respect mate....thats what YOU do. Instead of discussing the point which is quite clearly being made, you jump on any slight error someone has made with what they're saying, and stick yourself on it as if its more important for you to win than actually discuss what is clearly intended to be discussed.

Here is the post I replied to especially the bolded bit.

Where in my post is the bit you've put in quotes? You've ignored the key point, which is 'players under contract'.

All clubs work within the limits of squad size, and you can't just stockpile new players unless another player is sold, out of contract, or goes out on loan. That's how it works and is why limits exist.

Posters saying things like 'we should have sold Ox/Keita/Origi/whoever, and get someone else' clearly don't understand the word contract. There's a reason that so many average players stick around at so many clubs for so long - it's because they can. You can't just say to a player mid-contract 'Thanks, but we've found someone better. Cheerio'.

Quite clearly Keyop was stating that there are limits to how many players you can have on your books. That clearly isn't true is it ?

Amazingly I pointed that out without having to resort to personal insults, you should try it sometime. 

It'd be good for you to address the point he's actually making, which is practically you can't just stockpile players. And frankly, even the sports washers don't put themselves in a position where they've got senior players on big money not able to play in the PL or CL.

And also.....there aren't any specific rules against it, but FIFA have the below rules for transfers:

So we can probably get away with Nat Phillips not being considered an established professional, and I'd expect Adrian won't be kicking off if he doesn't play in 10% of our games this season. But if we had Naby Keita just getting a few league cup and FA Cup games I'd suggest he may well invoke that clause.

I addressed the point he was making. That there are arbitrary limits to how many players you can have.

I don't think you have got a proper grasp of article 15 though mate. Firstly it only kicks in for a small window at the end of the season and crucially it doesn't prevent compensation being paid. So in effect you stop getting paid by your old club but they can still seek compensation when you join a new club. Why would you do that when both parties can mutually agree to terminate a contract at any time.

Then we get to established players, amazingly you mentioned Adrian but not Karius. I would say that was an example of an established player not being named in a CL squad. It is also an example of being able to stockpile players without having to get rid of a player. I would say Liverpool recruitment of keepers is the very definition of stockpiling players.

[Dougle]

In terms of the game, I thought we did ok and if things had gone our way with some of the refereeing decisions/Mane's chances we could easily have won. As it is the loss was frustrating but it's hardly the end of the world - Moyes has done a good job there and has made them a real handful and their fans seem finally to have bought into the new stadium. It's a tough place to go and on the weekend we weren't quite at it.

For the moment we are right in the mix at the top of the table so I'm a little confused by some of the hand-wringing we are seeing in here.

On the wider discussion re spending in the summer, one big thing that I'm not sure has been brought up in the thread is all the contract extensions we sorted over the summer. As far as I am aware we gave new, bigger, contracts to Alisson, TAA, VVD, Robertson, Fabinho, Henderson and Elliott. I think it is fair to say that represents a pretty significant outlay. If you add in the Konate signing this summer and the Thiago/Jota signings from last summer we've got 9 out and out first team players and our most promising young player signed up for the long term. For me at least that represents a decent summer's work.

If we have a problem in midfield I don't think it is through lack of investment in the summer, more that three of the players that we have already sunk significant sums of money into (in terms of transfer fees and wages) can't stay fit for any consistent period of time. I guess it depends on your perspective whether you see that as bad luck or as poor decisions in terms of recruitment.

My view too. We should have won last weekend. Missed clear chances, gave away stupid goals, made errors and had no breaks (Although Hendo not being badly injured, given all the injuries, once again we have suffered, could be considered a good break.)

[Jm55]

For what it’s worth I don’t think it’s absolutely beyond the realms that we’ve got an additional striker lined up who we’ll either sign in January or the summer dependent on how long the AFCON looks like to keep our players out for.

[killer-heels]

For what it’s worth I don’t think it’s absolutely beyond the realms that we’ve got an additional striker lined up who we’ll either sign in January or the summer dependent on how long the AFCON looks like to keep our players out for.

Whats the point in signing anyone in attack in Jan? By the time they come in they will have missed the main games and Salah and Mane will be back.

[El Lobo]

Quite clearly Keyop was stating that there are limits to how many players you can have on your books. That clearly isn't true is it ?

Amazingly I pointed that out without having to resort to personal insults, you should try it sometime. 

I addressed the point he was making. That there are arbitrary limits to how many players you can have.

Where did I personally insult you? Lets not tell porkies eh?

Again though Al, I think you know full well what keyop was driving at. But if keyop genuinely thinks that we can only have 25 senior players and no more, then they're wrong. You win. Lets pretend though that we're reading through keyops well constructed posts and what they actually mean is that practically you can't just stockpile players because we'd end up with a load unregistered on big wages. Which wouldn't be great for any club, particularly a self sufficient one, and would also be crap for squad harmony. Would you agree with that Al?

I don't think you have got a proper grasp of article 15 though mate. Firstly it only kicks in for a small window at the end of the season and crucially it doesn't prevent compensation being paid. So in effect you stop getting paid by your old club but they can still seek compensation when you join a new club. Why would you do that when both parties can mutually agree to terminate a contract at any time.

I dont think you've got a proper grasp of article 15 though mate. The club could only seek compensation if the player didn't have just cause to terminate his contract. So if we just bombed Naby Keita into the ressies, it'd be pretty difficult for us to provide just cause for someone who has played so often for us suddenly being no good for 5/6 games in the cups. That's how it works. We would only be entitled to compensation in that situation if I dunno, he'd been injured all season and then tried to terminate his own contract.

What it essentially means Al, and again I'm sure you understand this, is that a club can't really just stockpile senior players and sign others without sorting out the existing ones first. It means if you have a 25 man squad of senior players, and want to sign another three senior players, then you practically need to ship out three senior players because if you dont loan them out, or release them, and they dont play enough games in other competitions then at the end of the season they can say thanks very much I'll go now. Particularly damaging if those players, like the ones we're talking about, are young enough to be worth considerable money and its the state of the market that has led to them not leaving.

Then we get to established players, amazingly you mentioned Adrian but not Karius. I would say that was an example of an established player not being named in a CL squad. It is also an example of being able to stockpile players without having to get rid of a player. I would say Liverpool recruitment of keepers is the very definition of stockpiling players.

We haven't 'stockpiled' Karius though Al. We signed him to be first choice, he wasn't good enough, we haven't found a seller so we've loaned him 4 times and moved on as a club (again, very different to what you're arguing). My guess would be he doesn't want to mutually terminate his contract, we might as well keep him around in case of an absolute emergency (one bitten and all that), and so here we are. We've signed five senior goalkeepers in six years under Klopp, with three of them very clearly being back-ups and back-ups to the back-up. I wouldnt define that as stockpiling Al, because again importantly we deal with the ones we have first. We didnt have Alisson, Adrian, Kelleher, Manninger and Lonergan all at the same time. Quite frankly I'm as surprised as anyone that we haven't come to an agreement just to release him, but it really isn't stockpiling.

[Peabee]

This game is an example of how bad officiating can have a major effect on the outcome. It’s bound to have an impact when a goal should have been disallowed then a player should have been sent off. The players didn’t feel like the right decisions would be made for the rest of the game.

Alisson would have felt that if he missed a ball when coming for crosses etc, the ref wasn’t going to protect him from fouls, while the outfield players would have been worrying about other reckless tackles after the officials didn’t even give a free-kick for that near leg-breaker.

[rushyman]

Dermot Gallagher thing on sky is pointless

A referee could go in a killing spree, calmly reloading and firing round after round into players and supporters alike

Gallagher ‘well I’m going to be in a minority but I think the ref is well within his rights to kill 87 people and turn the gun on himself’

[Jm55]

Dermot Gallagher thing on sky is pointless

A referee could go in a killing spree, calmly reloading and firing round after round into players and supporters alike

Gallagher ‘well I’m going to be in a minority but I think the ref is well within his rights to kill 87 people and turn the gun on himself’

Equally with Walton you always know that whatever he predicts is going to happen during a VAR delay, the opposite is likely to materialise.

[Eeyore]

I dont think you've got a proper grasp of article 15 though mate. The club could only seek compensation if the player didn't have just cause to terminate his contract. So if we just bombed Naby Keita into the ressies, it'd be pretty difficult for us to provide just cause for someone who has played so often for us suddenly being no good for 5/6 games in the cups. That's how it works. We would only be entitled to compensation in that situation if I dunno, he'd been injured all season and then tried to terminate his own contract.

Thanks for proving you don't understand Article 15.

2.3.2: More about sporting just cause:
Termination due to sporting just cause is a relatively narrow possibility for an established player to terminate the contract for sporting reasons. The provision is intended for circumstances in which a former key player is removed from the first team. There is little jurisprudence on this issue, but the commentary edition on FIFA RSTP says the following about the provision:

“Terminating a contract for sporting just cause

The Regulations reflect the fact that an established player may have valid sporting reasons – so-called ‘sporting just cause’ – to prematurely terminate a long-term contract unilaterally if he has appeared in less than 10% of the official matches of his club during a season. Consequently, the two mandatory conditions for a player to be entitled to claim sporting just cause are, first of all, that the player is recognised as an established player and secondly, he has not played in 10% of the official matches of his club. But what is an established player? The Regulations do not define this term. Consequently, in order to understand what an established player is, it is essential to focus on the scope of this provision. The key element here is the fact that a player with a certain level of footballing skill does not have sufficient opportunities in a club and therefore wishes to leave in order to join a club where he has the opportunity to play on a regular basis. “Established” is therefore first of all a player who has terminated and completed his training period. Furthermore, his level of footballing skill is at least equal to or even superior to those of his team-mates who appear regularly. One possible reason for the player in question not playing (regularly) is because his position has already been taken by another player with similar characteristics. A further condition imposed by the Regulations in order for a player to be able to claim sporting just cause is that he has appeared in less than 10% of the official matches of his club during a season. “Appearance” is to be understood as being fielded and thus actively taking part in a game. The championship, as well as national and international cup matches, are to be taken into account in order to establish the percentage of games played. As noted above, it is not possible to compile an exhaustive list of characteristics to define an “established player”. The deciding body must therefore evaluate the player’s specific circumstances in the appraisal of such cases and the existence of sporting just cause on a case-by-case basis. In particular, the following situations may play a fundamental role in the evaluation: the player’s position on the pitch, any injuries or suspensions sustained by a player that have prevented him from playing over a certain period of time as well as any situation that may justify, from a sporting point of view, the fact that the player has not been fielded on a regular basis Whenever it is established by the competent body that sporting just cause exists, no sporting sanctions are imposed on the player terminating the contract. However, compensation is payable to the club. The club may lose its entitlement to compensation if the player can prove that the club has completely neglected the player from a sporting point of view, as it was not interested in his services.6 A player who claims sporting just cause may only terminate his contract on this basis in the 15 days following the last official match of the season of the club for which he is registered. Failure to respect this provision will lead to the imposition of disciplinary sanctions. It must, however, also be considered that such a late termination will have financial consequences for the player, who must compensate the club for damages incurred as a result of the contract being terminated incorrectly.”

[rushyman]

Equally with Walton you always know that whatever he predicts is going to happen during a VAR delay, the opposite is likely to materialise.

Total boys club.

Ridiculous idiots.

[El Lobo]

Ahhh Al, I love it when you try and get smart and end up proving the point you're arguing against

[rushyman]

What’s the record for pages on an after match thread?

This one with a bad loss and two week break following it is going to challenge records I think

[Dave McCoy]

This may well be right in terms of the current situation with some players - harder to say going forward as the market returns to normal. I definitely think shorter contracts will become the norm.

Its still not really applicable to us last Summer - the implied argument is that we wanted to upgrade certain players/positions but none of our players would leave under any circumstances (are people genuinely arguing that if Minamino had been told he didn't have a future at the club in early summer he'd have dug his heels in and refused to move - for example) - its just not credible.
As I said its fine to argue why we might not wanted to have brought in more players and agree or disagree with the decision but 'no room at the inn' just isn't an argument here

I don't understand why you think it's not credible when it's been confirmed by multiple sources that we had a fee agreed for Origi that would have allowed us to then buy someone else and he refused to go.  This isn't a recent thing either.  Henderson for Dempsey being a great example as well.

[Peabee]

Dermot Gallagher thing on sky is pointless

A referee could go in a killing spree, calmly reloading and firing round after round into players and supporters alike

Gallagher ‘well I’m going to be in a minority but I think the ref is well within his rights to kill 87 people and turn the gun on himself’

“There is nothing in the rules specifically saying the ref can’t do that, so it’s down to the referee’s judgement”

[Eeyore]

Ahhh Al, I love it when you try and get smart and end up proving the point you're arguing against

What a surprise. Fucking Appalled completely ignores the content of a post and attacks the poster instead.

[paisley1977]

So Declan Rice throws a sicky for England so Jordan get's extra games and more chance of an injury. It should be Jordan throwing the sicky.

[Bobinhood]

HF

thought it was safe to come back in by now.

27 pages and Articles homework. Nope. a loss before an interbreak is a total disaster

C ya next week.  Canada's got Costa Rica and Mexico and a real chance at qualification for the first time since 86. Those games probably will beat whatever europe dishes up for entertainment. Davies and Davids lads. Once we produce 9 more like that and it's concacaaf all the way baby. Only 20 years behind schedule.

[FowlerLegend]

Firstly, if 3 years is 'ages' then being at a club for 'ages' is not a bad thing based on your definition of the word.

Secondly, having players at a club for 3+ seasons is - in the main - a positive. One of Klopp's obvious ambitions was to build a squad that wasn't in flux or transition; where players remain for several seasons to establish a strong sense of togetherness and cohesion. It's been designed that way. However, the balance of new talent being added - Thiago, Jones, Elliott - keeps things fresh. It's not just Thiago who is new.

Your analysis of this is really odd.

The whole point is stability! That is why having 5 or 6 players that are injury prone/susceptible to injury is a problem.

However the point is to try and put together a squad that can justify staying together a long time and in which players can be transitioned in and out without you noticing it too much. Like Utd did.

Naby and The Ox have been at the club long enough for the club to know that they shouldn't be relied on (well 3 years is a huge amount of time) and do something about it. Similarly with Hendo and Milly. They have been at the club long enough for the club to see that they are becoming more susceptible to injuries/cannot go on for ever.
Replacing players with 29 yr olds (Thiago) with injury issues ahead of joining, is never a long term solution and that leaves the midfield with 2  players with good injury records - both young - (Curtis and Elliott pre injury) and one with an ok one (Fabinho).
They have had plenty of visibility of these issues occurring.
Had they purchased a couple more 22-23 year olds, whose bodies could stand up to the strain, over the last few years and let the likes of Naby and Ox go and gradually phase others out  then perhaps we would see a squad that could stay together for 5 or 6 years with only minor/non noticeable tweaks each year instead of the massive turnover we are currently witnessing.
That is the whole essence of strengthening while you are on top. Be proactive, react before you have a problem.

[mrantarctica]

The whole point is stability! That is why having 5 or 6 players that are injury prone/susceptible to injury is a problem.

However the point is to try and put together a squad that can justify staying together a long time and in which players can be transitioned in and out without you noticing it too much. Like Utd did.

Naby and The Ox have been at the club long enough for the club to know that they shouldn't be relied on (well 3 years is a huge amount of time) and do something about it. Similarly with Hendo and Milly. They have been at the club long enough for the club to see that they are becoming more susceptible to injuries/cannot go on for ever.
Replacing players with 29 yr olds (Thiago) with injury issues ahead of joining, is never a long term solution and that leaves the midfield with 2  players with good injury records - both young - (Curtis and Elliott pre injury) and one with an ok one (Fabinho).
They have had plenty of visibility of these issues occurring.
Had they purchased a couple more 22-23 year olds, whose bodies could stand up to the strain, over the last few years and let the likes of Naby and Ox go and gradually phase others out  then perhaps we would see a squad that could stay together for 5 or 6 years with only minor/non noticeable tweaks each year instead of the massive turnover we are currently witnessing.
That is the whole essence of strengthening while you are on top. Be proactive, react before you have a problem.

I don't it is perhaps this straightforward, otherwise we'd be seeing every club do exactly this.

Thiago we signed for just 20m, and had played 4-5 seasons of 40 games each which isn't a bad record at all, though admittedly perhaps not as robust as Wijnaldum. There weren't really too many other options in that price bracket that could boast big club experience, multiple titles and champions league experience as well as offer something that we don't necessarily have in the middle of the park. There's no doubting his quality at all. When we signed Naby and Ox we probably didn't anticipate they'd have as many injury problems as they've had. Unfortunately it isn't that easy to sell injured players either and by now I doubt too many clubs want to take a big gamble on Ox or Naby by paying a big fee for a transfer, nor will we sell cheaply just because.

I don't think there would have been too many 22 or 23 year old CM's that we could have got cheaply that wouldn't have been a gamble themselves, and suited our system. I think we've been clever with he likes of Jota and Kostas who are pretty close to the finished article but at 24/25 they still have plenty of years in the tank. That being said, signings as good as them at a younger age are genuinely difficult to find for cheap. Often we have to look for the lower profile players that every club isn't after and end up being surprise purchases to some extent.

[Eeyore]

So Declan Rice throws a sicky for England so Jordan get's extra games and more chance of an injury. It should be Jordan throwing the sicky.

Rice is confident he has a starting spot nailed down whilst Hendo is desperate to impress.

[FowlerLegend]

I don't it is perhaps this straightforward, otherwise we'd be seeing every club do exactly this.

Thiago we signed for just 20m, and had played 4-5 seasons of 40 games each which isn't a bad record at all, though admittedly perhaps not as robust as Wijnaldum. There weren't really too many other options in that price bracket that could boast big club experience, multiple titles and champions league experience as well as offer something that we don't necessarily have in the middle of the park. There's no doubting his quality at all. When we signed Naby and Ox we probably didn't anticipate they'd have as many injury problems as they've had. Unfortunately it isn't that easy to sell injured players either and by now I doubt too many clubs want to take a big gamble on Ox or Naby by paying a big fee for a transfer, nor will we sell cheaply just because.

I don't think there would have been too many 22 or 23 year old CM's that we could have got cheaply that wouldn't have been a gamble themselves, and suited our system. I think we've been clever with he likes of Jota and Kostas who are pretty close to the finished article but at 24/25 they still have plenty of years in the tank. That being said, signings as good as them at a younger age are genuinely difficult to find for cheap. Often we have to look for the lower profile players that every club isn't after and end up being surprise purchases to some extent.

I agree that its not really easy but I do think it is very achievable, especially when you are as desirable  club as we have been the last 3 years. Also when the club have had plenty of time to see that these issues would be coming. Asides from the Elliott injury (and a real short term injury to Jones) none of this is really down to luck.

We also have a department that is lauded for its analytics and long term strategic approach (3 transfer windows ahead). So I doubt it is a case of them not seeing this all coming
The department was lauded for being across every bit of football data, anywhere in the world, and again I struggle to believe that they couldn't find at least a couple of players in the last 3 summers that could be brought in at good prices and developed.
It's more likely that those in control of the finances didn't want to spend the money. Yes, we brought in Thiago. A quality player but also one that was both cheap(upfront payment) and carrying a long term injury that he  needs to manage. So he was only ever going to be a relatively short term fix.
With Naby and the Ox it may well have been that the club would need to take a hit on them to move them on but the alternative is to keep paying them huge wages, knowing that they will play very little before going on a free anyway. That is wasted money that could be used elsewhere.
I don't have a problem with the club having one or two, like Thiago, that are so good that you "carry" them but it does mean your other options need to be robust. In one given season you may be really unlucky and get caught out but my initial point is this squad has been together long enough to have enough data to know who is robust and who is not and to have time for them to do something about it.
We now have a midfield that is relatively ill balanced in terms of positions players can play and in terms of susceptibility to injury. I doubt that Edwards, Klopp, Ward, Graham and his team didn't see that coming.

[El Lobo]

I agree that its not really easy but I do think it is very achievable, especially when you are as desirable  club as we have been the last 3 years. Also when the club have had plenty of time to see that these issues would be coming. Asides from the Elliott injury (and a real short term injury to Jones) none of this is really down to luck.

We also have a department that is lauded for its analytics and long term strategic approach (3 transfer windows ahead). So I doubt it is a case of them not seeing this all coming
The department was lauded for being across every bit of football data, anywhere in the world, and again I struggle to believe that they couldn't find at least a couple of players in the last 3 summers that could be brought in at good prices and developed.

It's more likely that those in control of the finances didn't want to spend the money. Yes, we brought in Thiago. A quality player but also one that was both cheap(upfront payment) and carrying a long term injury that he  needs to manage. So he was only ever going to be a relatively short term fix.

With Naby and the Ox it may well have been that the club would need to take a hit on them to move them on but the alternative is to keep paying them huge wages, knowing that they will play very little before going on a free anyway. That is wasted money that could be used elsewhere.

I don't have a problem with the club having one or two, like Thiago, that are so good that you "carry" them but it does mean your other options need to be robust. In one given season you may be really unlucky and get caught out but my initial point is this squad has been together long enough to have enough data to know who is robust and who is not and to have time for them to do something about it.

We now have a midfield that is relatively ill balanced in terms of positions players can play and in terms of susceptibility to injury. I doubt that Edwards, Klopp, Ward, Graham and his team didn't see that coming.

You're constantly talking about 'the department has been lauded'. Its been 'lauded' because overall we've done a very, very good job of both buying and selling players under the current manager. That doesn't mean its easy, or everything will be successful, or every plan will work. Right now though we have the best GK in the world, tied down for years. And we have a very good young keeper as backup. That's good planning to me. We have the best RB in the world, who is 22. We then have two good youngsters who could potentially back him up. At left back we have a superb player in Robbo, and another excellent back up a few years younger in Kostas. All tied down for years. To me that's good planning. At CB we have VVD and Matip, and we have Konate and Gomez. Two phenomenal older CBs and two brilliant younger ones. Contracts all good. And some excellent kids too. To me thats good planning. In CM we have the best DM in world football tied down for years. We have Henderson sorted. We then have three more 'injury prone' players with contracts soon to be discussed, we have Millie expiring at the end of the season and we have two very good youngsters with new contracts stepping up. We're well set there and as long as we've got one or two lined up in the next 6-12 months, again to me thats good planning. In attack we're very well stocked, but obviously depends what contracts we sort out. Your issue, and a few others, it seems is that you want everything now. If we havent dealt with everything already, we're slacking. Never mind if it'd mean we had 11 senior CMs and 6 attackers all expecting to start most games. Unless you're a sports washer, it is how any normal club has to operate. Its a constant process.

More weirdly though.....you keep bringing up how we 'work three transfer windows ahead' and often in the same paragraph then talk about Curtis Jones and Harvey Elliott not being ready. As much as you seem to despise the idea, there's every chance that bringing Jones and Elliott into the first team picture was very much part of any plan we had for the midfield.

You've got this bizarre idea that you just buy players who don't get injured. It doesn't work like that. You dont just 'sell your injury prone players' and replace them with 'players who will never get injured'. If you've got the magic formula for that I'd suggest you're wasted on RAWK and might want to give our soon to be new head of football operations a call.

[WEST HAM PAUL]

“ Peeps into thread to see if it’s safe ,  was hoping 30 pages would be done a bit of steam let off “


I did think about writing something funny but thought better if it 


Obviously amazing win thought we played well

In last few years you are World, European & Premier league champions and people expect West Ham to come out guns blazing and try to beat you at your own game

Never going to happen, Moyes tactics spot on tight compact press and counter

Cresswell yes should of been a red card .

The first goal sorry lads that was fine I’ve watched and read a lot of comments in the media and 99% agree it was goal

The future looks bright good team , youth and academy teams doing well recently beating Man Utd 6-0 , Arsenal 6-0 plus wins over Tottenham & Everton plus new investment

The top 5 have a fight on their hands with Tottenham, West Ham , Leicester, Aston Villa, Newcastle & Everton all getting new managers, investors and higher expectations
Going to be interesting

Look I still see us finishing around 6-7th . If we stay injury free maybe better

[keyop]

I agree that its not really easy but I do think it is very achievable, especially when you are as desirable  club as we have been the last 3 years. Also when the club have had plenty of time to see that these issues would be coming. Asides from the Elliott injury (and a real short term injury to Jones) none of this is really down to luck.

We also have a department that is lauded for its analytics and long term strategic approach (3 transfer windows ahead). So I doubt it is a case of them not seeing this all coming
The department was lauded for being across every bit of football data, anywhere in the world, and again I struggle to believe that they couldn't find at least a couple of players in the last 3 summers that could be brought in at good prices and developed.
It's more likely that those in control of the finances didn't want to spend the money. Yes, we brought in Thiago. A quality player but also one that was both cheap(upfront payment) and carrying a long term injury that he  needs to manage. So he was only ever going to be a relatively short term fix.
With Naby and the Ox it may well have been that the club would need to take a hit on them to move them on but the alternative is to keep paying them huge wages, knowing that they will play very little before going on a free anyway. That is wasted money that could be used elsewhere.
I don't have a problem with the club having one or two, like Thiago, that are so good that you "carry" them but it does mean your other options need to be robust. In one given season you may be really unlucky and get caught out but my initial point is this squad has been together long enough to have enough data to know who is robust and who is not and to have time for them to do something about it.
We now have a midfield that is relatively ill balanced in terms of positions players can play and in terms of susceptibility to injury. I doubt that Edwards, Klopp, Ward, Graham and his team didn't see that coming.

La Masia at Barcelona was also lauded for its success, but after an incredible run of great players, that dried up fairly quickly.

In a similar way (although not home grown), we had a great run of Mane/Gini/Matip (2016), Salah/Virgil/Robbo (2017), Alisson/Fabinho (2018), and Jota/Thiago/Tsimikas (2020). A great mix of bargain players and big transfers that formed the backbone of our success. I'd add Konate to that list too as one for the future, given his price and early promise. We've also had Trent, Jones, and Elliott emerge from the Academy during this time, Milner was re-born as an evergreen, reliable and versatile squad player, and Gomez became a credible partner for Virgil, despite the injuries.

That's an entire elite first 11 built from scratch in less than 5 years - a stunning success rate and probably the best in Europe over that period. The fact that during this time the likes of Ox, Keita, Shaqiri, and to a lesser extent Minamino haven't quite worked as planned isn't a sign of lack of intent or spending - it's just the way football works. You win some, you lose some, and compared to City, Utd, Chelsea and most European clubs, our success rate with transfers has been far better than most.

In terms of analytics - we did all the due diligence on Keita and even signed him a year before joining. He had the hallmarks of a Klopp thoroughbred, but the fact it hasn't worked out isn't something that could've been predicted or mitigated. Hindsight is always 20/20, but the club don't have that, and every signing is potentially a gamble - just look at Utd, City and Chelsea who've signed more than their fair share of duds in the last 5 years.

Perhaps we've all been spoilt by such a great run of transfers and some people expected that to continue. Perhaps they also want all players to be as durable as Gini, Salah or Mane. But Klopp can only work so much magic, and history shows that very few (if any) clubs can produce a consistent production line of homegrown or bought-in talent that is both elite level and durable. Considering the pandemic, the inflated transfer fees, increased wages, and other influencing factors over the last 18 months (such as reduced income and increased spend on infrastructure), I think many fans are going to have to be more realistic about expectations of incoming transfers in the next 2-3 years. Because the production line of talent we bought and developed between 2016 and 2020 is an incredibly difficult achievement to repeat at any club.

[Crosby Nick]

“ Peeps into thread to see if it’s safe ,  was hoping 30 pages would be done a bit of steam let off “


I did think about writing something funny but thought better if it 


Obviously amazing win thought we played well

In last few years you are World, European & Premier league champions and people expect West Ham to come out guns blazing and try to beat you at your own game

Never going to happen, Moyes tactics spot on tight compact press and counter

Cresswell yes should of been a red card .

The first goal sorry lads that was fine I’ve watched and read a lot of comments in the media and 99% agree it was goal

The future looks bright good team , youth and academy teams doing well recently beating Man Utd 6-0 , Arsenal 6-0 plus wins over Tottenham & Everton plus new investment

The top 5 have a fight on their hands with Tottenham, West Ham , Leicester, Aston Villa, Newcastle & Everton all getting new managers, investors and higher expectations
Going to be interesting

Look I still see us finishing around 6-7th . If we stay injury free maybe better

Go fuck yourself Paul you Aussie prick.

[Historical Fool]

What’s the record for pages on an after match thread?

This one with a bad loss and two week break following it is going to challenge records I think

Nah it’ll get locked before this can happen. Always does.

[mrantarctica]

...snip

Some valid points there I'll give you that but I think you're using the benefit of hindsight in your analysis.

When you say the club had plenty of time to see these issues would be coming, what is it that you are referring to? Injuries? A lack of depth in certain positions?

I'd call it a significant amount down to luck whether players get injured or not, not just Elliot's injury (or Curtis' short term injury). It's not like the players are running around recklessly and not adhering to the nutrition plans, exercise routines, warmups, cool downs and all the other aspects of fitness management that's going on. I thought it was decidedly bad luck that pretty much everyone that played CB for us last season picked up an injury.

I don't think either Naby or Ox will be among the top earners at the club. While in general they've struggled for fitness and consistency, I think when they have played they've shown exactly the reasons why we signed them in the first place. I don't think you could argue that both were bad players.

Injuries aren't as simple as if you have a good few seasons then you're all good for your career, or that if you have a couple of injury prone years then you'll always be that way. Nobody can predict injuries. There are plenty of examples of robust players who've struggled with injuries at one club and then gone away and been quite consistent at another. Take Lallana for instance, we sold him to Brighton and a big part of that was his injury reliability. Since then he's played many games for Brighton including 30+ games last season when he hadn't crossed 30 for the 3 years in a row prior to that. In fact, if he plays 1 more game for Brighton, he would have featured as much in just over a season, as he had for us in 3 seasons.

We now have a midfield that is relatively ill balanced in terms of positions players can play and in terms of susceptibility to injury. I doubt that Edwards, Klopp, Ward, Graham and his team didn't see that coming.

So it boils down to this? That you don't think we have enough depth or options in then middle of the park and that all the management staff knew we'd run into this problem?