Topic: The Anfield Wrap

[Redman0151]

I've not listened to the pod so excuse me if it's addressed but FSG's "austerity", does this include them providing the money to build a new stand (plus possible redevelopment of Annie Road end) and the 5th highest wage bill in the league?

Money that they will take back over the next 5 years to pay for the stand, it's a simple investment to increase their revenue not a statement of intent. And having the 5th highest wage bill in the league isn't impressive, we're the 9th richest team on the planet and they value us at upwards of £1 billion after buying the club for just over £200m.

I think you should listen to the pod, they discuss those exact things

[Bunter]

People need to realise we aren't dining at the top table anymore, Pogba, Griezemann etc. are not happening, regardless of the funds provided. Rather we pick up these Klopp bargains and the Manés that fit the Klopp style perfectly than get rinsed for 2nd/3rd tier players like Higuain for £80m because he's a supposed big 'name'.

[Uncle Ronnie]

If we go by our valuation we're 5th out of premier league clubs, so I don't see where the austerity thing comes from. Plus, the valuation and the money the club actually has are 2 very different things. Just because we're valued at £x doesn't mean we can go out and sign a player for £100m. It also doesn't mean that if we were put up for sale tomorrow that's what FSG would get for the club. H&G put close to £300m of debt on the club but we were worth more than that at the time. Still didn't stop us being 24hrs from going into administration.

And whilst making the money back on the stand is true, it's not living with "austerity". If it was we wouldn't have the stand being built. Unless I need a new dictionary. There's the argument that there's so much money in football at the mo that it shouldn't matter, but that will fall off a cliff eventually. The economy is tanking and football isn't in a bubble no matter what people who run the game want to think.

As I said I've not listened to the pod yet so may be some points I've missed from the posts on here.

[lamonti]

Whatever about other criticisms of the guys' opinions, that show could have done with someone interrogating their stance rather than cheerleading it, because there are so many secondary questions that come out of them holding those beliefs. And that's not a slight on Rob Guttman, just a formatting issue.

[Iska]

that show could have done with someone interrogating their stance rather than cheerleading it, because there are so many secondary questions

Exactly, that's why I found it so depressing - all the stuff that gets me excited, I came out the other end thinking 'is it just me?'.

I listened to the Jonathan Liew Midnight Caller afterwards and it would have made for a much better balance had they merged the two shows.  Neil said something there about enjoy the process and live with the outcome later, which I thought was missing from the Unwrapped.  I finished that feeling like the fanbase would be happier if we'd hired Mourinho and bet the farm on Zlatan, which surely isn't right.

[Mactavish]

Afternoon -

Glad that many enjoyed the pod and those that didn't at least have engaged with the debate.  The last thing I want to do is depress you! We have a big job on our hands this year backing the team and doing our part!

It's fine to disagree by the way - "we are all reds here"

Asking questions and challenging if we have the best plan for success is a healthy thing to do.  I didn't hear a criticism of Klopp in the room but will listen back.  He is definitely the best exponent of FSG's model and if we accept that this is Klopp's preferred mode of operations then we have a brilliant match up.

I believe it can work and I truly hope it does.

But - I am still entitled to think - how can we help tilt the odds in our favour? 

Many fans accept FSG's austerity as they believe that this is the only way left for us.  I do not want the club to be reckless.  But I want them to be obsessed with winning. 

I don't want the gap between us and our rivals to widen as it has done over the last 8 or 9 years.  It's that simple. 

FSG are getting a lot of things right.
The club is richer today than it has ever been and it is getting richer.  Our business model is strong - rising revenues, profitable, increased capacity with an improved revenue per seat even after the price concessions after the walkout and the asset value of the club has quadrupled. If we unload the players that we want to at their market values we may even have a negative transfer spend whilst simultaneously improving our available squad from last year.

Are our rivals looking at our squad and worrying?

We might be a surprise package - we might.  We might repeat Leicester's feat - we might.  My question (not a complaint) is could we afford to do a little more and be a little more certain?

I haven't got player names for you.  I'm not saying Klopp is wrong.  I am asking questions.  None of these things a binary.  I can simultaneously love Liverpool, rate Klopp, appreciate that FSG's business is successful, back the team at every opportunity AND ask for a little more of the club.  It's ok.

"We have the resources to compete with anyone in world football" - (joint open letter John Henry and Tom Werner 2012)

Brother.

Edit: Can I give a huge, massive even, shout for The Rider podcast? My main show of the week from the lads and Steph. Met John Gibbons and Gareth Robbo at a Louis Berry gig a few months back who is an artist who I wouldn't have even knew about without that show Didn't make a good account of myself, admittedly. Had been a long day and my jaw was possibly rocking by that time. In fact not probably, it was. Luckily I was with a mate who has a stutter who had been with me all day who may have just taken their attention from nob headery. Got them a bevvy like.

Anyway, been introduced to a lot of artists from listening to the Rider and feel it is a maybe a little underrated.

I'm going to call shite on that Xylouris White tune, though. Heard me me one year old bang better beats in his high chair demanding his grub😊

[Ipcress]

I think a few people are missing the point, made repeatedly and clearly by John Milburn, that attitudes to transfer market aren't binary, even if it's easier to think of it as such.

The Leeds comparison isn't relevant either, they were a club with a stock market value of £12m carrying a debt of £79m.

If LFC, as Forbes have stated, are worth £1.2bn we would have to be carrying a debt of £7.9bn for the comparison to be correct.

Regarding Leeds, what I took from there was a club that assumed spending loads would result in automatic success.

What do you feel about Jays belief that because Leicester didn't set out to win the league, it doesn't count. They set out to get as many points as they could, and this resulted in a League Championship. Personally I believe if Liverpool do the same, they could win the league championship.

I agree people can have many different opinions about transfers, but if a person just ignores the valid counter arguments to his opinion, then that opinion is worth considerably less.

For example, I agree that Liverpool can get into debt and spend loads. But if this spend means the manager ends up with 6 sofas and no lamps, when all he needed was a lamp, then what's the point?

To take Jays extension example. Yes you can borrow money to have an extension built, but if the quality contractors aren't available til next year, then why borrow money, pay interest on it for a substandard extension? If you can wait a year, pay out of available funds and get the right contractor, then surely that is the way to go?

This show seemed to be an argument for spending big and threw in the word austerity (£70m on Gini and Mane, hardly austere) instead of the phrase self sustainable, and ignored the other factors that go into winning a title, the right manager, coaching, team spirit, luck with injuries/squad to compensate, no European competition.

If it is just a matter of spending big then having £34m Beneteke starting ahead of £9m  Origi would be a no brainer and Spurs will have finished below us for the last 6 seasons.

[thekitkatshuffler]

Yikes, lots of updates.  Top-heavy Friday ahoy!   

[John C]

Afternoon -

Thanks for popping in mate, it was indeed an interesting discussion so much so I've listened twice. I was talking to my lad about it and I said it was a pod whereby you could pause after virtually every sentence and have a mini debate - including whether Kuyt was a brilliant signing

There seemed to be a short emphasis on what will happen this year and will we or won't we, or can we or can't we win the league this year. The point I would make is that there shouldn't be an analysis of Klopp after a year, we haven't got 1 opportunity, we've got 6. I don't expect him to get it right for a couple of years. There'll be the inevitable in's and out's. The dreaded transition - again. But this time its all under someone completely different than we've ever had. Ever. Don't forget FSG wanted Klopp years ago - perhaps even before he'd delivered at Dortmund? Correct me if I'm wrong.

In terms of resources I'd expect FSG to back a huge signing if it was wanted. Wanted by Klopp or/and the TC is an unknown issue, but I personally think they'd fund it.

Like you, I know people that wanted us to pay £100m for Pogba. I'm not ready for that although I'm not completely adverse to being owned by ethically rich people. But again that's a pause for discussion point

Thanks again anyway mate, the pods are great.

[CHOPPER]

They gave you a pair of Pods, John? Bad dem la.

[John C]

Whatever about other criticisms of the guys' opinions, that show could have done with someone interrogating their stance rather than cheerleading it, because there are so many secondary questions that come out of them holding those beliefs. And that's not a slight on Rob Guttman, just a formatting issue.

I love Rob's involvement in any and every podcast and I fear making comment seems like a criticism, it isn't it an observation. In that unwrapped show I think Rob countered and challenged most points, but you're right he also stated he agreed with everything said.

That's just my observation and not a criticism at all. Podcastland would be a poor place without Guttman

[the_red_pill]

Regarding Leeds, what I took from there was a club that assumed spending loads would result in automatic success.

What do you feel about Jays belief that because Leicester didn't set out to win the league, it doesn't count. They set out to get as many points as they could, and this resulted in a League Championship. Personally I believe if Liverpool do the same, they could win the league championship.

I agree people can have many different opinions about transfers, but if a person just ignores the valid counter arguments to his opinion, then that opinion is worth considerably less.

For example, I agree that Liverpool can get into debt and spend loads. But if this spend means the manager ends up with 6 sofas and no lamps, when all he needed was a lamp, then what's the point?

To take Jays extension example. Yes you can borrow money to have an extension built, but if the quality contractors aren't available til next year, then why borrow money, pay interest on it for a substandard extension? If you can wait a year, pay out of available funds and get the right contractor, then surely that is the way to go?

This show seemed to be an argument for spending big and threw in the word austerity (£70m on Gini and Mane, hardly austere) instead of the phrase self sustainable, and ignored the other factors that go into winning a title, the right manager, coaching, team spirit, luck with injuries/squad to compensate, no European competition.

If it is just a matter of spending big then having £34m Beneteke starting ahead of £9m  Origi would be a no brainer and Spurs will have finished below us for the last 6 seasons.

Which is what we and some others have been doing forever now.
We just fell short due to a variety of differen issues. There is also the 'luck' aspect. Yes - it might be deemed superstitious, but there is clearly a factor of goodwill from somewhere behind many successful campaigns. It might be brought on by attitude or performance or by being a likeable team, but it's there.

We always focus on the next game and on winning the next game, but like I said we fall short. 2001/2009/2014.. Seasons in which we just fell short. Middlesborough, Hull, City(referreeing), Chelsea(refereeing) etc..

Klopp certainly isn't aiming for 4th. Of that I'm sure. He has already shirked off the idea of needing anymore time(He said earlier this week, that he doesn't want to hear that he needs to be given at least one more year).

Add to that the fact, he said it's time to believe. That means going for the league. we don't need to believe in getting 4th or winning a Cup- that does not require much belief. It certainly does not seem that it is what Klopp meant when he called for Belief. For a Liverpool supporter- the League is the one we want and the one we have been without for so long that some have lost belief- or the power of their belief.
Klopp meant the League when he called for Belief. Sure- as supporters we can choose to be sensible and realistic, which is the "wise" thing to do. It will earn plaudits and pats on the back for being such a rational person, but Football isn't all about being realistic- it's about Belief and dreams and achieving those dreams. That requires Belief. It is unfortunately a two-edged sword, belief: shattering consequences or blissful highs.

We believe, they work.

[John C]

And you should all, particularly the arl arses, put Well Watched on your holiday podcast list. Brilliant.

[vivabobbygraham]

Exactly, that's why I found it so depressing - all the stuff that gets me excited, I came out the other end thinking 'is it just me?'.

I listened to the Jonathan Liew Midnight Caller afterwards and it would have made for a much better balance had they merged the two shows.  Neil said something there about enjoy the process and live with the outcome later, which I thought was missing from the Unwrapped.  I finished that feeling like the fanbase would be happier if we'd hired Mourinho and bet the farm on Zlatan, which surely isn't right.

Spot on.

Too one sided to be considered a debate. This narrative recently being peddled on TAW that Klopp is some sort of fucking mouthpiece for the owners and doesn't really mean what he's say's, is worrying. Give the fellah a chance before wading in, eh? You take Neil and Gibbo away and the whole ship blows off course. When you have contentious issues you need a firm hand on the tiller.

[spider-neil]

My only issue with the club in recent times is getting players who don't fit the style of play.
Some signings succeed and others fail but signings for huge sums of summer that don't fit your style of play is unacceptable.

[cricketrocks]

Spot on.

Too one sided to be considered a debate. This narrative recently being peddled on TAW that Klopp is some sort of fucking mouthpiece for the owners and doesn't really mean what he's say's, is worrying. Give the fellah a chance before wading in, eh? You take Neil and Gibbo away and the whole ship blows off course. When you have contentious issues you need a firm hand on the tiller.

The thing is that we don't have to wait until Klopp has loads of money to see if he's being genuine about development over spending sprees;he surely proved that by going to Liverpool rather than Bayern, City, Real etc.

I really like the show by the way - Neil and Gibbo are fantastic, and I really like Melissa Reddy when she's on.

[Don Vito Corleone]

Spot on.

Too one sided to be considered a debate. This narrative recently being peddled on TAW that Klopp is some sort of fucking mouthpiece for the owners and doesn't really mean what he's say's, is worrying. Give the fellah a chance before wading in, eh? You take Neil and Gibbo away and the whole ship blows off course. When you have contentious issues you need a firm hand on the tiller.

Narrative

[Uncle Ronnie]

Narrative

Well argued

[Don Vito Corleone]

Well argued

Just waiting for the old 'Agenda' line to resurface.

Each equally a load of fucking bollocks.

Incidentally, this week i've personally been accused of 'being in the clubs pocket' AND at the same time 'having an anti-FSG agenda'.

Think what is quite clear is that if someones opinion doesn't chime with your own it could only possibly be because of some kind of enforced party-line.

Fine with criticism of the shows, the quality, the audio or peoples opinion, but to suggest that we are peddling any kind of narrative or enforce some kind of party whip is beyond disrespectful, not only to myself personally but to everyone associated with TAW and anyone who appears or writes for us.

Frankly, the whole Pro FSG, everything is rosy in the garden and thou shalt not question the club RAWK narrative stinks. 

[Uncle Ronnie]

And they're all fair points. Sadly with the internet (be it on here, Twitter etc.) there's always people who go to the extreme in their points of view and accuse people of bias/agendas and so on.

I think some of the criticism of this show though was that there wasn't a counter argument to what was being said, or at least not a strong enough one being made. For example saying FSG is running the club under some sort of austerity is ridiculous in my opinion. They're clearly spending money, just not as much as some people want. If that's being put out as an argument against FSG and not countered then perhaps some people are looking at that as an agenda, which is unfair on TAW as a whole but justified criticism of the episode. The most recent Gutter show was very good and was offering points for both sides of an argument (being linked to the Norwegian kid for example) which is probably what people thought the "FSG show" was missing.

[BritishGas]

This particular Unwrapped show has unwrapped Pandora's Box and I think it would take more than one 50m pod to debate the multiple facets properly!

[John C]

Frankly, the whole Pro FSG, everything is rosy in the garden and thou shalt not question the club RAWK narrative stinks. 

Individuals on RAWK Andy, not club RAWK

It's probable those individuals that made the accusation, presumably on Twitter, about you being in the clubs pockets are not even RAWK members.

Keep up the good work anyway, you know its appreciated.

[vivabobbygraham]

Just waiting for the old 'Agenda' line to resurface.

Each equally a load of fucking bollocks.

Incidentally, this week i've personally been accused of 'being in the clubs pocket' AND at the same time 'having an anti-FSG agenda'.

Think what is quite clear is that if someones opinion doesn't chime with your own it could only possibly be because of some kind of enforced party-line.

Fine with criticism of the shows, the quality, the audio or peoples opinion, but to suggest that we are peddling any kind of narrative or enforce some kind of party whip is beyond disrespectful, not only to myself personally but to everyone associated with TAW and anyone who appears or writes for us.

Frankly, the whole Pro FSG, everything is rosy in the garden and thou shalt not question the club RAWK narrative stinks. 

You're a journalist/broadcaster, criticism goes with the territory. You were going on about Klopp talking the talk in San Fran. Peter Hooton touched on it and then the recent podcast went overboard. That's peddling a narrative for me. You mightn't like that language but not going to retract it just cos you take offence.

The show in question was not even handed, it was loaded with one narrative, namely, we should spend loads of dough in order tp play catch up. That's ok and I have some sympathy with it, to a point. But to bang on about it with little counter other than 'Devils Advocate' was poor broadcasting. You're not a gang of lads having a laugh anymore, you are, on the whole, a trusted and respected voice on all things LFC. Fuck sake, I subscribe to it and love it dearly so right back at yer with the...'if somebody's opinion doesn't chime with your own...' line

[lamonti]

I love Rob's involvement in any and every podcast and I fear making comment seems like a criticism, it isn't it an observation. In that unwrapped show I think Rob countered and challenged most points, but you're right he also stated he agreed with everything said.

That's just my observation and not a criticism at all. Podcastland would be a poor place without Guttman

I like Guttman and his involvement, I even enjoy his unabashed desire for transfer tattle, but there was absolutely loads of points in that chat that needed someone not to say "I agree with you mate" but rather "OK, you are dissatisfied with policies X, Y and Z. What do you suggest?" "You say we haven't made any big signings, who do you suggest we sign that would satisfy you?", the idea that the Main Stand extension was a "fudge" - please explain?

There was also an inherent, unquestioned idea running through the show that basically, all other clubs are getting everything right all the time and will necessarily perform to their maximum, while clueless, doddering Liverpool just careen from fuck-up to fuck-up... which again isn't true at all.

There was plenty of food for thought on it, I'm just trying some constructive criticism.

[tmsneil]

The show in question was not even handed, it was loaded with one narrative, namely, we should spend loads of dough in order tp play catch up. That's ok and I have some sympathy with it, to a point. But to bang on about it with little counter other than 'Devils Advocate' was poor broadcasting. You're not a gang of lads having a laugh anymore, you are, on the whole, a trusted and respected voice on all things LFC. Fuck sake, I subscribe to it and love it dearly so right back at yer with the...'if somebody's opinion doesn't chime with your own...' line

Quickly on this - the shows tend to be booked before what the show is about is decided. For instance there are already shows booked for the end of August. So if Jay, John and Josh have a certain view, then they have a certain view. What we don't do (and don't have the luxury to do given the fact people are giving their time up) is go, well, on this, Paul will think x but Sean will think y and Mike z so if we get them all in that will be "balanced".

It's a good discussion this. I appreciate the point above that we often presume all other clubs are getting everything right all the time. Manifestly not the case and what is going to make this season interesting - think the ability to keep your nerve (which we have) could well become important.

I think it is worth going right back to the sale of Alonso - can argue you can go further to be honest - to look at the issues within the squad. Had we signed, and kept the *new* Alonso that summer (speaking conceptually obviously) he would now be 28 and probably Liverpool captain. You can frame the discussion within that as very sympathetic to FSG but the discussion on the show didn't go that way. It happens.

I would end up reasonably sympathetically to FSG/transfer committee and am broadly of the view we have the strongest squad we have had in years because they have built in a certain way. I like Adam Lallana but even with our current injury concerns it is reasonably straightforward to write down an eighteen for Arsenal and not have him in it. You can make a plausible argument for that; it may not be correct.

Simultaneously it would be great to have one bit more stardust or the aforementioned 28 year old Alonso in our side.

Anyway lovely to have a great big chat. Idea for the show came out a discussion with someone who came to the San Francisco show and grabbed me about the way we approach the ups and downs of the season and the difficulty of contextualising that discussion.

[vivabobbygraham]

Quickly on this - the shows tend to be booked before what the show is about is decided. For instance there are already shows booked for the end of August. So if Jay, John and Josh have a certain view, then they have a certain view. What we don't do (and don't have the luxury to do given the fact people are giving their time up) is go, well, on this, Paul will think x but Sean will think y and Mike z so if we get them all in that will be "balanced".

It's a good discussion this. I appreciate the point above that we often presume all other clubs are getting everything right all the time. Manifestly not the case and what is going to make this season interesting - think the ability to keep your nerve (which we have) could well become important.

I think it is worth going right back to the sale of Alonso - can argue you can go further to be honest - to look at the issues within the squad. Had we signed, and kept the *new* Alonso that summer (speaking conceptually obviously) he would now be 28 and probably Liverpool captain. You can frame the discussion within that as very sympathetic to FSG but the discussion on the show didn't go that way. It happens.

I would end up reasonably sympathetically to FSG/transfer committee and am broadly of the view we have the strongest squad we have had in years because they have built in a certain way. I like Adam Lallana but even with our current injury concerns it is reasonably straightforward to write down an eighteen for Arsenal and not have him in it. You can make a plausible argument for that; it may not be correct.

Simultaneously it would be great to have one bit more stardust or the aforementioned 28 year old Alonso in our side.

Anyway lovely to have a great big chat. Idea for the show came out a discussion with someone who came to the San Francisco show and grabbed me about the way we approach the ups and downs of the season and the difficulty of contextualising that discussion.

Good stuff, Neil. I accept you shouldn't have to vet your guests as to how they are going to roll out their view on any given subject. All the more reason for a strong hand on the tiller, as I mentioned, with some ballast, in order to stop it sinking or becoming a shipwreck which, in my opinion, it became.

Having listened to Citytalk show this morning, it did, to an extent, attempt to steady the ship on this so well played, but having listened to some other shows consecutively whilst driving that may have just been coincidental given the volume you put out, it appeared to engender a view that TAW was beginning to doubt Klopp's integrity on a number of issues he had spoken about. I pointed it out, is all. It may not be a populist view on the thread but it's my observation and bears no malice aforethought

[TepidT2O]

Hmmm some people getting the concept of people having a "narrative" mixed up with the concept of people having an "opinion" that sufferers from their own I suspect.

When someone's opinion doesn't agree with yours, it strangely seems to be called a narrative.
Hey ho.
Gives me many great hours of listening, intelligent discussion, and a number of laughs, so I'm happy.

[SerbianScouser]

Hmmm some people getting the concept of people having a "narrative" mixed up with the concept of people having an "opinion" that sufferers from their own I suspect.

It`s narrative because the brunt of the criticism had nothing to do with Klopp and his regime right now. He needs to get a chance before we can conclude whether what he`s trying to do works or not. It`s a new era , new direction so harping on and on about the mistakes in the past is completely unnecessary and a waste of time.

[Alan_X]

Just waiting for the old 'Agenda' line to resurface.

Each equally a load of fucking bollocks.

Incidentally, this week i've personally been accused of 'being in the clubs pocket' AND at the same time 'having an anti-FSG agenda'.

Think what is quite clear is that if someones opinion doesn't chime with your own it could only possibly be because of some kind of enforced party-line.

Fine with criticism of the shows, the quality, the audio or peoples opinion, but to suggest that we are peddling any kind of narrative or enforce some kind of party whip is beyond disrespectful, not only to myself personally but to everyone associated with TAW and anyone who appears or writes for us.

Frankly, the whole Pro FSG, everything is rosy in the garden and thou shalt not question the club RAWK narrative stinks. 

I actually thought the show was a good one. It's all about opinions and it would be a boring world for me if I only listened to people who reinforce my opinions.

I'm broadly supportive of the job FSG have done and I still support the way they run the club in principle - generate our own succes, not buy it in with a sugar daddy approach. It's also a mistake to assume that one of the other buyers would have been better. Peter Lim at Valencia and the state of Dubai suggest otherwise. 

But critucism if FSG is fair. They are our owners and the point Jay made about the impact of the new TV deal is a good one. We could buy a 30 million player this window and not bat an eyelid. The secondary question of course is what does £30 million get you these days. That was the figure that United would splash on a top player - Rooney, Berbatov, Ferdinand etc to keep the high value/high quality topped up.

Now we're in a situation where United (from revenue) and City (from the owners back pocket) will splash out £30 million on second string players. If the £100 m deal for Pogba happens it re-calibrates the whole argument again.

I would love us to win the league without going down the sugar daddy route. Id love is to win without going down the prawn sandwich, over-commercialisation route (Mexican wave anyone). Maybe I just have to accept that's not going to happen. Leicester suggest it can be done but will all those circumstances ever align for another team?

Anyway, love all the shows and keep doing what you're doing.

[Uncle Ronnie]

But critucism if FSG is fair. They are our owners and the point Jay made about the impact of the new TV deal is a good one. We could buy a 30 million player this window and not bat an eyelid. The secondary question of course is what does £30 million get you these days. That was the figure that United would splash on a top player - Rooney, Berbatov, Ferdinand etc to keep the high value/high quality topped up

But we have signed a player for £30m, more in fact. And it was done relatively quickly. Plus we've also spent £25m on another player. In fact with Wijnaldum people have wondered why we've spent so much on him as he's not a guaranteed starter.

This Summer the only 2 players not signed that we've been heavily linked to are Gotze & Chilwell. Gotze wanted a Champions League club & Chilwell, if we believe the reports, was Klopp's decision not to bid higher.

[Raaphael]

I guess it's the plan to sell Benteke for around 30 mill and Balotelli, so I'll be surprised if we actually spend money this window. Let's see.

[BassTunedToRed]

Interesting debate about the recent Unwrapped show. There were some good points on the show but it was a bit one sided, and confused at times - I think Jay side he wanted FSG to spend more but then later said that potential new owners couldn't do that due to FFP. So surely FSG can't either?

I dunno, I'm certainly no financial expert, but as the club never really  makes a profit, except when we sell Suarez which nobody wants to do, then it suggests we're spending what we can. It's alright to say we can bank on future TV monies and spend them upfront, but surely that bubble's  going to burst to some extent eventually, and then what? All hypothetical of course.

I think we spend enough on transfers broadly speaking, but we need to spend it better. And that's far easier said then done!

Anyway, keep up the good work TAW.

[Alan_X]

But we have signed a player for £30m, more in fact. And it was done relatively quickly. Plus we've also spent £25m on another player. In fact with Wijnaldum people have wondered why we've spent so much on him as he's not a guaranteed starter.

This Summer the only 2 players not signed that we've been heavily linked to are Gotze & Chilwell. Gotze wanted a Champions League club & Chilwell, if we believe the reports, was Klopp's decision not to bid higher.

That's what I'm saying. £30 million is not a big deal anymore.

[Don Vito Corleone]

You're a journalist/broadcaster, criticism goes with the territory. You were going on about Klopp talking the talk in San Fran. Peter Hooton touched on it and then the recent podcast went overboard. That's peddling a narrative for me. You mightn't like that language but not going to retract it just cos you take offence.

I didn't take offence, I pointed out that it's bollocks, which it is.

The show in question was not even handed, it was loaded with one narrative, namely, we should spend loads of dough in order tp play catch up. That's ok and I have some sympathy with it, to a point. But to bang on about it with little counter other than 'Devils Advocate' was poor broadcasting. You're not a gang of lads having a laugh anymore, you are, on the whole, a trusted and respected voice on all things LFC. Fuck sake, I subscribe to it and love it dearly so right back at yer with the...'if somebody's opinion doesn't chime with your own...' line.

So you're suggesting, overtly, that we now try to temper or shape peoples opinions? Isn't that going down the 'agenda' route or promoting a 'narrative'? Bit confused 'ere.

[archie]

Looking forward to The Pink.

[MDougal]

I really don't see what the fuss is about the latest unwrapped podcast, as surely (as Neil would say) fundamentally it is an opinion based podcast and that is what we got.

Personal opinion differs from what the lads talked about, as I do believe we have a decent set of owners etc etc but is that not why we subscribe to the wrap to either a) have our own opinion validated or b) have our opinion challenged even if we still don't agree with it by the end of the show.

Could we have had a different approach from the host maybe, was the host right in agreeing with the narrative because that was his opinion maybe, are we all looking forward to the season ahead irrespective of moneyball or throwing hundreds of millions all over the place absolutely.

I think we wouldn't have a show worth listening to if we had no debate and even though it's not something I particularly agree with its surely like what is was supposed to be all along a group of (talented journalists) mates talking about Liverpool like we do at the game, I know I don't agree with everything some of the lads talk about around me on the kop.

Keep it up lads for good or bad positive or negative it's why we listen after all.

[Raaphael]

Don`t see the problem with that pod whatsoever. Agreed with most of it. Isn`t half the point/or the whole point of TAW that it`s fans talking to each other? Why should it change because it has a lot of listeners? 

[Raaphael]

What was wrong with it? The points were fair.

[tmsneil]

It`s narrative because the brunt of the criticism had nothing to do with Klopp and his regime right now. He needs to get a chance before we can conclude whether what he`s trying to do works or not. It`s a new era , new direction so harping on and on about the mistakes in the past is completely unnecessary and a waste of time.

Surely if the brunt of the criticism had nothing to do with Klopp and his regime right now then that is sound. Emphasising that is surely a good thing for Klopp and his regime right now - exactly how much he needs to overcome. Putting what he needs to do in context. It is no exaggeration to say that we are still paying for the H&G years, the Purslow eighteen months. You can see it in the age range of our squad. So it isn't unnecessary or a waste of time. It makes clear what he is up against.

[tmsneil]

Having listened to Citytalk show this morning, it did, to an extent, attempt to steady the ship on this

Quickly - it didn't *attempt* to do that. I emailed Sean that morning, said what do you fancy talking about, he said that Unwrapped was interesting, can we touch on it, I said sound, yeah, sure, we'll do that in Part Two. He said great. I had no idea what he was going to say before he said it. There was no attempt. There was people in a room talking about Liverpool FC. Sean and Paul had been down to do that show a couple of weeks ago.