Benitez .... prick

[Bruno]

There are many discussions on the forum about Rafa Benitez’s performance in the transfer market. Hopefully, this analysis will help in judging it better.

The Gross Spend and Net Spend of the teams from 04-05 to 08-09 is the following:
Man Utd: 188 M (Net Spend: 27.6 M)
Liverpool: 247 M (Net Spend: 113 M)

However, these figures include the players Rafa Benitez had to inherit. They also don’t take into account the fact that Man Utd already had a better squad and high quality players to sell from before 04-05.

In order to fairly analyse only the transfers which Rafa Benitez initiated, I am strictly looking at the players signed after 04-05. Also, players signed before 04-05 and sold after 04-05 are not included.

In this way we can free Rafa Benitez from all responsibility for the ‘bad squad’ he inherited and this analysis also nullifies the effect of the ‘better squad’ that Man Utd had.

Disclaimer:
- I am a Man Utd supporter but this analysis is not biased as I was genuinely interested in evaluating Rafa Benitez’s performance in the transfer market.
- The comparison with Man Utd is done because that’s where most arguments happen. I think anyone with half a brain knows that Wenger has done a fantastic job with Arsenal in building a comparable and competitive team on peanuts. If only they would win some trophies
- Please note that wages offered to players also impact the signings, and Liverpool’s wage bill is lower than Man Utd. I don’t have the exact figures though.
- All transfer figures have been taken from transferleague.co.uk

Man Utd Players signed for a fee after 04-05 who are in the current squad:
1. Edwin van der Sar (2.5M)
2. Patrice Evra (5.5M)
3. Owen Hargreaves (17M)
4. Michael Owen (Free)
5. Anderson (15M)
6. Dimitar Berbatov (30.75M)
7. Wayne Rooney (27M)
8. Ben Foster (1M)
9. Park Ji-Sung (4M)
10. Zoran Tošić (5M)
11. Nemanja Vidić (7M)
12. Michael Carrick (18.6M)
13. Nani (13.5M)
14. Fábio (2.5M)
15. Rafael (2.6M)
16. Antonio Valencia (16M)
17. Gabriel Obertan (3M)
18. Tomasz Kuszczak (2.5M)
19. Ritchie De Laet (Unknown)
20. Adem Ljajic (5M)

Total Spend on current squad: 178.45M

Man Utd Players bought after 04-05 and sold resulting in a Net Loss of 3.5M
Bought Sold Net
Carlos Tevez 10 0 -10
Rossi 0.2 6.7 6.5

------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ --
Liverpool players signed for a fee after 04-05 who are in the current squad:
1. Diego Cavalieri (3.5M)
2. Glen Johnson (17.5M)
3. Alberto Aquilani (17M)
4. Daniel Agger (5.8M)
5. Fernando Torres (26.5M)
6. Andriy Voronin (Free)
7. Albert Riera (8M)
8. Fábio Aurélio (Free)
9. Yossi Benayoun (5M)
10. Sotirios Kyrgiakos (1.5M)
11. Dirk Kuyt (9M)
12. Ryan Babel (11.5M)
13. Javier Mascherano (18.6M)
14. Lucas (6M)
15. Emiliano Insúa (1.3M)
16. David N'Gog (1.5M)
17. Pepe Reina (6M)
18. Nabil El Zhar (0.2M)
19. Martin Škrtel (6.5M)
20. Andrea Dossena (7M)
21. Philipp Degen (1.3M)

Total Spend on current squad: 153.7M

Liverpool players bought after 04-05 and sold, resulting in a Net Loss of 1.45M
Bought Sold Net
Scott Carson 1 3.25 2.25
Fernando Morientes 6.3 3 -3.3
Xabi Alonso 10.5 30 19.5
Luis Garcia 6 4 -2
Josemi 2 0 -2
Djibril Cisse 14 6 -8
Craig Bellamy 6 7.5 1.5
Paul Anderson 0 0.25 0.25
Peter Crouch 7 10 3
Mohamed Sissoko 5.6 8.2 2.6
Antonio Barragan 0.24 0.68 0.44
Mark Gonazlez 4.5 4.2 -0.3
Gabriel Paletta 2 0 -2
Jermiane Pennant 6.7 0 -6.7
Alvaro Arbeloa 2.64 3.5 0.86
Sebastian Leto 1.85 1.3 -0.55
Robbie Keane 19 12 -7


So Man Utd spent 178.4 Million + 3.5 Million, and Liverpool spent 153.7 Million + 1.45 Million. Approx 27 Million extra spent by Man Utd. This indicates that with the funds available to him, Rafa Benitez could have bought all the players Man Utd have signed except Berbatov. Which set of players would you rather have for the amount invested?
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ --

Man Utd players already in the team before 04-05 who are still in the squad:
1. Rio Ferdinand
2. Paul Scholes (Youth)
3. Ryan Giggs (Youth)
4. Wes Brown (Youth)
5. Gary Neville (Youth)
6. John O'Shea (Youth)
7. Darren Fletcher (Youth)

Liverpool players already in the team before 04-05 who are still in the squad:
1. Jamie Carragher (Youth)
2. Steven Gerrard (Youth)

Man Utd Emerging Youth:
1. Federico Macheda
2. Darron Gibson
3. Jonny Evans
4. Danny Welbeck
5. Rodrigo Possebon

Liverpool Emerging Youth:
1. Jay Spearing
2. Nathan Eccleston
3. Daniel Sánchez Ayala
4. Damien Plessis

Clearly, one reason why Man Utd are doing much better than Liverpool is that the youth system has produced some fantastic players capable of playing in the first team. Man Utd have been able to keep 5 more players than Liverpool in their current squad. One has to wonder whether Rafa sold too many players that he could have kept from the squad he inherited? For example should Hyppia, Riise, Hamaan and Murphy have been sold for 6.9M when they could be squad players, and utilized sparingly like Giggs, Scholes and Neville?
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ --

The following lists the players bought before 04-05 and sold after 04-05, and calculates the profit or loss on transfers of these players. This indicates how much Rafa Benitez was able to get for the squad he inherited.

Man Utd players bought before 04-05, but sold after 04-05
Bought Sold Net
Cristiano Ronaldo 12.5 80 67.5
Lee Martin 0 1.5 1.5
Fraizer Campbell 0 3.5 3.5
Chris Eagles 0 1.25 1.25
Mikel Sylvester 0 0.75 0.75
Louis Saha 12.8 0 -12.8
Gerard Pique 0 6 6
Phil Bardsley 0 2 2
Ryan Shawcross 0 1 1
Gabriel Heinze 6.9 8 1.1
Alan Smith 7 6 -1
Kieran Richardson 0 5.5 5.5
Tim Howard 2.3 3 0.7
David Jones 0 1 1
Luke Steele 0.5 0 -0.5
Ruud van Nistelrooy 19 10.3 -8.7
Quinton Fortune 1.5 0 -1.5
Sylvain Ebanks-Blake 0 0.2 0.2
John Mikel Obi 0 12 12
Jonathan Spector 0 0.5 0.5
Roy Keane 3.75 0 -3.75
Kleberson 5.93 2.5 -3.43
Phil Neville 0 3.5 3.5
David Bellion 2 0 -2
Ricardo 1.5 0 -1.5
Roy Carroll 2.5 0 -2.5
Eric Djemba-Djemba 3.5 1.35 -2.15
Diego Forlan 7.5 2 -5.5

Net Gain of 62.67 Million (Net loss of 4.83 Million excluding Ronaldo Sale)

------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ --

Liverpool players bought before 04-05, but sold after 04-05

Bought Sold Net
Sami Hyypia 3 0 -3
Anthony Le Tallec 3 0 -3
Harry Kewell 5 0 -5
Danny Gutherie 0 2.5 2.5
John Arne Riise 4.6 4 -0.6
Steve Finnan 3.5 1 -2.5
Jerzy Dudek 4.85 0 -4.85
Florent Sinama Pongoll 2 2.7 0.7
Salif Diao 5 0 -5
Stephen Warnock 0 1.5 1.5
Darren Potter 0 0.25 0.25
Chris Kirkland 6 3 -3
Neil Mellor 0 0.25 0.25
Djimi Traore 0.55 2 1.45
Dietmar Hamann 8 0.4 -7.6
Bruno Cheyrou 3.7 0 -3.7
Milan Baros 3.6 6.5 2.9
Gregory Vignal 0.5 0 -0.5
El Hadji Diouf 11 4 -7
Vladimir Smicer 3.75 0 -3.75
Stephane Henchoz 3.5 0 -3.5
Michael Owen 0 8 8
Danny Murphy 3 2.5 -0.5

Net Loss of 35.95 Million

This is where there is almost a 100 Million discrepancy between the two teams. There can be two reasons for this:
- Either Rafa Benitez genuinely inherited really bad players who could not fetch much in the market.
- Or he was not able to effectively integrate and utilize the players in his squad and in the hurry to get rid of them he made ill timed sales and got a much lower fee than he could have. So the question has to be asked - could Rafa Benitez have done better with utilization and sale of these players?

In reality, it is probably a combination of the above two reasons.

------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ --------

[Zulus Thousand of em]

So... Benitez is a prick.

[thebish]

So... Benitez is a prick.

I think that's the logical scientifically-proven conclusion!

[Bruno]

Another world-class dive from Liverpool tonight. Shameful.

[malcd1]

Cheating dirty Scouse scum.

[Bruno]

Outrageous isn't it.

Then again, I guess working there every day he'll have chance to learn from the master *throws arm up in the air Gerrard-style*







"Players like Carvalho and Ronaldo are damaging football." - Steven Gerrard.

"If I saw a team-mate doing it, I would definitely have a word." - Steven Gerrard.

"I don't think there's anything worse than a player diving when no one's been anywhere near him. It does ruin the game." - Steven Gerrard.

HAVE A WORD STEVIE!!!

[malcd1]

I think I will say guilty of all three of those Bruno.


http://www.scotsman.com/scitech/Science ... 5649457.jp

IT IS the lowest form of drama played out in some of football's grandest theatres; but referees have now been given a tool with which to root out the age-old scourge of diving.
A psychologist has devised a guide which, he claims, could be used by match officials to punish those players who go to ground on the flimsiest of pretexts.

Dr Paul Morris, an expert on the embodiment of emotions and intentions at the University
ADVERTISEMENT
of Portsmouth, has identified four actions employed by footballers when faking a fall.

Arguments over diving have intensified in recent weeks, most notably following Celtic's Champions League match against Arsenal last month.

Eduardo, a striker for the London side, was alleged to have won a penalty by diving, and was initially suspended for two games by UEFA, the governing body of European football. However, it overturned the ban on appeal this week.

Dr Morris said: "Referees have a very difficult job and, given the demands of the task, they do it remarkably well."

Nonetheless, he believes his research can only serve as an aid.

His guide identifies four signs of gamesmanship: players clutching their body when they haven't been hit; taking an extra roll when they hit the ground; taking fully controlled strides before falling after a tackle; and holding up both arms in the air, with open palms, chest thrust out and legs bent at the knee.

The latter shape, dubbed the "archer's bow," is the most common ruse of all and, according to Dr Morris, the least genuine of any attempt to hoodwink the men in black.

"In most dishonest tackles, the behaviour itself does not indicate dishonesty – the deception is revealed in the timing and co- ordination of the behaviours," he explained. "This occurs in many dives but, biomechanically, it does not occur in a natural fall. Instead, instinctively the arms either go down in an attempt to cushion the fall or out to the side for balance."

Craig Brown, the former Scotland manager, said that while many of the signs identified by Dr Morris would already be known to referees, the research was welcome.

"As the late, great Jock Stein used to say, your eye is your judge. You have to depend on the awareness of referees, and they know to look out for those extra couple of steps or that extra roll."

John McKelvie, a retired referee and former police officer, said simulation was far more prominent in today's game than even a decade ago.

Mr McKelvie, now an after-dinner speaker, said: "I don't envy referees nowadays. They have to make a split-second decision alone, and after that there are 15 cameras analysing them, along with a referee's assessor."

The research led by Dr Morris, published in the Springer Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, comprised three studies. It included using more than 30 amateur footballers to stage a scenario taken from a Football Association coaching manual.

Attackers were instructed to dribble the ball past defenders and then deceptively exaggerate the effects of a tackle.

Nearly 50 observers were asked to judge if the attackers were faking and the level of exaggeration, if any.

[Bruno]

Birmingham's Lee Carsley on the penalty incident: "It's a joke. I know for a fact I didn't touch him. I think when the referee sees it, he'll be really disappointed. It's an embarrassing case of cheating."

Coming soon: Carsley 5-game ban for truth-telling?

[blurred]

oops - equaliser from Lopez....

What a horrible shame

Blurred's been a bit quiet recently..

Unsurprisingly, he was out in Lyon (and variously travelling around the UK before and after for a few days either side, but that's by the by).

Oh, and Ngog should be banned for a hefty number of games. There's making the most of contact, there's anticipating contact and going down, and then there's just downright cheating. Not that it'll especially cost us, but he should get a good few games ban for that, no two ways about it.

[Village_Idiot2]

Love it how in the last photo Bruno posted Gerrard's already calling for a pen before he has fallen to the ground.

I wish there was a comprehensive way to tackle on diving, at least on the high level.

[Wandering Willy]

Love it how in the last photo Bruno posted Gerrard's already calling for a pen before he has fallen to the ground.

I wish there was a comprehensive way to tackle on diving, at least on the high level.

A first step could be for the punishment to fit the crime. The FA have seen fit to instruct refs to give a red card for a "last man foul" ie where a goal scoring (one on one) opportunity is denied. Would it not make sense for any dive in the box to be construed as trying to unfairly create a one on one goal scoring opportunity ie a penalty. In which case award the red card to the offender. Perhaps this may deter some.

Of course, if the ref is deceived at the time then the only solution would be a post game review and subsequent punishment.

[Village_Idiot2]

I don't think that punishment has to made harsher, just give what's already in the books. The Eduardo incident might have been a start, but it became obvious that FIFA only wanted to do a bit of grandstanding and then dropped the issue. However, punishing diving isn't actually as easy. It's not as clear cut as people think. For example N'Gog makes an absolute meal of this, but the tackle was mistimed, and had he not jumped he probably would have been fouled. So what's the right ruling? What if N'Gog just jumped and then lost balance instead of play-acted? The fact is a lot of people dive because it makes more likely to be awarded a penalty. If you try to man up and go with the play, chances are the ref might wave it away. Now, I would love to see this kind of behavior stamped out of the game and give penalties when they have to be given, but I can't see a an easy way. (without video refereeing, an idea I loathe).

[H. Pedersen]

The solution to diving is simple. Diouf will never get a penalty awarded because he's a known diver, especially after the Blackburn incident. The same logic should be applied to serial divers like Drogba and Gerrard.

When somebody exaggerates a fall, even if there is a contact, no penalty should be awarded. The idea behind the invention of the penalty kick was to encourage defenders to try to stay on their feet and avoid cynically hacking down players in a goal scoring position. Similarly, the incentive for attackers should be geared towards forcing them to try to stay on their feet and not cynically try to win a penalty. If the contact is bad enough to be a foul, you don't need to flair your arms or grab your hamstring on the way down.

[Zulus Thousand of em]

"I haven't seen the replay but maybe it wasn't a penalty. I still think that we deserved to win anyway," he stated. "Possibly it wasn't a penalty but we have had a lot of situations during the year and one for us I think is not the worst."

Anyone here still think he's not a prick - apart from Blurred that is?

No, didn't think so.

[blurred]

Makes sense to me - says he's not seen a replay, but that it might not be a pen, and then said we've had some bad luck this season (beachball, among others) so perhaps we were due a poor decision in our favour. Seems a reasonable enough comment to me.

[malcd1]

Makes sense to me - says he's not seen a replay, but that it might not be a pen, and then said we've had some bad luck this season (beachball, among others) so perhaps we were due a poor decision in our favour. Seems a reasonable enough comment to me.

Or maybe he has buried his head in the sand and won't watch it so he cannot comment on it. I will guarantee that if the penalty had gone against Liverpool (Yeah as if!), then he would have seen a replay and would have commented by lambasting the referee.

[blurred]

Or maybe he has buried his head in the sand and won't watch it so he cannot comment on it. I will guarantee that if the penalty had gone against Liverpool (Yeah as if!), then he would have seen a replay and would have commented by lambasting the referee.

Possibly - I don't know how quickly after the match the interview was, quite often you get managers giving interviews in the immediate aftermath before they've had a chance to see things again (which always seemed largely pointless to me, well, the questioning of 'did you think x was a penalty, what did you think of y's goal' when they have a shit view of just about everything from the dugout).

[Tombwfc]

To be fair, there have been millions of far worse penalty decisions than that.

I'm still not entirely sure I'm up with the law, but to me, that was a shit tackle. If N'Gog just plain carried on running, he'd have been tripped up and it'd have been a stonewall penalty.

So while I don't improve of him taking off like Phillps Iduwu, I don't see why he should have to hurdle shit challenges (and lessen his chance of scoring by doing so). If he hurdles the challenge and as a result his chance of scoring disappears, then Carsley has benefitted from cheating.

Ultimately N'Gog will get banned and Birmingham lost two points, I've no sympathy either way.

[Worthy4England]

To be fair, there have been millions of far worse penalty decisions than that.

I'm still not entirely sure I'm up with the law, but to me, that was a shit tackle. If N'Gog just plain carried on running, he'd have been tripped up and it'd have been a stonewall penalty.

Ok - I'm not up with the law either, but I'm not buying that one Tom.

To me N'Gog knocks it between two defenders, to run onto. Carsley gets to it first and is the next player to touch the ball. Surely that means Carsley and not N'Gog is technically in posession? If N'Gog carried on running and made contact with Carsley before the ball then surely it would have been a free-kick to Birmingham as they were the team "in posession" when the Liverpool player kicked him? At what point should Carsley pull out of a committed tackle that it looks to me he's successfully executed to allow N'Gog to try and walk it in the net?

[Tombwfc]

To be fair, there have been millions of far worse penalty decisions than that.

I'm still not entirely sure I'm up with the law, but to me, that was a shit tackle. If N'Gog just plain carried on running, he'd have been tripped up and it'd have been a stonewall penalty.

Ok - I'm not up with the law either, but I'm not buying that one Tom.

To me N'Gog knocks it between two defenders, to run onto. Carsley gets to it first and is the next player to touch the ball. Surely that means Carsley and not N'Gog is technically in posession? If N'Gog carried on running and made contact with Carsley before the ball then surely it would have been a free-kick to Birmingham as they were the team "in posession" when the Liverpool player kicked him? At what point should Carsley pull out of a committed tackle that it looks to me he's successfully executed to allow N'Gog to try and walk it in the net?

Are we looking at the same incident? Carsley doesn't touch the ball, never mind gain posession of it.