The Weekend’s Other Games 16/01/21

[Steveo]

Anyone seen Sid about lately..?

[Kev0909]

Anyone seen Sid about lately..?

Not since CCTV upset him

[skyebo]

Comparing Origi and Ings is like comparing me to Superman, or indeed anyone who can raise any of their body parts without calling out in pain.

That is one of our problems. Nobody should be undroppable. On recent form any of our front three should be under pressure for their place, but given our one and only decent alternative was injured after being played in a meaningless match, we have no choice but to keep playing them game after game, irrespective of form, fitness or opposition.

That's why they keep getting games, because no-one else can get any goals. Pointless looking at any of the midfield players for help.

[justme]

A fit Danny Ings will always get you goals. The trouble was, he was never shifting the front three, as Origi has already found out.

Exactly. Origi has hardly ever started has the main striker. Dann Ings wouldn't have gotten the games..Klopp wanted to keep him. But he was fair with Ings and let him go to get games.
In fact we have not actually ever bought a natural number 9 under Klopp..He likes players in the main role to drop off and be a false 9.

[Steveo]

Like that old false 9 Lewandowski.

[Balinkay]

As did most of those who knew anything about him.

Given how we've hung onto other players with fitness issues, players who aren't anywhere near as good as him, I'm still miffed that we sold him. Personally I would not be at all surprised if Klopp wanted to keep him, but our 'overlords' said "no dice".

Why would they say "no dice" to him but not Oxo or Keita?

[Steveo]

Both Ox and Keita look like Career sick notes. Ings was unlucky with bad injuries not a constant recurring lack of fitness. Besides who is going to pay a wedge for the Ox or Keita?

Money on them is lost - looks like damage limitation. Get as many minutes until contracts to run down - the. Sell cheap or let go.

Ings - a natural striker was always going to go for a mint. Even Benteke did.

The difference? Profit..
bought Ings for £8 million sold for £20..!

Profit....

[Balinkay]

But if you want damage limitation, surely it makes sense to sell as soon as possible before their value drops off further because of their age and contract length, no? They're not playing at all anyway - might as well make some money.

In the end you'll lose them for nothing when their contract runs out.

[Steveo]

Who will buy them for anything but a huge loss now? Who will pay their salaries.? And more importantly would it be close to enough to give Klopp enough to replace them?

The sad reality is - we are a selling club. For Klopp to keep his main men he has to “pay the bills.” His own words.

We went out and tried to get Keita on the cheap BEFORE anyone else entered the bidding - backfired. Were due to sell Coutinho and bag Virgil and the Ox in August nut Couts deal fell through and Ox arrived. A 2nd, 3rd or 4th choice player (Ox) again on the cheap due to injury record. Arsenal were cock a hoop they got £35 million for him.

This is why I give 90% of all the credit to Klopp - 10% to the owners - credit them for getting their man... but beyond that - this house has shallow foundations - they come from the Black Forrest and will likely return.

[Balinkay]

But someone will buy them for some money Even if it's a loss, some money is better than the no money we'd get when we lose them for free. They're currently not playing or contributing anything to results on the pitch so even giving them away would make for a smaller loss than keeping them around.

This line of thinking makes a lot more sense with Wij - he's playing regularly and contributing to results (and to money influx) so it possibly makes financial sense to hang on to him. I don't understand the thinking behind doing the same with someone who doesn't actually play.