http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/sa...vren_Liverpool_s_worst_ever_signing_/?ref=mac Article in Echo discussing whether Lovren at 20 million is the PL's worst signing EVER. Big claim. Certainly at 20 million he was vastly overpriced (shame on you, Saints!!) and obviously doesn't suit Liverpool. Suggests that buying players is an art...may fit in one team, but will he fit in yours (enter the Black Box). Considering we bought Bertrand and Forster with the money, Saints came off best.
Surely one of the worst signings, but probably not EVER. Not even this season. There's a certain CB at Man City which costed more, and played less and worse.
I think a certain Mr Torres beats Lovren. And Carroll. And Joe Cole. And Kim Kallstrom. There's plenty worse signings.
Have to add Lambert to the list I'm afraid, albeit not his fault and not the same price tag. But why buy someone if all they are going to do is sit on the bench? If he was playing poorly, then, fair enough but not to be given any kind of chance to prove himself is pointless. There have been many times this year when his cool head would have helped Liverpool. Even last night, Sturridge had 2 opportunities for an easy pass, instead he chose to shoot from a ridiculous angle. We know that Lambert would have passed, just ask Jay Rod.
Not sure why you have added Rickie to be honest . He has played well , when he has played , no talk of him arguing with the captain either . I think the situation is different with Lovren .
Ballotelli has not exactly been a success either. Lovren, Carroll, Ballotelli there's a common denominator here......Liverpool are just crap at transfers.
Lovren is patently not close to the worst signing. Can't be judged this early anyway. I reckon he could come good - probably next season if at all. He's clearly a class player, all conditions being equal; but has consistency and decision-making issues - big ones. His poor performances happened to coincide with the rest of his current teams' poor performances too, and he just happened to be one who got dropped. He's not even Liverpool's worst signing this season. But yes, he was massively overpriced.
Pelletron, there is a time and a place for common sense posting - this is not the time, nor the place
I'm not disagreeing with you at all, which is exactly my point. Why sign someone who can play well, add something to the team and then steadfastly refuse to play him. It is not about Lambert, it is about Liverpool. But, if Rogers insist on not playing him then it makes Lambert a complete waste of money. The difference between him and Lovren is that Lambert could go to many clubs and make a hugely positive impact, Lovren couldn't.
I can only go from what I read on various forums from Liverpool fans and I have seen quite a few people say the Lambert transfer is worse because Lovren could get better. They obviously think they overpaid, but at 25 (?) he still has time to settle and possibly come good. The Lambert deal is strange as surely professional scouts/coaches/managers would have been able to see that he is not the sort of player to just throw on with 5 mins to go to grab a goal. The comment about him performing OK doesn't seem to be shared amongst Liverpool fans that I've come across, most think he has been terrible, one even said he was the worst player he had ever seen in a Liverpool shirt
Lambert got a goal for England within a few minutes of getting thrown on One of my great football moments.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19043308 Another Liverpool waste of £20m.......I give u Alberto Aquilani
I see what you mean , just thought the OP was on about how useless ( quality wise ) players have turned out to be .
