Should Liverpool really be spending all that money on Alexander Isak? Do they need him? Does he break their transfer policy?
Send your mails to theeditor@football365.com. Read Big Weekend and send us some thoughts.
Want to talk ridiculous fees?
Liverpool sold Philippe Coutinho to Barcelona in 2018 for a fee (if many sources are to be believed) of £142m, including add ons. I really can’t believe Liverpool fans are suggesting that £150m for Isak is exorbitant.
Dave AFC
Seriously, do Liverpool need Isak?
Waaaay back in the day, I remember Alan Hansen saying about Liverpool’s continued success – when we never stopped winning – that the best transfer policy was 2 in and 2 out.
The 2 going out might have got older, injured , out of form etc, but the 2 coming in would be better. So therefore keeping the majority of what won you the title , with a few tweaks to keep it fresh. Obviously it wasn’t followed religiously every year but it worked as a general rule for our 70’s and 80’s successes. Two decades of league wins can’t be too far wrong.
Souness came in a changed *everything*. Result? Plummeted like a stone. He’s said himself he changed too much, too quickly.
So what in the fresh hell is happening at the moment? Hugo Ekitike is a flat out upgrade on Darwin Nunez – no problem there. Florian Wirtz is practically an upgrade on anyone, so I’m all good on that too. Add one full back to the mix, because no rules are completely hard and fast, and you’ve kept 8 from your title winning side and improved the other 3.
Makes sense to me. You have to evolve because your rivals aren’t standing still either but it’s important to remember that last year we added practically nothing and won the title. The guys knew what their teammates were going to do and played their games accordingly. Not having to work around a huge pile of change was a huge advantage to us.
So we don’t need bloody Isak now, especially at the ludicrous prices quoted. £150 million for a player we don’t need? That’s some distance from transfer genius to me.
And now we’re heavily linked with Rodrygo too. Why? Don’t need him either!
Here’s a thought. Focus on integrating the new players we already have, of which there are now many, and stop buying every class attacker that flirts in our general direction.
There’s all kinds of waffle about net spends and sustainability but just because you *can* buy lots of players, it doesn’t mean you *should*.
It could be Jan/Feb before we know our best team and how to play best together. That’s a hell of a head start for someone else who hits the ground running earlier.
One title is fabulous, of course it is, but who hasn’t got the taste for it again now? Slow down, smell the roses and remember Rome wasn’t built in a day.
James, Liverpool
…A few thoughts on the Isak ‘Odyssey’ (many of which echo other mailboxers):
– this has happened many times before.
– it’s getting very boring.
– no-one is coming out of it well…
– … but clubs are expected to be tough in negotiations, players are expected to play.
– thought Lfc had recently developed a ‘no dickheads’ policy…Isak may be in breach.
– we should focus on defenders.
– I was first really excited about signing him. Now not so sure.
– Or maybe ‘I never wanted him anyway’.
Aidan, Lfc (my wonderful Swedish mother in law loves him so I’ll keep these thoughts to myself)
Newcastle are deluded on Isak
“Liverpool should be having second thoughts the way he’s acting”
Lmfao.
Liverpool is a gigantic football club. They’ve been done over a thousand times and more by clubs with bigger pockets, usually based in Spain. They know how it all works. All is fair in love and war.
The thing that’s really gripping the shit of Newcastle fans is they know that deep down they’ve got a massive inferiority complex. Trying to cling on to Isak, despite the player not wanting to play for them anymore, is their deluded take on “acting like a big club”.
Here’s what big clubs do (ie everyone else who isn’t Real Madrid, the Apex Predator of football): you understand your place in the food chain. You take the money, however reluctantly. Then you plough it back in to your team and you back yourself to be better for it, even if it takes a year or two to come to fruition. Liverpool have done it before. They’ll do it again. Because they back themselves. They know they can always attract big players.
But Newcastle are not a big club. And they’re scared. They know they don’t have much pull. They’re terrified of having £150m sat in the bank, unable to spend it because no one worth their salt wants to go there. That’s the truth for the Geordie nation, however unpalatable.
But what’s worse? Having a player on the books who will spend the next 5 months faking “calf injuries”, depreciating? Or taking the money and at least TRYING to build something new and better?
Not really a choice, is it?
Andy H, Swansea
They bit it off whole
I see a plethora of This Means More FC’s wingnuts took the bait, hook, line, rod, and half of Sarah’s arm. Nary a Scouser among them either I’ll be bound.
RHT/TS x
Should Isak go Full Odemwingie?
I don’t begrudge a club trying to negotiate best value for a transfer, including Liverpool and Isak.
Isn’t the point though, that Newcastle’s stance on an acceptable fee was very well known to them, Isak has a long time left on his deal and Newcastle would rather have Isak in their team than £110m in the bank. Given the quality of player and length of his contract, Newcastle’s valuation makes sense in the current market, even if it is massive.
Newcastle are in a very strong position with Isak. He can’t realistically refuse to play for 3 years.
Now, none of us know the detail of what’s going on, but it is difficult to believe that a player would behave the way Isak has without some relatively firm encouragement from the buying team that, while they want to shave off a few quid, they are prepared to back up their offer with something approaching the required money, which doesn’t seem to be forthcoming here.
People compared it to Gyokeres and they’re right, he did behave in the same way, but by all reports at the point where Arsenal and Lisbon were like £3-4m apart and the deal got done quickly thereafter, rather than £30-40m as seems to be the case here.
I think that where Liverpool would be letting Isak down is by encouraging him to strike without being ready to put their money where their mouth is to get the deal done.
Now, a lot of the comments are right. Liverpool’s priority is to look after Liverpool, but I think that Isak may expect a prospective employer to show him a bit of love and duty of care.
Of course, I could be wrong. This could be Isak and his agent going full Odemwingie to make a move happen. Liverpool may have been as ignorant about it as the rest of us were… but I doubt it.
I for one am looking forward to the sight of Isak trying to manifest his dream move by loitering around outside Anfield and signing autographs on deadline day!
Andy (MUFC)
Two sides to every coin
With all the flak Isak is getting and I’m not saying it’s unjustified, only a small handful of people have tried to comment from a different angle.
MUFC, and they’re not the only one’s to have done this, have ostracised players within their squad by not allowing them to train with the other members of the first team squad. Whilst advertising that these players are surplus to requirements and available for transfer, have they set transfer fees too high to attract them to “smaller” clubs? Clearly the wages of these players are a stumbling block as Utd will have given them huge increases when they were bought. If they do not manage to sell these players, then their value will drop for future windows but more importantly for the player, his potential earnings will also drop even further. The psychological effect of “failing” at Utd is also detrimental to their career.
Why should Utd not to be expected to pay the remainder of the contracts thus allowing the player to accept a lower offer, safe in the knowledge that their earnings will actually be higher for this period of time. Alternatively should Utd terminate the contracts making the players free agents and allowing potential new clubs to pay higher wages due to paying nothing to Utd.
Had Isak not performed to the levels he has, Newcastle would have no hesitation in moving him on. I’m sure boyhood Newcastle fans Elliot Anderson and Sean Longstaff were heartbroken to be told “you’re no longer required, we’ve accepted bids from XXX, go and sort your own terms out”.
Isak is being vilified for being attracted by a move to a bigger club (sorry but they are)and an increase in earnings, yes his behaviour is wrong but whether Newcastle made a gentleman’s agreement or not, surely they should be willing to enter into negotiations which they appear unwilling to do so, their “we can’t foresee our criteria being met” suggests they are willing, but a straight “no” to Liverpool would appear to mean “we haven’t told you (or Isak) what these are”. They have made him a new contract offer (bit odd if it has a 2026 release clause, what’s the point?) but if that were couched in a “if we don’t get what we want, this is what we’ll do for you” manner then maybe Isak would have a different stance, this may still happen but there hasn’t been any reference to it. Their stance seems to be “we’ve offered him a contract, he’s turned it down what more can we do”?
I expect to get some stick for this next bit, but LFC have shown with Luis Diaz that they are willing to acquiesce to a players needs, they informed him that they were not willing to meet his contract expectations and allowed him and his agent to seek them elsewhere, they did say all along that they were more than happy to retain him for the remainder of his contract but acknowledged that this could have a negative effect in the future. It seems fairly common knowledge that his agent and his father (didn’t LFC take great care of him after his kidnapping?) were touting him to Barcelona a season earlier but as no formal offer was ever made, both the player and the club went on to have a great season.
The transfer world is a murky one but an unhappy club seem to be outraged when there is an unhappy player, cake and eat it springs to mind.
Howard (he could do a “Bogarde”) Jones
On those Man Utd pressures
A company I used to work for wasn’t a particularly good place to work. I’m good at my job, good enough to do what’s normally expected in my position and several other roles that aren’t. I didn’t get any recognition for seamlessly doing what I was employed to do but I was constantly criticised for minor mistakes in roles outside my actual job without any guidance on how to improve. Perks didn’t exist, I was constantly refused pay rises and told that I was lucky to work for such a big company. I watched as they made entire departments redundant and their work outsourced while the most valuable employees that remained weren’t reassured about their job security. It was a miserable and eventually they lost all the capable staff they relied on to actually deliver.
People are humans, they need to feel valued and wanted if they’re to be happy.
Utd have always had this “privileged to play for the club” mentality and it was true when they had the pick of the best players in the world. That’s not true anymore but the sentiment remains and is the sole reason for everything that Badwolf questions. Your players perform better elsewhere because they’re wanted elsewhere. Your fans demand that a player in bad form is publicly flogged and you’ve had a lot of recent managers that have been very happy to oblige. Your fans demand that your managers tell the world how bad their players are and then the same fans get angry when nobody wants to buy them for £50m.
Your players are watching as the club is torn apart under the pretense of bankruptcy while being constantly told how shit they are, how they need to get out of “our club”, getting blamed for things that aren’t their fault and publicly humiliated to appease an entitled fanbase lost to nostalgia. Fans that cry that everything is a mistake, win or lose. Fans that question every decision with perfect 20/20 hindsight vision. It’s no surprise that players do better when away from that ubiquitous toxicity.
SC, Belfast
How could Arsenal have covered for Havertz?
I don’t understand Will Ford’s article, particularly the last paragraph which he said Arsenal’s back up striker is Merino, a situation that should have been avoided this summer. Do tell, how do you avoid it, sign 3 additional strikers?
Last season Arsenal lost Jesus and Harvetz and had to rely on Merino. The club signed Gyokeres this summer while Jesus (who should be close to returning) and Harvetz just literally got injured. Turns out there’s now coverage for a situation Arsenal struggled with last season. Of course there’s always a possibility Gyokeres get injured but how many back ups does a club realistically need? Injuries are part of the game and you can’t legislate for every eventuality. In what world does anyone look at Arsenal’s summer so far and still find a negative?
Yinka (London)
Man Utd v Arsenal chat still rumbling on
I think we’ve officially reached the point where we don’t need any more new views on the Man United vs Arsenal match, considered or otherwise… but here’s one more (kinda sorta).
Man Utd fans have the right to be optimistic about what they saw, especially in comparison with last season’s disaster. Arsenal fans have the right to be simultaneously concerned by a disjointed performance and elated by the fact that the same disjointed performance was enough to take 3 points at a stadium where various generations of the club’s teams have struggled (six ‘1-0’ wins in 34 visits during the Premier League era). That said, it’s oddly amusing to hear and read fans of “winning is all that matters” FC continuously bleating on about a “great performance” that didn’t even result in a single goal (that used to be Arsenal’s thing)!
Nothing about either team’s performance in one game is enough to project into what will happen the rest of the season. We’ll know more about which team is “better” on January 24th, when Man Utd visit The Emirates, and in May after the season ends. I’d put a lot of money on the answer being Arsenal though. That’s really all any of us should be taking from a week one matchup between a slowly/expensively rebuilding team and a contender that’s undergoing a stylistic evolution.
Well, that and 3 points for The Arsenal.
Deen (AFC, USA)
…After a few days to mull over United’s performance against Arsenal and allowing the excitement of ‘not being absolute dogshit’ to settle, here are some general thoughts.
Amorim has done a very good job over the summer break in getting his players in much better condition and they obviously have a higher physical level than last year.
The first phase of build up was very good. Using first the wingbacks then later the wide centre backs to play directly into the Cunha and Mbeumo worked well and Arteta had to change his tactics twice to deal with it, in the end becoming very compact and ceding the bulk of possession.
The second phase of build up was very rough and there didnt seem to be much of a plan for breaking through Arsenal’s low block. Despite them being the best defence in the league it would have been nice to see a bit more invention when attacking the box.
This may be a season long problem. Amorim is setting United up as a quick transition high impact team, albeit one that retains possession rather than counters. If the opposition just sit deep and never take the pressing bait will he have a plan B to break them down?
Across the whole team there was a distinct improvement in the effort and willingness to fight for the ball. Arsenal players were not allowed to hold possession without being harried and United looked far more combative in duels.
In context a good first performance and certainly better than expected but we’ll see how it goes. An average of 1.8 points per game should be the target this year so no serious judgements until we’ve got a decent sample.
Dave, Manchester