“I’M not just talking about winning games, but the way we do things and the way we conduct ourselves. The class and dignity this club was renowned for. It’s the way Liverpool used to be seen by people and we should be aiming to recreate that.”
Jamie Carragher is speaking on the eve of his testimonial in September 2010 amidst a time of unprecedented turmoil at Anfield. The owners are aloof and vilified, the manager is Roy Hodgson and the summer just been has witnessed a dampening of expectations in the transfer market without the allure of Champions League football. It’s a seismic pre-season in the recent history of the club; marking an abrupt end to the Rafa Benitez era and a sharp change in direction.
In a wide-ranging interview Carragher talks about the club reclaiming its identity, about the end of internal politicking and open hostility with other Premier League clubs. He exudes a positivity completely at odds with the situation at the club as it begins its descent down the domestic and European food chain.
The manager had been appointed not because he was the best person available, but because he was cheap, English and well respected; someone to “steady the ship”. His nationality was widely seen as the most important aspect of his appointment, a reclaiming of traditions and a clean break from the continental ideals that had seeped into the club through 12 years of foreign management.
Throughout the club, from the coaching staff to the playing staff, a feeling prevailed — among sections of the fan base and the UK media too — that Liverpool had lost its identity.
Between 2005 and 2010 the club had spent only 31 per cent of its transfer dealings within the Premier League. The spine of a Champions League winning side, and the 2008-9 vintage, were drawn from within the academy, across Europe and the world, with a prominent sprinkling of Spanish-Latin American flavouring coming after Gerard Houllier’s French wave at the beginning of the decade.
Of the £208.55m spent between 2005 and 2010 only £64.7m went on “Premier League proven talent” — one of the biggest myths in football — with Benitez spending well over half of his £61.2m outlay on Robbie Keane and Glen Johnson. Those summers of 2008 and 2009 look to represent, with hindsight, the moment that the Premier League premium jumped up a level, after the modest sums that had been spent on Yossi Benayoun, Jermaine Pennant, Craig Bellamy and Peter Crouch in the previous windows.
(Though a sizeable sum was spent to bring Javier Mascherano from West Ham, he was hardly “Premier League proven” as he languished in the reserves behind Hayden Mullins for much of his time there).
What’s key is that the acquisition of Premier League talent was always supplemented by arrivals from afar. Rather than forming the basis of a pre-ordained policy, the player’s background didn’t matter, it was their skill set and character. Only Benayoun and Crouch made a lasting impression, with the others failing to fire beyond the short-term — or in Robbie Keane’s case, failing to fire at all.
Since the appointment of Hodgson and the arrival of FSG the shift in player recruitment has been stark. From the summer of 2011 up until the summer of 2014 the amount invested in Premier League proven talent has jumped to 52 per cent of the total transfer outlay; a significant increase on the years that preceded it and a trend that has survived changes of manager and numerous shifts in recruitment policies.
There are some caveats; that the inflation of Premier League prices will invariably take a larger chunk out of your budget than before, and the extended absence of Champions League football that impacted on the club’s ability to attract top talent. Yet still, the numbers that Liverpool shelve out on Premier League players in this period are eye-watering: £167.25m out of a total gross spend of £322.8m. Daniel Sturridge aside, the money is invariably splashed on players at mid-to-lower-level clubs; Aston Villa, Blackpool, Newcastle, Southampton, Sunderland and Swansea — the reality of the “Premier League proven talent” misnomer.
The £35m that Kenny Dalglish and Damien Comolli splashed on Andy Carroll was an early indicator of where they, and the owners, saw Liverpool’s transfer philosophy heading. The calendar year of 2011 saw an unprecedented splurge on Premier League talent of £81.75m; not only were the Reds spending more than at any point since 2005 — indeed in their history — but 73 per cent of their outlay was being funneled within the confines of their own domestic league.
The idea that buying English-based players offered a guarantee over foreign investment had taken root — that they would be less of a gamble, would take less time to bed in, and provide a decent resale value. It is a policy not dissimilar to the one Dalglish would have recognised from the club’s history; identifying domestic talent that was ready to take the step up. Football has changed, however. That the club’s best signings since the turn of the millennium had little or no Premier League experience upon arrival was, seemingly, ignored.
The English obsession is safe, predictable and not exactly cost-effective. Limiting your squad to a certain cross-section limits your potential. A melange of backgrounds and footballing cultures keeps things fresh and broadens horizons, new ideas seep through and are encouraged rather than restricted. Buying from an English source isn’t necessarily worthless — in 2005 Liverpool won the European Cup and then signed Peter Crouch (God knows what Twitter would have made of that) — but importantly that was supplemented by purchases from abroad.
The club has not invested in English-based talent as heavily or unilaterally since 2011 but it has remained a distinct feature of the overall plan, as shown by the £49.5m spent on Southampton players last summer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r-tBUUl6UU
At the time of writing Liverpool have agreed terms with six new signings, five of whom have come from England, four from the Premier League and three on free transfers. The media line has remained consistent, that the club values and actively targets that infamous red herring; Premier League proven talent. The capture of Roberto Firmino is significant in many ways, namely how the club have identified a target and quickly done their business. It suggests, too, a flexibility to the English doctrine that has dominated the summer so far, and the endless links to Christian Benteke.
Are the transfer committee haunted by the deals of summer 2013, in particular the moves for Iago Aspas and Luis Alberto, or the failures of Nuri Sahin, Fabio Borini and Oussama Assaidi? Perhaps. But it should be remembered that no transfer is guaranteed, that 50 per cent of transfers fail no matter their provenance. The remaining targets — presumably one or two more strikers — should be identified intelligently, with their integration into the Liverpool set up and style of play being the distinction they should be merited on, not the league the play in.
Further restrictions on the pool of talent will further restrict possibility; the English obsession will ultimately hold Liverpool back.
[rpfc_recent_posts_from_category meta=”true”]
Pics: David Rawcliffe-Propaganda-Photo
Like The Anfield Wrap on Facebook
Subscribe to TAW Player: https://www.theanfieldwrap.com/player/subscribe
Couldn’t agree more. 2011 felt like we’d just signed players from watching Match of the Day or who looked the part against us assuming they’d automatically be as good slotting in for us. Carroll had a good game and scored against us in December 2010 right before signing. Ditto Downing last game of that 2011 season. Adam strolling round Anfield looking like a tubby Steve Gerrard against Hodgson’s Liverpool (his corners weren’t worth £10m alone, were they? Mustn’t be a ‘top, top player’).
Weirdly, Rodger’s watched what Kenny tried to do (“trying to build and fly the plane at the same time”) and made a similar mistake over Lovren and arguably Lallana who I still think he was unlucky with injuries and will come good. I like the Clyne signing just because I reckon he’ll be a good player in that position for us over the course of seasons to come; not because he gets a goal first game of last season.
Funnily enough it’s the domestic players you can’t remember having demonstrably influential performances against us like Henderson, Allen and Sturridge that have been the much better signings in this time simply because they fit in to how we go about playing our best football.
I’m not as anti-the signing of Benteke as I was just after watching his pitifully ineffectual, Balotelli as lone striker-esque cup final performance but if we still haven’t cottoned on that signing players just because they’re a bit of a bogey player for you is no way to sign a good Liverpool player yet, we never will. Jon Walters has given our defence a rough time of it and scored against us the last few seasons but we’re not linked with the fucker are we? Benteke’s got the potential and can make at least some actual runs but I’m still not sure it’s enough for us with the money being talked about. It’s a low bar for Benteke to clear but we can’t afford to have our fingers burnt anywhere near like we did with Balotelli. The big centre forward signing *has* to come off for us if we’re to bridge any gap; smart till the final third but then blunt footy gets us 5th at best next season.
I know the 50% of transfers fail statement is firmly engrained with writers now, but that seems to only hold because the transfer policy at most top English clubs in recent years does not seem to make much sense at all. With this being the case, it is no surprise at the continued struggles of the Premier League clubs to replicate the domination of the European competition from a decade ago, despite our clubs having far greater financial resources than all bar a handful of European clubs.
From last season I had called for the signings of Lacazette, Firmino, Ricardo Rodriguez, Song & Aurier, plus Rodwell, Wickham to supplement the squad and English numbers. All players within the 22-23 age bracket, with clear assets that they could have added to the squad. Some may have failed to settle into the squad but I always felt they would have had a far greater chance of success than the signings that we actually made.
I’d put much more weight/trust in a player putting in consistently top notch performances in a ‘weaker’ league replicating those on transfer, than a ‘decent’ Premier League player stepping up to become a top player for LFC.
“….50 per cent of transfers fail no matter their provenance.”
Does that figure hold true to transfers under, say, a Mourinho helmed Chelsea? Or is it dependent on the Manager / Transfer Committee / hat the names are drawn out of?
It may hold true for Mourinho is if we consider the signings Chelsea makes just for the sake of stockpiling talent and loaning them out around Europe forever.
I’m sure that the success rate would be a great deal higher if just considering players that were signed to go directly into the first choice 16, particularly during last summer’s window.
Some teams will be able to buck the trend over a season or two, especially teams who can afford to discerning in the market because they have a successful, settled side.
However, even Chelsea have their share of misses. Just from last season, Filipe Luis and Juan Cuadrado represents £43m spent on players who can’t be regarded successful.
The problem with the “50% rule” is that it largely assumes all signings are to strengthen the first XI, since it is based on number of games played. Some players are signed purely as backups or squad players and shouldn’t contribute to this statistic.