Liverpool

Thrugelmir

kennyboy66 wrote: »

Liverpool this season had 62 professional players on their books, although some were loaned out.
I think in 1983/4 they won the league and European Cup fielding just 16 players.

Arsenal won the double in 70/71 with 14 players. And one of those only played in 3 games.

Bob Wilson played every game that season, 64 in total including friendlies.

Went to a book event a few weeks back where BW spoke. Very interesting guy. Has a good insight into football even today.

Backbiter

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Arsenal won the double in 70/71 with 14 players. And one of those only played in 3 games.

Bob Wilson played every game that season, 64 in total including friendlies.

Went to a book event a few weeks back where BW spoke. Very interesting guy. Has a good insight into football even today.

That's an amazing stat, which raises a few questions:
a) were Arsenal just lucky with injuries? (though Liverpool had a similar stat in the 70s)
b) was the game less dirty in those days? (it was definitely slower, but TV evidence shows that players kicked lumps out of each other, e.g 1970 Chelsea-Leeds Replay - incredible fouls by both sides that went unpunished)
c) did Arsenal pump their players with cortisone to get them through games? There was a TV documentary on that a few years ago - players from the 1960s on given injections so they could play with injuries. They were left crippled afterwards. One Liverpool player never played again after one jab (Geoff Strong? in a mid 60s European match at Anfield, before subs were allowed).)

kennyboy66_2

Backbiter wrote: »

That's an amazing stat, which raises a few questions:
a) were Arsenal just lucky with injuries? (though Liverpool had a similar stat in the 70s)
b) was the game less dirty in those days? (it was definitely slower, but TV evidence shows that players kicked lumps out of each other, e.g 1970 Chelsea-Leeds Replay - incredible fouls by both sides that went unpunished)
c) did Arsenal pump their players with cortisone to get them through games? There was a TV documentary on that a few years ago - players from the 1960s on given injections so they could play with injuries. They were left crippled afterwards. One Liverpool player never played again after one jab (Geoff Strong? in a mid 60s European match at Anfield, before subs were allowed).)

The game was miles slower, even in the 1980's. In some games it looks like players are walking around at times. The ball is 'live' more now as you can't pass it back to the keeper (and him pick it up). I'd suspect most injuries are actually non-contact, ie hamstrings, many serious injuries are also non contact (cruiciate ligament, achillies tendons etc)

Really2

Debt now refinanced.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8170699.stm


Liverpool Football Club - which owes two banks £350m - has renegotiated its debt with the Royal Bank of Scotland. Club owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett are believed to have extended the £290m RBS debt for another year, but agreed to pay back £60m.

Thrugelmir

Really2 wrote: »

Debt now refinanced.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8170699.stm


Liverpool Football Club - which owes two banks £350m - has renegotiated its debt with the Royal Bank of Scotland. Club owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett are believed to have extended the £290m RBS debt for another year, but agreed to pay back £60m.

Explains the lack of activity by Liverpool in the transfer market.

chucky

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Explains the lack of activity by Liverpool in the transfer market.

£18 million on a right back who has played the pre-season friendlies at left back isn't lack of activity... it's putting most of your eggs in one basket...

Thrugelmir

chucky wrote: »

£18 million on a right back who has played the pre-season friendlies at left back isn't lack of activity... it's putting most of your eggs in one basket...

£18 million is peanuts in the current market . Though I'm finding the goings on at Notts County fascinating.

chucky

Thrugelmir wrote: »

£18 million is peanuts in the current market . Though I'm finding the goings on at Notts County fascinating.

i'm surprised anyone would think it was peanuts... paying £18 million for a right back who has a very low marketing potential is a bit too expensive in any market...

i'd also love to know the finance and the plan behind this Notts County project.
it's got all the markings to end in tears though...

Sportbilly_2

chucky wrote: »

£18 million on a right back who has played the pre-season friendlies at left back isn't lack of activity... it's putting most of your eggs in one basket...

Most of that was paid from the fee still owed for Crouch. I'd imagine any other buys would depend on whether Alonso gets off loaded or not.

Johnson's looked pretty decent at left-back, btw. Given that Aurelio's out injured yet again, he could be an option there if need be.

chucky

Sportbilly wrote: »

Most of that was paid from the fee still owed for Crouch. I'd imagine any other buys would depend on whether Alonso gets off loaded or not.

Johnson's looked pretty decent at left-back, btw. Given that Aurelio's out injured yet again, he could be an option there if need be.

only bantering...

he is a v.good player, a good buy - not sure about the £18 million as i said. Insua was also away in the youth tournament and Dossena had been away at the Confederations Cup so were not available. so he was the only real option.

i'm sure Benitez will be buying another couple of his fave £6 million players... no need to worry Liverpool fans...