Topic: Darwin Núñez (Darwin Gabriel Núñez Ribeiro)

[mensor]

I like him - he's a big, strong lad and just needs a few things to fall his way.

He's still very, very young - 24 - for those that remember Ian Rush, he was absolute utter fucking dogshite for us for years and then clicked.

I hope that's the case here too.

Which season was Rushie dogshite? He scored 30 goals in 49 games in his first full season.

[Pistolero]

He's still very, very young - 24 - for those that remember Ian Rush, he was absolute utter fucking dogshite for us for years and then clicked.

yer wha?......

[johnathank]

While this is broadly true, he got winners v Newcastle and Forest, and openers against Burnley, Bournemouth, and Sheff United. It feels odd to mark him down for that, some fucker has to score them.

I think my point is that he does well against weaker sides where his physicality will earn him enough chances to eventually put one away. Against stronger sides, where that isn’t enough, his mental and tactical shortcomings mean he doesn’t score. His disappearance from the scoresheet in the business end of this season points to his inability to handle pressure.

Newcastle may well be a flash in the pan. Plenty of players have those. For what we paid, we should have been replacing Salah, not Origi (who scored in a Champions League semifinal and final and how many other important goals).

The game is on the line, do you want the last chance falling to him? Be honest.

[Fiasco]

So build our attack around someone who hasn't joined yet? Makes sense.

I didn't say that at all? I'm not entirely sure you have to build an attack around anyone as much these days anyway, at least not like it used to be. But even hypothetically speaking he hasn't exactly earned that right. My point is that our attack and style might look a lot different come August and we don't know for sure what personnel we will or won't have. And while I wouldn't sell him, I wouldn't build the attack around him either.

[Red Dane]

Stories goes that Nunez was Klopps idea, end not the recruiment teams idea. Is that correct? Does the story come out now, because Klopp is going, or...?

[JP!]

The game is on the line, do you want the last chance falling to him? Be honest.

At the moment I don't think it matters, and honestly, I'm not arsed.  He's done it for us a few times this season, so why not I suppose?

Honestly, I'm just here to try and stem the tide - he's getting another season at least and he's a good footballer. 377 pages of this is mental.

[The G in Gerrard]

He’s mostly scored against sub-mid table teams and Europa League opponents.

So that doesn't count?

[Davidbowie]

Who is a better finisher - Darwin Nunez or Divock Origi?

The answer quite obviously is Divock Origi.

One of those was our 4th choice striker, mostly seen as a super-sub. The other is supposed to be our (potentially) record-fee signing, starting centre forward.

It's a damning indictment on Nunez's ability to score.

[The G in Gerrard]

I didn't say that at all? I'm not entirely sure you have to build an attack around anyone as much these days anyway, at least not like it used to be. But even hypothetically speaking he hasn't exactly earned that right. My point is that our attack and style might look a lot different come August and we don't know for sure what personnel we will or won't have. And while I wouldn't sell him, I wouldn't build the attack around him either.

I may have misunderstood but there is no reason why in a front 3 Nunez should not be a part of that. Most assists and second highest goal scorer this season hasn't "earned the right"?

[butchersdog]

Which season was Rushie dogshite? He scored 30 goals in 49 games in his first full season.

Not the best comparison generally. Rushie was ruthless in front of goal, often helped out at the back, and was rarely offside.

[Fiasco]

I may have misunderstood but there is no reason why in a front 3 Nunez should not be a part of that. Most assists and second highest goal scorer this season hasn't "earned the right"?

Earned the right to have the attack built around him, especially with a new manager coming in. Do you think he's clinical enough for that? Do you think his build-up and hold up play is consistent enough? Is his first touch often good enough?

I have no issue with him staying and the brighter parts of Nunez would start every game but he is wildly inconsistent and seems to turn a corner and then gets lost again. I think you'd be very foolish to focus your attack on someone with so many traits that have no guarantee of ever improving to the required level on a consistent basis.

Blasting the ball hard as you can when in a prime position to score doesn't scream improvement to me. Lack of confidence maybe, but it was so infuriating. For every finish like Brentford and Newcastle away you've got glaring, unforgivable misses. Some hit the target, some don't and some are just hit hard with force no matter the situation. Not entirely sure I want someone like that as the focal point and key player in attack when trying to win big trophies.

[Eeyore]

Launching it would have given them the ball in a non-threatening area.

Their heads had dropped and they were creating fuck all. We needed to show some nous to see out the remaining 10 (TEN) minutes. There was literally no need to force it.

That really isn't true. It was Liverpool who were creating nothing at that stage we didn't have a single shot in the 2nd half of extra time they had 4 with 3 on target. We made 67 passes in that 2nd half of extra time with 14 of them going long with us losing 9 of them. We lost possession 31 times in 15 minutes.

The issue was that the midfield was not showing for the ball and we simply couldn't play through their press.

[Sonofthewind]

In a funny way, going into next season he might be the forward which we can be most certain with what we're getting with him.  Amongst a big change in the management i think the club will look for solidity. I don't really understand the shouts replace him, it seems very risky, when there's other areas which need addressing sooner.  He'd be the last of the forwards I'd sell. That doesn't mean he's not frustrating and without problems.

[Circa1892]

Who is a better finisher - Darwin Nunez or Divock Origi?

The answer quite obviously is Divock Origi.

I'm not the hugest Nunez fan by any stretch - but this is a bit wild. Take off games against Everton, THAT Barca game and the half season before he got his knee done by Everton and Origi was a 2-3 goal a season sort of player.

[Eeyore]

I may have misunderstood but there is no reason why in a front 3 Nunez should not be a part of that. Most assists and second highest goal scorer this season hasn't "earned the right"?

Yeah but the pundits don't like him and United fans have put some videos on Youtube cos he turned them down and came to us instead.

[johnathank]

So that doesn't count?

No, it just means we still need a solution for more difficult games.

[Cpt_Reina]

If you remove the hyperbole it's very easy to just assume the position that Darwin can simultaneously be good, but ultimately not good *enough*.

We've had those strikers before. Heskey was good, he scored 22 goals for Liverpool his first full season. He was a handful for defenders. He wasn't good *enough*. He wasn't Van Nistlerooy or Henry.

Cisse was good. He scored over 20 goals for an unfancied Auxerre team 3 seasons in a row before going the reds, even got 19 for us in his second season. But he wasn't good *enough*.

Darwin is good enough for 10-15 league goals in the PL which is no small feat. Not easy to do. But is he good enough for 20? Is he good enough for 25? Is he good *enough* to be the guy who fires you to a league championship?

Now you can argue a no9 doesn't need to deliver those kinds of numbers in order for a team to win it all. Drogba wasn't that guy (consistently). Bobby wasn't that guy. But they had others in their teams who delivered the high numbers of goals you need to get over the line. Chelsea had Lampard, we had Mo and to a lesser extent Mane.

But that doesn't tell the full story. Because what Drogba and Firmino didn't deliver in goals the brought in droves elsewhere. Getting their teams up the pitch. Drogba fighting CBs and winning battles, both of them adept at playing with their backs to goal and being critical in their teams' build up play.

Darwin isn't doing that to any meaningful degree. He's not good with his back to goal, he has little interest in ever being back to goal, he wants to be played through and run behind like a Haaland or Owen. He's nothing like Drogba in that sense. For such a big guy the ball doesn't stick to him. He's also fundamentally not a Bobby type who will take the ball to feet in a crowded area of the pitch and engineer some space for others that way.

If Darwin isn't going to do the Drogba or Firmino thing of compensating for his lack of pure goalscoring, and he isn't going to be a Haaland or Salah level goalscorer then are we just at the point where we say, he's good but not quite good *enough* to win us a title or a CL.

[Walshy nMe®]

I love him and think he is talented, but if we want to be successful we need someone who has more of a killer instinct.

[kasperoff]

Yes Michael Owen is a famed expert in analysing the game.

It's not that finishing ability doesn't matter at all. It is possible to overperform your xG and you'll score more goals as a result. It's just that it isn't actually necessary to be a player like this to be a great goalscorer. And Nunez doesn't need to become it to shutup all his critics. to be honest he probably just needs to get lucky instead of unlucky a bit more. And then anyone who criticises him will look like an idiot because they'll be criticising a player who is scoring a lot of goals.

It's not down to being unlucky though, is it? It's poor technique and lack of composure.

[NickoH]

If you remove the hyperbole it's very easy to just assume the position that Darwin can simultaneously be good, but ultimately not good *enough*.

We've had those strikers before. Heskey was good, he scored 22 goals for Liverpool his first full season. He was a handful for defenders. He wasn't good *enough*. He wasn't Van Nistlerooy or Henry.

Cisse was good. He scored over 20 goals for an unfancied Auxerre team 3 seasons in a row before going the reds, even got 19 for us in his second season. But he wasn't good *enough*.

Darwin is good enough for 10-15 league goals in the PL which is no small feat. Not easy to do. But is he good enough for 20? Is he good enough for 25? Is he good *enough* to be the guy who fires you to a league championship?

Now you can argue a no9 doesn't need to deliver those kinds of numbers in order for a team to win it all. Drogba wasn't that guy (consistently). Bobby wasn't that guy. But they had others in their teams who delivered the high numbers of goals you need to get over the line. Chelsea had Lampard, we had Mo and to a lesser extent Mane.

But that doesn't tell the full story. Because what Drogba and Firmino didn't deliver in goals the brought in droves elsewhere. Getting their teams up the pitch. Drogba fighting CBs and winning battles, both of them adept at playing with their backs to goal and being critical in their teams' build up play.

Darwin isn't doing that to any meaningful degree. He's not good with his back to goal, he has little interest in ever being back to goal, he wants to be played through and run behind like a Haaland or Owen. He's nothing like Drogba in that sense. For such a big guy the ball doesn't stick to him. He's also fundamentally not a Bobby type who will take the ball to feet in a crowded area of the pitch and engineer some space for others that way.

If Darwin isn't going to do the Drogba or Firmino thing of compensating for his lack of pure goalscoring, and he isn't going to be a Haaland or Salah level goalscorer then are we just at the point where we say, he's good but not quite good *enough* to win us a title or a CL.

Why do you keep calling him Darwin and not Nunez? Are you his dad or something? 

[Cpt_Reina]

Why do you keep calling him Darwin and not Nunez? Are you his dad or something? 

You might want to check the back of his shirt pal.

[kasperoff]

If you remove the hyperbole it's very easy to just assume the position that Darwin can simultaneously be good, but ultimately not good *enough*.

We've had those strikers before. Heskey was good, he scored 22 goals for Liverpool his first full season. He was a handful for defenders. He wasn't good *enough*. He wasn't Van Nistlerooy or Henry.

Cisse was good. He scored over 20 goals for an unfancied Auxerre team 3 seasons in a row before going the reds, even got 19 for us in his second season. But he wasn't good *enough*.

Very much like Heskey in that he is a poor finisher who should score more, but a very good athlete. Thing is, Heskey did a good job of holding the ball up and running the channels.

It was the same story with Heskey and Cisse. We were all willing them to turn the corner and undergo some kind of transformation, but it never happened. I fear the same for Nunez. At 24 going on 25, I don't see him developing his technique and composure.

[Knight]

It's not down to being unlucky though, is it? It's poor technique and lack of composure.

To a degree it is. He's hit the woodwork an insane amount this season. A couple of cm difference and he scores when he hits the woodwork. That isn't down to bad technique or a lack of composure. It's just being unlucky. Likewise when you hit the goalkeeper because the keeper happened to be there rather than because you did much wrong (plenty of very close range chances this season where Nunez has done everything right but not scored). He's been very, very unlucky this season. That may not be everything to say about his finishing, but it is part of the story for him this year.

[Davidbowie]

He hasn't scored in his last 6 games, that's not great for a Liverpool centre forward, and if I remember correctly, his last goal before that was when the Sheff United keeper kicked it against him and it rebounded into the net 

[Knight]

He hasn't scored in his last 6 games, that's not great for a Liverpool centre forward, and if I remember correctly, his last goal before that was when the Sheff United keeper kicked it against him and it rebounded into the net 

We've barely scored an open play goal in the last 6 games. We're criticising player after player, often reasonably, but forgetting that we've been really, really bad as a whole during this period. And Klopp is included in that.

[rossipersempre]

He's still very, very young - 24 - for those that remember Ian Rush, he was absolute utter fucking dogshite for us for years and then clicked.

Not sure when 24 (almost 25), is considered "very very young" for a footballer.

You clearly don't remember Rush. He spent his first season after signing (age 19) in the reserves mostly, as was typical back then. After that he was unstoppable.

So, overall, what an "absolute utter fucking dogshite" post.

[Egyptian36]

We've barely scored an open play goal in the last 6 games. We're criticising player after player, often reasonably, but forgetting that we've been really, really bad as a whole during this period. And Klopp is included in that.

True and our genral attacking play all season was average. All season we looked like an international team who barley train together. It's the bench and Klopp brilliant use of it plus Alisson what made us stay at the race. I am guessing the foucs this season by Klopp was on perfecting pressing.

[Dench57]

I understand people calling hitting the woodwork "bad luck" as an easy turn of phrase, especially if it's a spectacular effort, but it's not really is it? You're hitting a stationary obstruction that never moves instead of putting the ball in the net. Is it just because it's very close to the target that it suddenly becomes luck rather than accuracy? If I go up against the best darts player or archer in the world and they hit the bullseye more than me, is that just them getting luckier than me?

[wemmick]

If you remove the hyperbole it's very easy to just assume the position that Darwin can simultaneously be good, but ultimately not good *enough*.

We've had those strikers before. Heskey was good, he scored 22 goals for Liverpool his first full season. He was a handful for defenders. He wasn't good *enough*. He wasn't Van Nistlerooy or Henry.

Cisse was good. He scored over 20 goals for an unfancied Auxerre team 3 seasons in a row before going the reds, even got 19 for us in his second season. But he wasn't good *enough*.

Darwin is good enough for 10-15 league goals in the PL which is no small feat. Not easy to do. But is he good enough for 20? Is he good enough for 25? Is he good *enough* to be the guy who fires you to a league championship?

Now you can argue a no9 doesn't need to deliver those kinds of numbers in order for a team to win it all. Drogba wasn't that guy (consistently). Bobby wasn't that guy. But they had others in their teams who delivered the high numbers of goals you need to get over the line. Chelsea had Lampard, we had Mo and to a lesser extent Mane.

But that doesn't tell the full story. Because what Drogba and Firmino didn't deliver in goals the brought in droves elsewhere. Getting their teams up the pitch. Drogba fighting CBs and winning battles, both of them adept at playing with their backs to goal and being critical in their teams' build up play.

Darwin isn't doing that to any meaningful degree. He's not good with his back to goal, he has little interest in ever being back to goal, he wants to be played through and run behind like a Haaland or Owen. He's nothing like Drogba in that sense. For such a big guy the ball doesn't stick to him. He's also fundamentally not a Bobby type who will take the ball to feet in a crowded area of the pitch and engineer some space for others that way.

If Darwin isn't going to do the Drogba or Firmino thing of compensating for his lack of pure goalscoring, and he isn't going to be a Haaland or Salah level goalscorer then are we just at the point where we say, he's good but not quite good *enough* to win us a title or a CL.

I would like to see him coached to be a Haaland-type player. Don't want him dropping into midfield to help the build up. Don't want him pressing the fullbacks out wide. Just want him focused on being in the right position to attack at any moment. He was doing that as a sub early in the season and tearing back lines apart. I love Klopp, but I think he has been shoehorning Nunez into a role he can't play effectively.

[Knight]

I understand people calling hitting the woodwork "bad luck" as an easy turn of phrase, especially if it's a spectacular effort, but it's not really is it? You're hitting a stationary obstruction that never moves instead of putting the ball in the net. Is it just because it's very close to the target that it suddenly becomes luck rather than accuracy? If I go up against the best darts player or archer in the world and they hit the bullseye more than me, is that just them getting luckier than me?

Both archery and darts demand and hold the possibility of extremely precise levels of control and you are rewarded or penalised for the smallest variation in accuracy. There are no other variables - the board never moves, the dart is always in the same place, you always throw from the same position. No one else in in your eye line and there is no weather. Kicking a football does not work like this. Your foot is not capable of the same minute levels of accuracy as throwing a dart, the ball is moving, you are moving, everyone around you is moving, the surface on which you’re playing is always changing, the weather is present. You even see it with penalties- where there the ball isn’t moving and many variables are removed. But it’s still the case that even the best players won’t be able to put the ball in the same exact spot time after time after time. How many players could hit the inside of the post and into the goal 10 times in a row? Ask players to kick a ball through a hoop double the size of the ball from 12 yards - much harder than throwing a dart. And even then, the players best at it might not be the best at finishing in a real life football situation. So I think we just have to accept, owing to the many variables in play and the difficulty of the task that there is more variance inherent in the act of shooting and that, often, hitting the woodwork is at least to some extent, down to bad luck. Certainly when you add up the number of times a player has hit the woodwork and it’s unprecedented you’re entitled to think - in another year several of those go in rather than his the post/ bar.

[Cpt_Reina]

I would like to see him coached to be a Haaland-type player. Don't want him dropping into midfield to help the build up. Don't want him pressing the fullbacks out wide. Just want him focused on being in the right position to attack at any moment. He was doing that as a sub early in the season and tearing back lines apart. I love Klopp, but I think he has been shoehorning Nunez into a role he can't play effectively.

That's my point though, if all you're going to provide is goals, a la Haaland, you actually have to deliver the goals. Nunez isn't, and doesn't appear capable of being that kind of cold in front of goal, killer, laser focused finisher.

I do agree he was at his best coming in off the bench, think that's a nightmare scenario for many defenders to have to face as they're fatigued. A Harrods Origi.

Darwin isn't a Haaland any more than he's a Firmino though. He might look like he's more that kind of guy, but he's not, he doesn't have that refinement in his finishing.

[wemmick]

That's my point though, if all you're going to provide is goals, a la Haaland, you actually have to deliver the goals. Nunez isn't, and doesn't appear capable of being that kind of cold in front of goal, killer, laser focused finisher.

I do agree he was at his best coming in off the bench, think that's a nightmare scenario for many defenders to have to face as they're fatigued. A Harrods Origi.

Darwin isn't a Haaland any more than he's a Firmino though. He might look like he's more that kind of guy, but he's not, he doesn't have that refinement in his finishing.

Agreed, mate. He is not a Haaland per se. What I meant is that I would like to see him focus far more on goal scoring in training and during matches. He has a broad role in attack and defense right now. His defensive game has improved a lot this season, but I think he is spread too thin. I think we need to get back to what he did best at Benfica: being a single-minded goal scorer. Mo is declining and he will need to become a true focal point in attack.   

[Spezialo]

Likewise when you hit the goalkeeper because the keeper happened to be there rather than because you did much wrong (plenty of very close range chances this season where Nunez has done everything right but not scored). He's been very, very unlucky this season. That may not be everything to say about his finishing, but it is part of the story for him this year.

That's down to composure though. He's not unlucky that the keeper happened to be there, he smashes it right at the keeper.

[Samie]

Slot once sent his Left Back to Kickboxing lessons to get agression out of him. Yoga for Darwin please Arne. 

[Lochgelly Violet]

If you remove the hyperbole it's very easy to just assume the position that Darwin can simultaneously be good, but ultimately not good *enough*.

We've had those strikers before. Heskey was good, he scored 22 goals for Liverpool his first full season. He was a handful for defenders. He wasn't good *enough*. He wasn't Van Nistlerooy or Henry.

Cisse was good. He scored over 20 goals for an unfancied Auxerre team 3 seasons in a row before going the reds, even got 19 for us in his second season. But he wasn't good *enough*.

Darwin is good enough for 10-15 league goals in the PL which is no small feat. Not easy to do. But is he good enough for 20? Is he good enough for 25? Is he good *enough* to be the guy who fires you to a league championship?

Now you can argue a no9 doesn't need to deliver those kinds of numbers in order for a team to win it all. Drogba wasn't that guy (consistently). Bobby wasn't that guy. But they had others in their teams who delivered the high numbers of goals you need to get over the line. Chelsea had Lampard, we had Mo and to a lesser extent Mane.

But that doesn't tell the full story. Because what Drogba and Firmino didn't deliver in goals the brought in droves elsewhere. Getting their teams up the pitch. Drogba fighting CBs and winning battles, both of them adept at playing with their backs to goal and being critical in their teams' build up play.

Darwin isn't doing that to any meaningful degree. He's not good with his back to goal, he has little interest in ever being back to goal, he wants to be played through and run behind like a Haaland or Owen. He's nothing like Drogba in that sense. For such a big guy the ball doesn't stick to him. He's also fundamentally not a Bobby type who will take the ball to feet in a crowded area of the pitch and engineer some space for others that way.

If Darwin isn't going to do the Drogba or Firmino thing of compensating for his lack of pure goalscoring, and he isn't going to be a Haaland or Salah level goalscorer then are we just at the point where we say, he's good but not quite good *enough* to win us a title or a CL.

A superb post.

I think there's a better than even chance Darwin starts next season as a Liverpool player, but it's clear he's only ready to be part of a forward line, not the main man. That ship has sailed for now.

[Wool]

Slot once sent his Left Back to Kickboxing lessons to get agression out of him. Yoga for Darwin please Arne. 

I actually think Nunez needs to be more aggressive. For someone his size he gets bullied by defenders a bit easily and he’s not particularly strong aerially.

[duvva 💅]

I actually think Nunez needs to be more aggressive. For someone his size he gets bullied by defenders a bit easily and he’s not particularly strong aerially.

I’m not sure this is true. I think like many others he’s low on confidence and out of form. At the start of the season he had shown great improvement in his strength and was holding the ball up well and was linking play well. This seems to have disappeared recently along with the goals. I’d not be giving up on him yet. I think when the confidence returns, all of it (the goals, composure, link up play) will return.

I guess a lot will depend on if the new manager wants him and if so how he wants to use him and believes he can get the best out of him

[HeartAndSoul]

Stories goes that Nunez was Klopps idea, end not the recruiment teams idea. Is that correct? Does the story come out now, because Klopp is going, or...?

No these stories were already released around the time we signed him. Klopp/Ljinders wanted him and recruitment team suggested Nkunku as a player who’d fit us better in terms of being a long term false 9 replacement for Firmino.

[Wool]

I’m not sure this is true. I think like many others he’s low on confidence and out of form. At the start of the season he had shown great improvement in his strength and was holding the ball up well and was linking play well. This seems to have disappeared recently along with the goals. I’d not be giving up on him yet. I think when the confidence returns, all of it (the goals, composure, link up play) will return.

I guess a lot will depend on if the new manager wants him and if so how he wants to use him and believes he can get the best out of him

Oh I’m absolutely not giving up on him, in fact I’ve defended him regularly up until the last few weeks where I couldn’t defend the lack of composure in front of goal any longer. But I do think he needs to show more aggression. Haaland is the obvious comparison and you see the way he uses his frame to just bully defenders, if there’s a loose ball it’s generally going to be his no matter what. I do think Nunez is lacking in this department and could improve and I think will improve.

[Fromola]

Not the best comparison generally. Rushie was ruthless in front of goal, often helped out at the back, and was rarely offside.

Hard to think of many examples where Liverpool forwards suddenly come good after a few years.

Owen, Fowler, Torres, Suarez, Salah, Mane all looked the part straight away. Firmino struggled first few months but that was a coaching issue - as soon as Klopp came in he proved his worth. Suarez in the sense that he wasn't prolific in front of goal until his 2nd full season when Rodgers came in. He was always a top player though, Nunez is just so raw as a footballer, not just a finisher.