Which side will win the Liverpool vs Manchester City Premier League encounter on 10th November?

[RickyG]

I love Pep. I was desperate for us to get him. It was a dream that was never going to happen.

I did have doubts about Klopp, but he has proven me wrong.

Pep would've never ever gone to Arsenal if United or City positions were open.

 

[in_cutter]

Keita has been hampered by injuries but he has also been poor when he has been fit. Chamberlain has surpassed him in the pecking order with his excellent performances. It will be difficult for Keita to establish himself as a starter and he will probably be sold soon.

It was a poor signing by Klopp in the first place - he is not a bad player, but he didn’t need to spend 50 million on a player when he already had Fabinho (signed a month before Keita), Henderson, Wijnaldum and Chamberlain.

That 50 million could have been spent more wisely to strengthen the team in a different area where they are not stacked. Liverpool fan’s complain about the lack of squad depth but Klopp hasn’t handled covered himself in glory on that front. Signing an attacking player to cover for Salah, Mane and Firmino would have been more prudent than signing another midfielder.

Also, you need to understand the context of MMHS’s criticism of Pep. He claims that he is only successful because he buys expensive players, but that is also true for Klopp. There is a reason why he paid world record fees for Alisson and VVD instead of settling for cheaper alternatives. That is not a dig at Klopp - it is simply the reality of modern football - you have to pay big money if you want to sign quality, and Pep is not alone on this front.

As far as net spending is concerned, Liverpool got lucky because of the 100 million that they got for Coutinho. Unfortunately, City don’t have any world class players who are desperate to leave the club for Barcelona or Madrid. If De Bruyne was to force a move, Pep can easily recoup more than what Liverpool got for Coutinho and his net spend wouldn’t look that bad.

Both Klopp and Pep have different circumstances in different clubs. If Klopp was at City he wouldn’t have a lower net spend than Pep.

Keita is yet to be given a good run. He will come good..if he stays.

 

[Hasan123]

Pep would've never ever gone to Arsenal if United or City positions were open.

The City moved was planned for a while. As soon as City hired the old Barcelona directors, it was clear he would join City.

 

[RickyG]

The City moved was planned for a while. As soon as City hired the old Barcelona directors, it was clear he would join City.

Potentially, but I can't envision a situation where Pep would turn down a job at United or City for Arsenal is my point regardless of directors or what not. But having the old Barca directors did make it a much easier decision for him.

In fact, I don't think Pep would've ever taken over the Arsenal job. It neither has the prestige he would want nor can they match City's or United's spending.

I could only see him going to City or United as he wouldn't feel any other club could match his ambition.

 

[KingKhan12]

How do you know MO didn't see Bernardo's handball? The fact VAR doesn't mention it doesn't mean MO didn't see it. VAR could've only looked at Trent's hand ball and said that's not a clear and obvious error so move on.

The point of VAR is to find objective clear and obvious errors. What you're stating is an opinion which is subjective not objective.

With regards to "most didn't want City to win". That's just some classic victimhood. City fans right now are talking off the game being bent and officials being biased. Ex-pros talking about it being 13 v 11.

Even the Sterling vs Gomez fall out, City fans are suggesting Sterling is the victim or Sterling was correct in trying to engage in a fight with Gomez while on England duty.

If that's your mindset then I can't help you. It's one thing to feel hard done by a decision and wallowing in your self pity for a bit and it's completely another to feel so entitled to win that you think only a conspiracy could've prevented from happening.

The VAR checked the penalty appeal for handball against Trent Alexander‑Arnold,” said a Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) statement.

“[It] confirmed the on-field decision that it did not meet the considerations for a deliberate handball.”


So going by the officials on match day clearly Michael Oliver didn't give the penalty because of Bernardo Silvas handball so stop chatting **** please and trying to talk about my mindset. I've just stated the fact but some reason Liverpool fans are hell bent to prove it was not given because of Bernardo Silvas handball which is not true as cleared by the match officials.

Lol and seriously you are deluded. What mindset I don't support Man City or Liverpool so it don't bother me. I rather Liverpool win the league then Man City who always used to steal our players lol.

But it's fact about the handball which Liverpool fans are hell bent not accepting and people who hate Man City. I predicted a Liverpool win beforehand as didn't see them losing at home to a weak back line team of Man City. And even without that decision maybe Liverpool would won but that was a deciding factor aswell. Officials ruined what could have been a really really good game for a neutral especially.

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=134460]RickyG[/MENTION]

Please show me the post where I have claimed that both Klopp and Pep have spent the same amount? Please don’t insult my intelligence, I did not start watching football yesterday.

This is what I wrote:

“Saint Klopp spent 52 million On Nabi Keita, a midfielder who is Liverpool’s fifth choice at the moment. But no, only Pep has a checkbook in his hand.“

How on earth did you make that conclusion from this post? I am simply implying that Klopp also spends big money on players and thus it is unfair to call Pep a checkbook manager.

Furthermore, as far as the net spend is concerned, you need to understand the different dynamics of Man City and Liverpool. Man City is a small club that is very eager to establish itself as a powerhouse. They don’t have the patience or the support that a historic club like Liverpool has.

At Man City, if you don’t win the title every season your job is under threat. Since the takeover in 2008, they have sacked two PL winning managers (Mancini and Pellegrini).

When they brought Pep in 2016, they expected him to deliver the PL and the CL right away.

On the contrary, Klopp had the luxury of having the time to rebuild the squad and not be tasked with winning the PL right away.

Take a look at Liverpool’s position in the table under Klopp:

2015-16: 8th
2016-17: 4th
2017-18: 4th
2018-19: 2nd (first trophy)

Liverpool gave Klopp four seasons to seriously challenge for the title and win a trophy. Had he failed to win a trophy last season, he would still have not been sacked.

On the other hand, Pep was immediately under pressure to deliver the PL, which he did in his second season in 2017-18. The squad that he inherited from Pellegrini was not suitable to his style of play and he had to spend big quickly to revamp the side and win the title in his second season.

Had Klopp joined City instead and produced the same results that he did at Liverpool in his first two seasons, i.e. finishing 8th and 4th and winning nothing, he would have been sacked unceremoniously.

If he was tasked to win the PL as soon as his second season, he would have had no choice but to spend big immediately, which he would have to had he joined City instead of Liverpool.

 

[KingKhan12]

[MENTION=134460]RickyG[/MENTION]

Please show me the post where I have claimed that both Klopp and Pep have spent the same amount? Please don’t insult my intelligence, I did not start watching football yesterday.

This is what I wrote:

“Saint Klopp spent 52 million On Nabi Keita, a midfielder who is Liverpool’s fifth choice at the moment. But no, only Pep has a checkbook in his hand.“

How on earth did you make that conclusion from this post? I am simply implying that Klopp also spends big money on players and thus it is unfair to call Pep a checkbook manager.

Furthermore, as far as the net spend is concerned, you need to understand the different dynamics of Man City and Liverpool. Man City is a small club that is very eager to establish itself as a powerhouse. They don’t have the patience or the support that a historic club like Liverpool has.

At Man City, if you don’t win the title every season your job is under threat. Since the takeover in 2008, they have sacked two PL winning managers (Mancini and Pellegrini).

When they brought Pep in 2016, they expected him to deliver the PL and the CL right away.

On the contrary, Klopp had the luxury of having the time to rebuild the squad and not be tasked with winning the PL right away.

Take a look at Liverpool’s position in the table under Klopp:

2015-16: 8th
2016-17: 4th
2017-18: 4th
2018-19: 2nd (first trophy)

Liverpool gave Klopp four seasons to seriously challenge for the title and win a trophy. Had he failed to win a trophy last season, he would still have not been sacked.

On the other hand, Pep was immediately under pressure to deliver the PL, which he did in his second season in 2017-18. The squad that he inherited from Pellegrini was not suitable to his style of play and he had to spend big quickly to revamp the side and win the title in his second season.

Had Klopp joined City instead and produced the same results that he did at Liverpool in his first two seasons, i.e. finishing 8th and 4th and winning nothing, he would have been sacked unceremoniously.

If he was tasked to win the PL as soon as his second season, he would have had no choice but to spend big immediately, which he would have to had he joined City instead of Liverpool.

Ignore him I've mentioned about the handball and he's coming up with some next crap and saying it's my mindset and crap like that. Seriously he's deluded. Instead of having a genuine debate he coming up with crap and lies as he can't hear anything against Liverpool and Klopp

 

[RickyG]

The VAR checked the penalty appeal for handball against Trent Alexander‑Arnold,” said a Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) statement.

“[It] confirmed the on-field decision that it did not meet the considerations for a deliberate handball.”


So going by the officials on match day clearly Michael Oliver didn't give the penalty because of Bernardo Silvas handball so stop chatting **** please and trying to talk about my mindset. I've just stated the fact but some reason Liverpool fans are hell bent to prove it was not given because of Bernardo Silvas handball which is not true as cleared by the match officials.

Lol and seriously you are deluded. What mindset I don't support Man City or Liverpool so it don't bother me. I rather Liverpool win the league then Man City who always used to steal our players lol.

But it's fact about the handball which Liverpool fans are hell bent not accepting and people who hate Man City. I predicted a Liverpool win beforehand as didn't see them losing at home to a weak back line team of Man City. And even without that decision maybe Liverpool would won but that was a deciding factor aswell. Officials ruined what could have been a really really good game for a neutral especially.

Are you okay? You've just had a Sterling-esque mental disintegration. Your next post to me might as well be "you think you're the big man now?"

The PGMOL statement doesn't prove whether MO saw the handball or didn't see it. You and I are both guessing at this but you're completely convinced MO didn't see Bernardo's handball without any evidence.

And I've literally said the same thing that you're now agreeing with in bold. That MO didn't give the penalty maybe because he saw Bernardo's handball. And you can't have a goal scoring chance directly from a handball so it made sense.

Also I no longer know what your argument is because on one hand you say MO didn't give the penalty because of Bernardo's handball. Then you say Liverpool fans are trying to prove it wasn't given because of the handball. So why are Liverpool fans wrong for speaking the truth?

What is there to accept? That the correct decision was made? How did the officials ruin the game? Every call was correct and one call was at best 50/50.

You're saying you don't support Man City. But you're more upset than anyone about Man City not getting that one 50/50 call.

 

[RickyG]

[MENTION=134460]RickyG[/MENTION]

Please show me the post where I have claimed that both Klopp and Pep have spent the same amount? Please don’t insult my intelligence, I did not start watching football yesterday.

This is what I wrote:

“Saint Klopp spent 52 million On Nabi Keita, a midfielder who is Liverpool’s fifth choice at the moment. But no, only Pep has a checkbook in his hand.“

How on earth did you make that conclusion from this post? I am simply implying that Klopp also spends big money on players and thus it is unfair to call Pep a checkbook manager.

Furthermore, as far as the net spend is concerned, you need to understand the different dynamics of Man City and Liverpool. Man City is a small club that is very eager to establish itself as a powerhouse. They don’t have the patience or the support that a historic club like Liverpool has.

At Man City, if you don’t win the title every season your job is under threat. Since the takeover in 2008, they have sacked two PL winning managers (Mancini and Pellegrini).

When they brought Pep in 2016, they expected him to deliver the PL and the CL right away.

On the contrary, Klopp had the luxury of having the time to rebuild the squad and not be tasked with winning the PL right away.

Take a look at Liverpool’s position in the table under Klopp:

2015-16: 8th
2016-17: 4th
2017-18: 4th
2018-19: 2nd (first trophy)

Liverpool gave Klopp four seasons to seriously challenge for the title and win a trophy. Had he failed to win a trophy last season, he would still have not been sacked.

On the other hand, Pep was immediately under pressure to deliver the PL, which he did in his second season in 2017-18. The squad that he inherited from Pellegrini was not suitable to his style of play and he had to spend big quickly to revamp the side and win the title in his second season.

Had Klopp joined City instead and produced the same results that he did at Liverpool in his first two seasons, i.e. finishing 8th and 4th and winning nothing, he would have been sacked unceremoniously.

If he was tasked to win the PL as soon as his second season, he would have had no choice but to spend big immediately, which he would have to had he joined City instead of Liverpool.

How are you comparing a guy with the highest net spend and a guy with the 14th highest net spend?

One guy has 6 times the net spend as the other guy. That is literally the only thing I objected to. Even now I'm raising an objection to the following: "I am simply implying that Klopp also spends big money on players and thus it is unfair to call Pep a checkbook manager."

In their first two summer transfer windows (2016 and 2017), Klopp had net spend of +26m Euros and Pep had a net spend of -404m Euros. You can't say they're on the same level of spending simply because Klopp spent 3 expensive players.

If Klopp has spent 50m+ on 3 players Pep has spent that amount 7 players. They are not the same.

Also regarding what you said initially about Keita. If that doesn't imply that Klopp spends the same as Guardiola then I don't know what does.

The rest of your argument about expectations and what not is redundant. You suggested that both Klopp and Guardiola have spent money and are "checkbook" managers. I showed you one has spent 6 times less than the other so they are not. This isn't a discussion of expectations and I'm not even debating qualities of Guardiola as a coach/manager.

Also I've not insulted your intelligence but do you expect me let you make up facts as you go (e.g. Keita signing)?

If me referring to facts is insulting your intelligence then there's not much I can do to help you.

 

[KingKhan12]

Are you okay? You've just had a Sterling-esque mental disintegration. Your next post to me might as well be "you think you're the big man now?"

The PGMOL statement doesn't prove whether MO saw the handball or didn't see it. You and I are both guessing at this but you're completely convinced MO didn't see Bernardo's handball without any evidence.

And I've literally said the same thing that you're now agreeing with in bold. That MO didn't give the penalty maybe because he saw Bernardo's handball. And you can't have a goal scoring chance directly from a handball so it made sense.

Also I no longer know what your argument is because on one hand you say MO didn't give the penalty because of Bernardo's handball. Then you say Liverpool fans are trying to prove it wasn't given because of the handball. So why are Liverpool fans wrong for speaking the truth?

What is there to accept? That the correct decision was made? How did the officials ruin the game? Every call was correct and one call was at best 50/50.

You're saying you don't support Man City. But you're more upset than anyone about Man City not getting that one 50/50 call.

Sorry I meant that Bernardos handball had nothing do with MO making his decision for TA handball which was also confirmed by all match officials after the game that the decision was based on TA arm not being in a un-natural position and clearly it was in a UN-natural position so MO and whoever was checking VAR made a mistake. So I don't know why you fooling yourself by keep saying MO saw Bernardos handball and that's reason he didn't give it when clearly they confirmed that had nothing to do with MO or VAR not giving the penalty.

And sorry to upset you by stating facts from the match officials. So all the match officials lied after the game to PGMOL and they told the truth undercover to you and Liverpool fans.
Your the one having a Sterling-esque mental disintegration. I don't care about Sterling or Man City. And it's you who seems upset by me stating facts. All I did was state what the match officials said after the game why the didn't give a penalty as what your saying was a lie so gave your facts but by giving facts from match officials means I am upset lol.
And no I don't support Man City you can see from previous posts on other threads who I support.

 

[Mamoon]

How are you comparing a guy with the highest net spend and a guy with the 14th highest net spend?

One guy has 6 times the net spend as the other guy. That is literally the only thing I objected to. Even now I'm raising an objection to the following: "I am simply implying that Klopp also spends big money on players and thus it is unfair to call Pep a checkbook manager."

In their first two summer transfer windows (2016 and 2017), Klopp had net spend of +26m Euros and Pep had a net spend of -404m Euros. You can't say they're on the same level of spending simply because Klopp spent 3 expensive players.

If Klopp has spent 50m+ on 3 players Pep has spent that amount 7 players. They are not the same.

Also regarding what you said initially about Keita. If that doesn't imply that Klopp spends the same as Guardiola then I don't know what does.

The rest of your argument about expectations and what not is redundant. You suggested that both Klopp and Guardiola have spent money and are "checkbook" managers. I showed you one has spent 6 times less than the other so they are not. This isn't a discussion of expectations and I'm not even debating qualities of Guardiola as a coach/manager.

Also I've not insulted your intelligence but do you expect me let you make up facts as you go (e.g. Keita signing)?

If me referring to facts is insulting your intelligence then there's not much I can do to help you.

No, that clearly does not imply that Klopp spends THE SAME as Guardiola. If that is your interpretation than the problem seems to be your grasp of English. What that implies is that Klopp ALSO spends big. Also and same are not synonyms.

This whole net spend is a cop-out by people who do not want to acknowledge that Klopp is also reliant on spending big money. The fact is that Liverpool fans are in no position to take shots at Pep’s checkbook when Klopp paid world record fees for a defender and goalkeeper in successive windows, and bought two midfielders in one summer for a collective fee of over 80 million.

How is that argument about expectations redundant? It clearly puts the different net spends into perspective. Do you think Man City would have allowed Klopp to finish 8th, 4th, 4th in his first three seasons with no trophies? As result, do you deny that Klopp would have had to spend more money and have a higher net spend if he was the Man City manager?

Comparing net spend of different managers across different clubs is ridiculous. Every club has different objectives and circumstances and of course different financial muscle. If Klopp’s net spend is lower than Pep it does not mean he is not dependent on big money signings or doesn’t like to spend money. It simply means he is at a club with less money to spend but more patience than Man City.

If Klopp was not dependent on money he should have proved it by winning the Champions League without the likes of VVD, Alisson, Fabinho etc., but in those days he was finishing 8th or 4th and losing Europa League finals to the likes of Emery. It is simply hypocritical for Liverpool supporters to take shots at Pep for spending money.

You didn’t prove anything regarding Keita. You are only making excuses for a flop signing who has so far proved to be a 50 million donkey who can neither stay fit or play well. Fabinho and Henderson are indispensable and Wijnaldum and Ox are playing better than him, so I don’t see where he fits in the starting XI. Having a 50 million option on the bench is a luxury that only checkbook managers can afford.

I am not criticizing Klopp or dismissing his credentials as a manager. He is absolutely brilliant and I have no issues if some think that he is better than Pep. However, my point is that like Pep, he is also dependent on making big money signings and was unable to deliver success without them. Similarly, it is pointless to compare the net spend of the two clubs because of different variables.

 

[topspin]

No, that clearly does not imply that Klopp spends THE SAME as Guardiola. If that is your interpretation than the problem seems to be your grasp of English. What that implies is that Klopp ALSO spends big. Also and same are not synonyms.

This whole net spend is a cop-out by people who do not want to acknowledge that Klopp is also reliant on spending big money. The fact is that Liverpool fans are in no position to take shots at Pep’s checkbook when Klopp paid world record fees for a defender and goalkeeper in successive windows, and bought two midfielders in one summer for a collective fee of over 80 million.

How is that argument about expectations redundant? It clearly puts the different net spends into perspective. Do you think Man City would have allowed Klopp to finish 8th, 4th, 4th in his first three seasons with no trophies? As result, do you deny that Klopp would have had to spend more money and have a higher net spend if he was the Man City manager?

Comparing net spend of different managers across different clubs is ridiculous. Every club has different objectives and circumstances and of course different financial muscle. If Klopp’s net spend is lower than Pep it does not mean he is not dependent on big money signings or doesn’t like to spend money. It simply means he is at a club with less money to spend but more patience than Man City.

If Klopp was not dependent on money he should have proved it by winning the Champions League without the likes of VVD, Alisson, Fabinho etc., but in those days he was finishing 8th or 4th and losing Europa League finals to the likes of Emery. It is simply hypocritical for Liverpool supporters to take shots at Pep for spending money.

You didn’t prove anything regarding Keita. You are only making excuses for a flop signing who has so far proved to be a 50 million donkey who can neither stay fit or play well. Fabinho and Henderson are indispensable and Wijnaldum and Ox are playing better than him, so I don’t see where he fits in the starting XI. Having a 50 million option on the bench is a luxury that only checkbook managers can afford.

I am not criticizing Klopp or dismissing his credentials as a manager. He is absolutely brilliant and I have no issues if some think that he is better than Pep. However, my point is that like Pep, he is also dependent on making big money signings and was unable to deliver success without them. Similarly, it is pointless to compare the net spend of the two clubs because of different variables.

Do you rate Pep more than Klopp? For me the latter is best manager in the world.

As for his first season at Liverpool, yes they did finish 8t, however the damage was done that season by Brendan Rogers, which led to him being sacked in October. So my point is it's unfair attribute a 8th placed side to Klopp.

 

[KingKhanWC]

No, that clearly does not imply that Klopp spends THE SAME as Guardiola. If that is your interpretation than the problem seems to be your grasp of English. What that implies is that Klopp ALSO spends big. Also and same are not synonyms.

This whole net spend is a cop-out by people who do not want to acknowledge that Klopp is also reliant on spending big money. The fact is that Liverpool fans are in no position to take shots at Pep’s checkbook when Klopp paid world record fees for a defender and goalkeeper in successive windows, and bought two midfielders in one summer for a collective fee of over 80 million.

How is that argument about expectations redundant? It clearly puts the different net spends into perspective. Do you think Man City would have allowed Klopp to finish 8th, 4th, 4th in his first three seasons with no trophies? As result, do you deny that Klopp would have had to spend more money and have a higher net spend if he was the Man City manager?

Comparing net spend of different managers across different clubs is ridiculous. Every club has different objectives and circumstances and of course different financial muscle. If Klopp’s net spend is lower than Pep it does not mean he is not dependent on big money signings or doesn’t like to spend money. It simply means he is at a club with less money to spend but more patience than Man City.

If Klopp was not dependent on money he should have proved it by winning the Champions League without the likes of VVD, Alisson, Fabinho etc., but in those days he was finishing 8th or 4th and losing Europa League finals to the likes of Emery. It is simply hypocritical for Liverpool supporters to take shots at Pep for spending money.

You didn’t prove anything regarding Keita. You are only making excuses for a flop signing who has so far proved to be a 50 million donkey who can neither stay fit or play well. Fabinho and Henderson are indispensable and Wijnaldum and Ox are playing better than him, so I don’t see where he fits in the starting XI. Having a 50 million option on the bench is a luxury that only checkbook managers can afford.

I am not criticizing Klopp or dismissing his credentials as a manager. He is absolutely brilliant and I have no issues if some think that he is better than Pep. However, my point is that like Pep, he is also dependent on making big money signings and was unable to deliver success without them. Similarly, it is pointless to compare the net spend of the two clubs because of different variables.

Every manager would love to have millions to spend. lol

Liverpool sold Coutinho , which helped finance Alisson and VVD. We lost the league by 1 point having a number of draws. If Coutinho wasnt sold and we still bought those two, we would have at least turned one or more of those draws into victories, giving us the league.

This seaons we have spent nothing much, still dont have a player like Coutinho yet we are top of the league. Pep has spent more this season but bought the wrong players.

Pep has more money, this is a fact. Klopp is top of the league this is a fact too.

Hope this helps.

 

[RickyG]

Sorry I meant that Bernardos handball had nothing do with MO making his decision for TA handball which was also confirmed by all match officials after the game that the decision was based on TA arm not being in a un-natural position and clearly it was in a UN-natural position so MO and whoever was checking VAR made a mistake. So I don't know why you fooling yourself by keep saying MO saw Bernardos handball and that's reason he didn't give it when clearly they confirmed that had nothing to do with MO or VAR not giving the penalty.

And sorry to upset you by stating facts from the match officials. So all the match officials lied after the game to PGMOL and they told the truth undercover to you and Liverpool fans.
Your the one having a Sterling-esque mental disintegration. I don't care about Sterling or Man City. And it's you who seems upset by me stating facts. All I did was state what the match officials said after the game why the didn't give a penalty as what your saying was a lie so gave your facts but by giving facts from match officials means I am upset lol.
And no I don't support Man City you can see from previous posts on other threads who I support.

It still wasn't confirmed. The only thing that PGMOL has said is "The VAR checked the penalty appeal for handball against Trent Alexander-Arnold and confirmed the on-field decision that it did not meet the considerations for a deliberate handball." Unless I've missed something in which case feel free to correct me.

VAR can still look solely at Trent's handball and say there was no clear and obvious error with that decision alone. So they wouldn't bother rolling the tape back any further because if Trent's handball alone didn't meet the criteria to over-turn why look at Bernardo's? Common sense.

None of that eliminates the relatively high probability of MO having seen Bernardo's handball and that having affected his decision making. We're both speculating but I'm not sure why that seems like an impossible scenario to you that MO saw Bernardo's handball. He was literally 6 yards away. It's a very very logical argument.

Now the second thing that you're completely convinced off is that VAR made the wrong decision. It didn't because it's not a clear an obvious error. Two ex-referees have come out and said it was right decision and two have said it wasn't. When referees can't agree on a decision then why would VAR not back it's referee and instead deem it a clear and obvious error? What makes you more qualified to argue that VAR made a wrong call than referees?

Not to mention, in the game against Villa a much more obvious handball wasn't over turned when Ox had a shot at goal. And I don't think any Liverpool fans were as upset about that decision as you are on behalf of Man City. There was also a Dele Alli handball against Everton with the hand above his head that VAR didn't overturn. But for the record, the precedent has been set.

You can disagree with MO's call but you absolutely cannot blame VAR since it has been consistent.



Finally, if MO had given a penalty against Liverpool. I would imagine it would have to be overturned because there can't be a clear goal-scoring opportunity where the attacking team has committed a handball in the build up. These are the rules and I'm just applying them. So my final point is that City's penalty appeal even if given would've likely been overturned.

Quite frankly, I don't care who you support. The world doesn't revolve around you. And as for this discussion, I really hope you can follow along this time without having another nervous breakdown.

 

[RickyG]

No, that clearly does not imply that Klopp spends THE SAME as Guardiola. If that is your interpretation than the problem seems to be your grasp of English. What that implies is that Klopp ALSO spends big. Also and same are not synonyms.

This whole net spend is a cop-out by people who do not want to acknowledge that Klopp is also reliant on spending big money. The fact is that Liverpool fans are in no position to take shots at Pep’s checkbook when Klopp paid world record fees for a defender and goalkeeper in successive windows, and bought two midfielders in one summer for a collective fee of over 80 million.

How is that argument about expectations redundant? It clearly puts the different net spends into perspective. Do you think Man City would have allowed Klopp to finish 8th, 4th, 4th in his first three seasons with no trophies? As result, do you deny that Klopp would have had to spend more money and have a higher net spend if he was the Man City manager?

Comparing net spend of different managers across different clubs is ridiculous. Every club has different objectives and circumstances and of course different financial muscle. If Klopp’s net spend is lower than Pep it does not mean he is not dependent on big money signings or doesn’t like to spend money. It simply means he is at a club with less money to spend but more patience than Man City.

If Klopp was not dependent on money he should have proved it by winning the Champions League without the likes of VVD, Alisson, Fabinho etc., but in those days he was finishing 8th or 4th and losing Europa League finals to the likes of Emery. It is simply hypocritical for Liverpool supporters to take shots at Pep for spending money.

You didn’t prove anything regarding Keita. You are only making excuses for a flop signing who has so far proved to be a 50 million donkey who can neither stay fit or play well. Fabinho and Henderson are indispensable and Wijnaldum and Ox are playing better than him, so I don’t see where he fits in the starting XI. Having a 50 million option on the bench is a luxury that only checkbook managers can afford.

I am not criticizing Klopp or dismissing his credentials as a manager. He is absolutely brilliant and I have no issues if some think that he is better than Pep. However, my point is that like Pep, he is also dependent on making big money signings and was unable to deliver success without them. Similarly, it is pointless to compare the net spend of the two clubs because of different variables.

You're conveniently forgetting that Pep inherited a team that had won 2 league titles with their previous manager and was a top 4 regular. A team that had spent 50m on a 19 year old winger and 50m on a right back the summer before.

Klopp inherited a team that finished 6th I think.

You really think Liverpool have the 14th highest transfer budget only? Klopp doesn't spend for the sake of spending.

They both had the same objective over the last two years then why is Klopp's net spend still lower than Peps. Everton have a top 6 objective but out spend Liverpool, why is that? You think Liverpool is hoping to finish 14th every season. What an idiotic statement.

What does Klopp also spends big imply? You can say he pays big transfer fees for the right players but he doesn't spend big when he only has the 14th highest net spend.

For the record, he took them to the final without Alisson and Fabinho. VVD was only there for half the season that year too.

The rest of your post is disgraceful. Suggesting Keita is a donkey is uncalled for not to highlight that it may be an implied/unimplied subliminal reference to his background.

Him being dependent on big money signings doesn't make him a big spender unlike Pep. You think Everton don't wish they could sign VVD or Alisson? They could but those players won't go there. VVD and Fabinho chose Liverpool over United/City even though the Manchester clubs would've offered bigger salaries.

Based on their history, Pep is far more dependent on big transfer budgets than Klopp. Does that make Klopp better? No but you can't say well he also spends big because that would imply a high net spend or at least in the same ballpark as Pep.

 

[MMHS]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Nabi was pre signed a year ago, and he is a box to box midfielder, not defensive mid fielder like Fabinho.

Regarding the expenses by respective manages, not only Klopp, Pep can compete with hardly any manager. He is a brilliant chef, in fact probably the best there - but you have to buy him the best ingredients that’s available, food will be delicious no doubt.

@ Hasan123, don’t dislike Pep, never underestimated him either (otherwise would have celebrated EPL title by now), but he is the most over hyped, over praised manager in world - partially by the Barca fan group, who still thinks him as one of their and mostly by EPL fans of other 5 clubs (MU, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs & CFC - MCity never had the class), who hates to see Liverpool shine. Just about couple of years back, there was a thread to prove Pep as the greatest manager in world for winning EPL, after injecting almost half a billion US (in the then market.... imagine current context!!!) into a squad that won EPL a year back under Pelegrini.... and he hasn’t still managed better than 4 MU managers since SAF in Europe...... Had Klopp not managed Liverpool, you would have seen his popularity!!!! That’s the greatest achievement by the club name Liverpool - we are hated by everyone else, and Klopp is just having his share for being the Liverpool manager. On honest merit, he is absolutely at different level.

My point regarding the Arsenal game wasn’t about Klopp’s master tactics, rather his capability to develop players - he extracted men out of kids who chased an almost full strength Arsenal for 90 minutes and fought ball by ball, hunted them eventually. This is not about tactics, it’s about skill.

Fabinho won’t improve Arsenal, Gundouzi can be developed into one equally good in that role, what you need is defenders - at least 2 for the starting XI. And your Manager needs to go back to soft soccer of Spain, he isn’t fit for EPL. Not a bad manager, but it’s not working in EPL - what Arsenal can seriously think is to bring in Jo Mou; he knows how to defend and his family is still based in London.... 3 years contract can be great (not more than that, then Kroenke will have to pay him fat after sacking.....)

 

[Mamoon]

Do you rate Pep more than Klopp? For me the latter is best manager in the world.

As for his first season at Liverpool, yes they did finish 8t, however the damage was done that season by Brendan Rogers, which led to him being sacked in October. So my point is it's unfair attribute a 8th placed side to Klopp.

I think as managers they are equally brilliant. However, it is a myth that Klopp is not dependent on spending money.

I personally prefer Pep because of the style of play that he implements and I have great admiration for what he did with Barcelona in 2008-2009 after a net of spend of only 35 million.

Valverde’s Barcelona has proved that giving the ball to Messi is the not the solution to everything, you still need to construct a team that can take advantage of his genius.

The current Barcelona is the most talented squad that they have had since Pep. You give him an amazing talent like de Jong and he will make another Xavi/Iniesta out of him.

As far as Pep is concerned, if he doesn’t deliver the Champions League with City it will hurt his legacy. He was unlucky last season but you cannot blame luck forever.

Klopp delivered the CL and will win the PL this season after spending money, and Pep has to follow up in Europe now. Winning another PL but falling short in the CL will not enhance his Man City legacy at this point.

 

[Mamoon]

You're conveniently forgetting that Pep inherited a team that had won 2 league titles with their previous manager and was a top 4 regular. A team that had spent 50m on a 19 year old winger and 50m on a right back the summer before.

Klopp inherited a team that finished 6th I think.

You really think Liverpool have the 14th highest transfer budget only? Klopp doesn't spend for the sake of spending.

They both had the same objective over the last two years then why is Klopp's net spend still lower than Peps. Everton have a top 6 objective but out spend Liverpool, why is that? You think Liverpool is hoping to finish 14th every season. What an idiotic statement.

What does Klopp also spends big imply? You can say he pays big transfer fees for the right players but he doesn't spend big when he only has the 14th highest net spend.

For the record, he took them to the final without Alisson and Fabinho. VVD was only there for half the season that year too.

The rest of your post is disgraceful. Suggesting Keita is a donkey is uncalled for not to highlight that it may be an implied/unimplied subliminal reference to his background.

Him being dependent on big money signings doesn't make him a big spender unlike Pep. You think Everton don't wish they could sign VVD or Alisson? They could but those players won't go there. VVD and Fabinho chose Liverpool over United/City even though the Manchester clubs would've offered bigger salaries.

Based on their history, Pep is far more dependent on big transfer budgets than Klopp. Does that make Klopp better? No but you can't say well he also spends big because that would imply a high net spend or at least in the same ballpark as Pep.

In 2015-16, Rodgers/Klopp’s Liverpool only accumulated 6 points less than the Pellegrini’s City. That is a very negligible difference and clearly shows that Pep did not inherit a team that was a cut above Liverpool.

Furthermore, that team did not have the players that could work in the Pep system and he had to spend big to deliver the league title immediately. They had Clichy and Zabaleta as full-backs. You are wrong about Kyle Walker because he was signed by Pep in 2017.

Yes he inherited Sterling, but he inherited a version that was closer to Theo Walcott than Neymar. Pep has done incredible work with him in 3 years and has transformed him from a wasteful winger to a genuine world class wide forward.

The club’s objectives have been the same only since 2018, but Klopp has been at the club since 2015. He has finished 8th, 4th and 4th in his first three seasons but his job has never been in the line which clearly illustrated that Liverpool had different objectives at the time. On the contrary, Pep was under pressure to deliver the title immediately and hence he had to spend big.

If Liverpool would have told Klopp to deliver the Premier League title in 2016-2017, do you think he would not have spend the money? In fact, Liverpool fans were highly critical of the owners of not giving Klopp a big budget before they hit the jackpot with Coutinho’s transfer. Hence, you cannot compare the net spends of two managers when they are working in different contexts and have had to meet different objectives.

The signings of VVD, Alisson, Fabinho and Keita in successive windows does prove that Klopp is a big spender. He didn’t spend big from 2015 to 2017 because he didn’t have the money to spend, and unsurprisingly, he couldn’t deliver any trophies in that period.

Yes he took Liverpool to the final of the CL in 2017-2018 without Alisson, Fabinho and half a season of VVD, but he also finished 25 points behind Man City, and the gap wouldn’t have been much closer had he not made those big signings. What further proof does anyone need that he is also dependent on spending money?

Please don’t play the racist card. I am not implying Keita is a donkey because of his race but because of the way he has been playing on the pitch whenever he has managed to prove his fitness. I am also happy to call Torreira a donkey and he is not black.

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Nabi was pre signed a year ago, and he is a box to box midfielder, not defensive mid fielder like Fabinho.

Regarding the expenses by respective manages, not only Klopp, Pep can compete with hardly any manager. He is a brilliant chef, in fact probably the best there - but you have to buy him the best ingredients thatÂ’s available, food will be delicious no doubt.

And what did Klopp achieve when he didn’t have the best available ingredients? What did he win?

What were his achievements when he had Lallana, Can, Mignolet and Lovren leading the defense? He finished 8th, 4th, 4th and got outplayed by Emery’s Sevilla in the Europa final, and finished 25 points behind Man City in 2017-2018.

He only started to win things after signing the likes of VVD, Alisson and Fabinho, three big money signings.

As far as Keita is concerned, yes he is a different player to Fabinho, but he is still a luxury signing at 50 million who currently is Liverpool’s fifth choice in midfield.

 

[Mamoon]

Every manager would love to have millions to spend. lol

Liverpool sold Coutinho , which helped finance Alisson and VVD. We lost the league by 1 point having a number of draws. If Coutinho wasnt sold and we still bought those two, we would have at least turned one or more of those draws into victories, giving us the league.

This seaons we have spent nothing much, still dont have a player like Coutinho yet we are top of the league. Pep has spent more this season but bought the wrong players.

Pep has more money, this is a fact. Klopp is top of the league this is a fact too.

Hope this helps.

Every manager is reliant on money. In modern football, you cannot sustain success without spending big. That is why it is hypocritical for Liverpool fans to take shots at Pep when their own fortunes changed after making big money signings.

Your point regarding Coutinho is moot. If you still had him, you wouldn’t have had VVD, Alisson and Fabinho, and you would still be trophy-less and trailing Man City by 20+ points. Liverpool weren’t willing to spend the money without selling a 100m player and Liverpool fans were very critical of not giving Klopp money to spend.

In fact, Liverpool is playing better without Coutinho in the current system, with three workhorse midfielders and number 9 allowing the full-backs and Salah/Mane to work the spaces. It is a more balanced team than the one with Coutinho which at times was over-reliant on his individual flair.

 

[MMHS]

And what did Klopp achieve when he didn’t have the best available ingredients? What did he win?

What were his achievements when he had Lallana, Can, Mignolet and Lovren leading the defense? He finished 8th, 4th, 4th and got outplayed by Emery’s Sevilla in the Europa final, and finished 25 points behind Man City in 2017-2018.

He only started to win things after signing the likes of VVD, Alisson and Fabinho, three big money signings.

As far as Keita is concerned, yes he is a different player to Fabinho, but he is still a luxury signing at 50 million who currently is Liverpool’s fifth choice in midfield.

He won two Bundes Liga, and made one CL Final with a squad that cost him less than one player of Bayern....

 

[Mamoon]

He won two Bundes Liga, and made one CL Final with a squad that cost him less than one player of Bayern....

I accept it, but I thought we were discussing Liverpool and Man City. However, on the same token, you have little appreciation for a man who took a rotten, trophy-less team (21 points behind the champions) to a treble in 12 months with a net spend of €35m.

Anyway, it was a good discussion. The rivalry between those two has been fascinating to watch since 2018. I think it is only a matter of time before it gets ugly especially with the advent of VAR.

Hopefully the title race won’t be over by April 4 and we can have another cracking game.

 

[Hasan123]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Nabi was pre signed a year ago, and he is a box to box midfielder, not defensive mid fielder like Fabinho.

Regarding the expenses by respective manages, not only Klopp, Pep can compete with hardly any manager. He is a brilliant chef, in fact probably the best there - but you have to buy him the best ingredients thatÂ’s available, food will be delicious no doubt.

@ Hasan123, donÂ’t dislike Pep, never underestimated him either (otherwise would have celebrated EPL title by now), but he is the most over hyped, over praised manager in world - partially by the Barca fan group, who still thinks him as one of their and mostly by EPL fans of other 5 clubs (MU, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs & CFC - MCity never had the class), who hates to see Liverpool shine. Just about couple of years back, there was a thread to prove Pep as the greatest manager in world for winning EPL, after injecting almost half a billion US (in the then market.... imagine current context!!!) into a squad that won EPL a year back under Pelegrini.... and he hasnÂ’t still managed better than 4 MU managers since SAF in Europe...... Had Klopp not managed Liverpool, you would have seen his popularity!!!! ThatÂ’s the greatest achievement by the club name Liverpool - we are hated by everyone else, and Klopp is just having his share for being the Liverpool manager. On honest merit, he is absolutely at different level.

My point regarding the Arsenal game wasnÂ’t about KloppÂ’s master tactics, rather his capability to develop players - he extracted men out of kids who chased an almost full strength Arsenal for 90 minutes and fought ball by ball, hunted them eventually. This is not about tactics, itÂ’s about skill.

Fabinho wonÂ’t improve Arsenal, Gundouzi can be developed into one equally good in that role, what you need is defenders - at least 2 for the starting XI. And your Manager needs to go back to soft soccer of Spain, he isnÂ’t fit for EPL. Not a bad manager, but itÂ’s not working in EPL - what Arsenal can seriously think is to bring in Jo Mou; he knows how to defend and his family is still based in London.... 3 years contract can be great (not more than that, then Kroenke will have to pay him fat after sacking.....)

He is rated highly for a reason. He improves players and implements a philosophy. Not to mention trophies he won lol. You keep going about spending money. Jose, Sir Alex, and Klopp have all spent money but you never mention that. You just talk about their achievements. You never have a response to [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] point about Pep net spend in first year at Barcelona.


Oh please not hated. All I hear about is how great Liverpool are. Also you are mocking Pep for a thread about him being the greatest ever manager. There was an article in the British media asking are Liverpool the greatest runners up in PL history? Who cares being runners up. Especially the greatest ones. ) ) .

It was not our full strength line up or even close. No Pepe, Auba, Laca, Xhaka, Guendozi, Leno.

Maitlind Niles and Mustafi don’t even get on the bench for PL games. Willock, Saka, and Martnelli are youngsters. Bellerin and Holding have played about 4/5 games in a year.

Don’t make out as though it was some genius motivation as well. It just poor defending and mentality from us.


Fabinho would improve us. We lack a physical presence and player with recovery speed in the midfield. Guendozi is better of being partnered with someone of this profile.

Don’t see us appointing Jose, but a change needs to be made. Question is if it will be too late to save the season.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Every manager is reliant on money. In modern football, you cannot sustain success without spending big. That is why it is hypocritical for Liverpool fans to take shots at Pep when their own fortunes changed after making big money signings.

Your point regarding Coutinho is moot. If you still had him, you wouldn’t have had VVD, Alisson and Fabinho, and you would still be trophy-less and trailing Man City by 20+ points. Liverpool weren’t willing to spend the money without selling a 100m player and Liverpool fans were very critical of not giving Klopp money to spend.

In fact, Liverpool is playing better without Coutinho in the current system, with three workhorse midfielders and number 9 allowing the full-backs and Salah/Mane to work the spaces. It is a more balanced team than the one with Coutinho which at times was over-reliant on his individual flair.

The point was we needed to sell Coutinho in order to get VVD and Alisson. This means we dont have the funds which City and Pep have, otherwise would have won the league last year.

No we are not, Coutinho is a great player who can unlock a defence at any given moment. We can play with two holding midfieldes and Coutinho just behind the top 3 and be an ever better team.

 

[RickyG]

You didn’t prove anything regarding Keita. You are only making excuses for a flop signing who has so far proved to be a 50 million donkey who can neither stay fit or play well. Fabinho and Henderson are indispensable and Wijnaldum and Ox are playing better than him, so I don’t see where he fits in the starting XI. Having a 50 million option on the bench is a luxury that only checkbook managers can afford.

Thoughts on Keita now? With Ox and Fabinho injured, a fit Keita is a blessing. His link up with Salah is great to watch.

Flop? Donkey? He's currently our most creative midfielder. He was bought to do same thing that Ox does which is to drive from midfield and create chances. Has been doing it brilliantly.

For a high intensity team who plays 3 centre-mids, having 6 options is not an overkill. I reckon when Fabinho comes back, Hendo and Gini may be competing for the 3rd spot.

 

[Mamoon]

Thoughts on Keita now? With Ox and Fabinho injured, a fit Keita is a blessing. His link up with Salah is great to watch.

Flop? Donkey? He's currently our most creative midfielder. He was bought to do same thing that Ox does which is to drive from midfield and create chances. Has been doing it brilliantly.

For a high intensity team who plays 3 centre-mids, having 6 options is not an overkill. I reckon when Fabinho comes back, Hendo and Gini may be competing for the 3rd spot.

He has certainly played very well in recent weeks. However, I don’t think Henderson’s place in the starting XI would be under any threat when Fabinho returns. Not only is he the official captain, he is a great leader and his presence lifts the whole team. He is indispensable for Liverpool at the moment.

Anyway, the point of discussion was that it is quite rich to see Liverpool fans mock Pep for being reliant on expensive signings when Klopp himself was finishing 8th, 4th and 4th and couldn’t win a tea cup before he started throwing money after selling Coutinho.

Besides, very few managers in the world have the luxury of spending 50m on a player who is not even a guaranteed starter and didn’t make any impact for the first 1.5 years of his Liverpool career. A manager with a small budget would not only be obliged to make a 50m player an immediate starter, he would also be under pressure of selling him if he does not hit the ground running.

Klopp is a fantastic manager, but it is a myth that he does not need to spend money to win trophies. Again, I am not talking about net spend here - I am talking about the reliance on expensive players. He couldn’t win anything at Liverpool without signing top class, expensive players like VVD, Alisson, Fabinho etc.