Paul Tomkins Articles

good spot mate

 

Just in case Paul Tomkins pops in here to see how much he's loved, heres a few stats for his next article.

To date, this season we have played the following teams currently in the bottom half of the table:

Portsmouth (20) Lost 2-0
Wolves (17) Drew 0-0
Sunderland (16) Lost 1-0
West Ham (15) Won 3-2
Wigan (14) Lost 1-0
Bolton (13) Won 3-2
Blackburn (12) Drew 0-0
Stoke (11) Drew 1-1

So away from home against the absolute dross of this league, we have Won 2, Drawn 3 and Lost 3. Scored 7 in 8 games, with 6 of them coming in 2 games. So thats 1 goal in 6 games against teams currently 20th, 17th, 16th, 14th, 12th and 11th.

So Paul, dress that one up please.

 

Why don't you send it to via his website.

Unfortunately your theory doesn't take into account the form of either us or the teams you've mentioned above when we played them. It also doesn't take into account the players we had available for each game.

Your view of the league is very simplistic. If only it was that straightforward then we'd only ever drop points to the teams above us.

 

The Implications of 5th (or Worse)?

http://tomkinstimes.com/2010/03/the-implications-of-5th-or-worse/

Free, In-Depth Analysis

Posted on March 9th, 2010

Written by Paul Tomkins

Such is the importance placed on being in the Champions League, the thought of Liverpool missing out on the top four will be treated by many as the same as relegation.

Last night’s defeat against Wigan won’t have helped ease such fears.

Of course, relegation from the Premier League is now to be avoided at all costs, because of the money involved. Newcastle look set to bounce back, but previously well-established top-tier clubs like Southampton, Coventry, Norwich, Leeds, Leicester and Charlton have all been hit hard by demotion; indeed, four of those clubs are now in the third tier of English football. And it’s taken Nottingham Forest years to arrest their decline.

The fear is that Liverpool would suffer the same fate, albeit dropping closer to mid-table mediocrity than relative oblivion. And with the way the finances have been going at the club, allied to the increasing wealth of others, makes it a valid fear. Benítez could not eternally magic up Champions League revenue to overcome shortfalls in other areas.

As with any storm, you can pick out silver linings. The lowering of expectations (which grew too high with overachievement last year), and the lessening of playing demands by being out of the elite European competition could certainly help. But it could also mean smaller funds and a slight tarnish for those looking to join. I wouldn’t want to call which way it would go.

I didn’t necessarily agree with Jamie Carragher’s assertion in a revealing Sunday Times interview that Liverpool are the kind of club that will always find itself up there; he may well be right to some degree, but it seems to smack of entitlement. There are no guarantees, especially as the financial landscape changes so rapidly these days.

Liverpool can always come back stronger, as they have in the past – and as have other big clubs after a spell in the doldrums – but right now, rivals for the top four are making obscene investments in their playing staff, and if they are also well managed and stable at the top, they will only become harder to compete with.

There are some very valid reasons why the Reds can remain a major force, but also a fair few suggesting that it won’t be easy to get back in, once squeezed out of the prime positions. Maybe that’s why there’s such a sense of panic around the situation from fans right now.

In their favour, Liverpool have great prestige, and an enormous fan-base. That won’t change in the next 50 years! (Even if some fly-by-nights will come and go.)

Anfield retains a mythical, magical air, even if for most league games it can be a shadow of its former glorious noise. (Having said that, my first visit, in 1990, was fairly underwhelming.)

So attracting good players will not be a problem; the issue will be attracting the very best, especially with no Champions League to offer, and a lack of deep pockets to pay the biggest wages.

Liverpool also still have some world-class players, both home-grown and brought to the club by Benítez.

But I still feel that there is massive instability across the club, and it all heads back to the mess it has been in off the field for a few years now. It set a bad tone, and that can never help; you don’t see the same happening at Spurs and Aston Villa, do you? It doesn’t explain all the performances this season, but it did predate them.

If the funding had been there in the first place, then a bigger squad ‘might’ have dealt better with the early season injuries, and Benítez would definitely have been able to invest the money he originally believed he had in greater cover for Torres, from which point the word crisis does not get bandied about after every setback. If you go one-nil down, you are chasing the game; since week one, Liverpool have been chasing the season.

At the moment, it seems like everyone is jostling for position, trying to assert their authority and have the club move forward with their vision. In Shankly’s day, that vision would be the manager’s and the manager’s alone. But nowadays? – it’s far more complicated.

Exodus?

The main concern I hear is that “Torres will leave”, and Man City will snap him up. This ignores his love of Liverpool, his utter faith in Benítez, and his loyalty, seen in years at Atletico Madrid, when they didn’t even qualify for the Champions League on one single occasion.

(As an aside, off the pitch, Torres has a fantastic attitude. On it, it’s letting him down of late; when your best-paid, ‘go-to’ players show petulance, it undermines the unity. So even though Liverpool missed the cut and thrust of Gerrard and Torres when injured, at least the Reds were playing ‘as one’ in grinding out results. Frustration is understandable, but it turns players against one another. I acknowledge that players like Torres, Gerrard and Carragher have deservedly had the plaudits in recent years, after countless excellent displays, but equally, when they let the team down, it needs to be said. Istanbul was accredited mostly to Rafa, Gerrard and Carragher, and therefore the criticism in bad times shouldn’t stop with just the manager.)

However, a club like City could make Liverpool’s hierarchy an offer they think they can’t refuse.

But if the worst did happen, would that be Benítez’s fault for finishing outside of the top four, or the club’s for being in such a perilous financial position, based on debt, and still without a new stadium?

All the same, selling Torres to a rival would signal defeat in terms of ambition, and on that score, I just can’t see it happening. So I’m confident Torres will stay, and the same for Steven Gerrard.

However, despite his commitment to the cause, Benítez’s future is unclear, not least because he is under pressure; Jamie Carragher has suggested that his own future is also unclear; it’s unclear if Christian Purslow is a long-time leader off the pitch or a man with a temporary task courtesy of Royal Bank of Scotland; and, of course, Gillett and Hicks know they are not welcome at Anfield in the eyes of many fans. Will there be new investment? And to what extent? So many unresolved issues still beset the club.

Unrest?

It saddens me to say, but the impression I get – and this is purely my impression – is that Carragher and Gerrard are not fully behind Benítez, as they desperately look to achieve that elusive title towards the back-end of their Liverpool careers.

Of course, there’s no law that says players have to be in 100% support of their boss; I just feel that their silence has been deafening.

It’s been left to players like Reina, Mascherano and Torres to sing Benítez’s praises during a difficult campaign, while the local lads have kept rather quiet on the issue (while their good friend, Danny Murphy, publicly attacked Rafa in quite scathing manner a couple of months back).

It’s been that kind of season. Also, I’d be surprised if it’s escaped Rafa’s attention that during the season, Carragher’s family and friends have been quite vocal in calling for a new manager. That concerns me.
Benítez, meanwhile, could tire of the nonsense surrounding the club, and look to improve his reputation elsewhere, after it has taken a bit of a hammering this season. Or the owners could tire of him, and look to install someone with a clean slate and bring back that universal good-feeling air that comes with a new boss (and which usually lasts about eight games!).

Benítez has always dealt with players who are not particularly fond of him; in my experience he is a very likeable man, but I was kind of surprised to find that to be the case after some of the things I’d read.

However, to play for him, you have to accept that he won’t allow anyone to rest on his laurels, and that must be frustrating for those who crave some praise. Some Valencia players were hugely relieved when he left, after three years of him driving them relentlessly on and on and on; only to miss him once the club started slipping down the league. Be careful what you wish for, etc, etc.

I don’t doubt Benítez’s utter commitment to the job, with regard to his desire to bring success for the fans. He works incredible hours, and is utterly obsessed with doing the best he can.

Equally, I don’t believe that winning a trophy elsewhere could ever mean as much to Carragher and Gerrard as it would at Liverpool. I don’t doubt that they love the club, and they will go down in the history books as two of the very best.

Obviously Carragher’s position is the most unstable, given his age of 32 and lack of a long-term deal (standard practice at Arsenal). This is not to mention his own poor form earlier in the season, that led many observers to prematurely write him off; since when he’s returned to something approaching (but not quite matching) his best form.

However, personally speaking, I wasn’t too keen on Carragher’s assertions that he’ll move on if he isn’t a regular at Liverpool. While I accept his reasoning – he loves the game and wants to play every minute throughout the season – saying so publicly puts the manager in a tight spot, and whether it was intended to or not, it sounds a bit like blackmail: “play more, or I’m off”.

Gary Neville, Paul Scholes and Ryan Giggs have no such assurances at Manchester United, and I’d like to think that Carragher would be happy to contribute in the way they have, and accept time on the bench as part and parcel of getting older. He remains an outstanding organiser, and utterly committed to every last tackle, but mistakes are playing a bigger part in his game, and there’s no guarantee that he can defy the passage of time. I don’t think he’s finished, but equally, he’s not 25 anymore.

If he can’t maintain his place in the side, I’d love to see him remain on hand, as an option. But if he refuses to accept a bit-part – should that be his future (and I’m purely hypothesising) – and forces Benítez to sell him, then the manager will appear the villain. So from Carragher’s point of view (if his point of view is on a par with his family and friends), I could see why a change of manager might appeal.

That’s before getting onto the fact that the Academy has produced only one Premier League-standard local in the past 12 years (Stephen Warnock), and the iconic importance placed on Carragher staying.

(Indeed, it is precisely this lack of local talent emerging that prompted Benítez to recently replace loads of part-time amateur scouts with a smaller, more organised band of professional talent spotters. This is one example of him doing the right thing for the club, and follow Arsene Wenger’s model, but few people being aware of it, because a handful of months later, no new wonderkids have miraculously emerged in the first team.)

The Reds’ no.23 was arguably the club’s most consistent player throughout the previous decade, and a bona fide legend, but managers have to think about the future, not the past. However, when Carragher said that he’d had “a bad 45 minutes at West Ham”, he was underplaying form far worse than just one half of football. If anything, his bizarre challenge for the ball at Spurs on the opening day, that led to Martin Skrtel breaking his jaw, set the tone for the season.

(Of course, that injury then led to a defensive crisis, with Agger already out, so he wasn’t helped by a new-look back-line – but even so, all criticism of him was justified, even if the “he’s finished” rubbish wasn’t.)

Players cannot be kept on for sentimental reasons. In some ways, Carragher may simply be accepting that: saying that if his time is up, he won’t dwell on it; he’ll take it on the chin, go elsewhere and continue to give his best. If so, I totally respect that.

But my fear is that it’s a power play, especially with Henry Winter, who ghosted Gerrard’s autobiography and who never misses a chance to state his dislike of Benítez, continually tipping the no.23 as a future Liverpool manager, with some outdated notion that you can tell who’d make a top boss by the way they play football.

The English game has moved on from the days of big-name rookie managers, with the bosses of the big five (if you now include City) all having won titles in either Italy, Spain or England, and three of them also landing the European Cup. This is not the era of O’Leary and Gullit anymore; this is the age where years of graft in managerial apprenticeships, usually in obscure environs, is almost certainly a necessity. And you can add the names of Roy Hodgson and David Moyes to that list (not to mention a little-known player like Roberto Martinez, who managed in the lower leagues first).

Carragher may well turn out to be a great manager; but I don’t see it as helpful that he’s being touted for the job, and it surely wouldn’t be long into the future, anyway.

Self-interest

Make no mistake – players have a more selfish view than managers. It’s the nature of the beast.

While the ego, and need to achieve great things, is arguably the same – these are winners, after all, whether crossing the white line or pacing the technical area – the manager has responsibility for the collective, while the individual has his own form and career to worry about.

This is never more clear than when ex-players who’ve achieved nothing as managers (Martin Tyler's Monkey, Alan Shearer) berate a boss like Benítez when he takes off a player on a hat-trick with 15 minutes to go and the game well and truly won. They see the hat-trick as the key thing; the manager sees the next game as the important factor. I know who I back, and it’s not the player.

(Interestingly, Shearer’s take on backing Michael Owen in any circumstances as a pundit changed once he was actually managing. Beforehand, he would argue that he would “always get you a goal”; staring relegation in the face, and never more desperate for a goalscorer, Owen was left out. This is a key example of the different side to the coin.)

Some players feel a loyalty to a manager, while others won’t. I’m sure players like Reina, Torres, Mascherano, and all the other first-team players featuring in the side (of those he bought), are 100% behind Benítez. But those he didn’t buy, or those who feel they don’t play enough, will naturally have less loyalty. That’s not sinister; it’s natural.

This is why I will always back managers over players, even if it was a manager I didn’t like and a player I did.

At the time, I was angry that Houllier got rid of Robbie Fowler, but looking back, if the relationship between player and manager irrevocably breaks down, then there can only be one winner. And if it’s the player, then player power has taken control.

At any club, if there are player power issues, and it’s a small minority, then the problem probably rests with them; if it’s the whole squad, then the manager’s time is up. That’s when he’s “lost the dressing room”; equally, there will always be those within a dressing room, especially in the age of 25-30-man squads and increased egos, who are unhappy.

In the modern game, player power exists simply due to the celestial standing of the star names. When players at Chelsea can get a World Cup-winning manager the sack after six months, then you have to accept that anything is possible. I don’t necessarily think that is what exists at Liverpool, but equally, it would be wrong to suggest that it couldn’t.

Perhaps it’s just a case of bad results exaggerating every last niggle at the moment. If there are divisions, they need not necessarily be permanent. Ultimately, no-one is going to be happy during a season like this, and it only takes a winning run to smooth over difficulties. And a winning run will come – but it might not happen in time to rescue this season.

Stay or Go?

So, will Benítez stay or go? If the Reds finish outside the top four, as looks increasingly likely, then there will certainly be a clamour for him to move on.

My belief has always been that one bad season for a top manager can happen, but that two in a row is the cut-off point. (This is in my first book, from 2005.) However, I’m sure that even Benítez himself would admit he’s taken it as far as he could if next season was a continuation of this. Clearly, dramatic improvements are needed, on what has been an annus horribilis.

I don’t think that he’s grown stale, and he’s certainly no worse a manager than the one who won La Liga titles and the Champions League; if anything, experience will have made him better. (Managers don’t just lose their ability; but they can lose control of a situation, and need help, and/or time, to reel it in again.)

The problem is working magic during a season that has been snowballing negatively from the very first game.

Not once have Liverpool been out of “this is a must-win game” mode, and that’s exhausting. (It has been for me; I imagine it has for you, too. So for the players and staff, it cannot be easy.)

What’s clear, however, is that the situation around Benítez has grown steadily worse in recent years. The supposed “full control” he was given of the club has coincided with other problems.

He has had to break even in transfers for the last two years, rather than being able to spend money to improve the squad – certainly its depth; at a time when other clubs either have squads that are far more costly, and new rivals like Manchester City are emerging, with riches beyond compare. In terms of investment, Liverpool have been standing still; Spurs, City and Villa have not.

Benítez has experienced great instability over his job since late 2007. No other manager at a big English club has had to survive warring owners, one of whom was looking to sack him. So any success last season would have been in spite of this, not because of it.

And this season, the media, which has never given him the benefit of the doubt, has been out for its pound of flesh, like a pack of rabid, starving wolves, in a manner usually reserved for failing England managers.

Then there’s the lack of leeway that fans give to new bosses or those with recent trophies. He still has loads of loyal supporters, but a growing number of critics.

And all the while, some players will naturally grow less motivated by managers after long periods of time. Bill Shankly would have moved the players on, even during seven years of drought. Indeed, his main regret was that he left it until after 1970 to ship out the legends of the early-to-mid ‘60s.

Alex Ferguson does the same whenever any of his stars fall out with him, or grow stale. Bob Paisley was a master at moving a player on at the right time, as is Arsene Wenger. But vitally, all could call on total support from the board in freshening things up, with very secure positions at the club. But it’s not clear to me if Benítez has that utter power at this point in time.

The improvements in Benítez’s favour, such as the removal of Rick Parry and more control of the youth set-up, have yet to bear fruit.

I certainly think Purslow seems more professional, and although doubts remain in some quarters, at least he has solved one financial problem by agreeing a very lucrative shirt sponsorship deal.

Also, given that their relationship had seriously soured, he has to get on better with Rafa than did his predecessor (even if missing out on £15m-rated Chamakh, when the player wanted to join the club on a free transfer, takes us back into Parry territory).

But the youth revamp could take years to have a telling effect. The landing of one of England’s true prodigies – Raheem Sterling – is exciting news, and is indicative of moves in the right direction; the decision to bring back Kenny Dalglish clearly helped. But Sterling has only just turned 15, and similar signings obviously won’t have an immediate impact, either.

And now, Dalglish’s presence could be used to undermine the Liverpool manager, in the way that Roy Evans feared would be the case with him in 1997, when he blocked a similar move.

On the plus side, Benítez has been here before and come back stronger: in his 2nd season at Valencia, after winning the league, they dropped to 5th and he had to withstand massive pressure. A year later, they were champions again, with the UEFA Cup thrown in to boot.

But this is slightly different. This is Liverpool, and the massive goldfish bowl that the club is, with expectation always way beyond realistic levels.

I don’t doubt that Benítez could turn things around next season, if given the chance. But by being given the chance, it has to mean being backed to the hilt by the club, and not just with funds. Even Jose Mourinho lost his way at Chelsea once he was undermined by its owner.

People are already touting the return of Kenny Dalglish as manager, and the future appointment of Jamie Carragher; which, to me, sounds like Newcastle fans crying for the return of their messiah, Kevin Keegan, followed by the instalment of Shearer as boss – followed swiftly by relegation.

Believe me, I love Kenny to bits, and he did a brilliant job at Liverpool and Blackburn. He might still be able to cut it, but so much has changed in the past 15 years; not just in English football, but at Liverpool. And he wouldn’t have the financial backing he got first time around, or at Blackburn. Either way, the speculation won’t help.

All in all, it’s going to be a massive summer for Liverpool. To make matters worse, 15-or-so players are heading to the World Cup, and Torres will have his third consecutive hectic summer, with injuries dogging him after the previous two. And prices for players who are targets always escalate wildly after a good game or two at the finals.

But it needn’t all be doom and gloom.

It can be a chance for players and management to take pause, regroup, and make sense of what has at times been a logic-defying season, beset with every problem imaginable. After a break, a line can be drawn under 2009/10, and everyone starts again on an equal footing. I hope that this is the case: that everyone comes back refreshed, with renewed vigour and belief, united in the aim of being the best they can possibly be.

Then again, it can be a chance to fragment and go in different directions. It’s up to those concerned as to how it will play out. But either way, success beyond the summer will ride on the unity of what remains.

 

I’d be surprised if it’s escaped Rafa’s attention that during the season, Carragher’s family and friends have been quite vocal in calling for a new manager. That concerns me.


???

 

If it did escape Rafa's attention then Tomkins has certainly made sure he know's now.

Who is this fella to have an opinion of what goes on between Rafa and his players? Goes on like he's ITK. That article is unsettling.
Then he says this

Looks like he's trying to set the tone to be in Rafa's favour should Carra leave in the Summer.

I'm sorry I took time out of my morning to read that brain washing rubbish. Tomkins is full of shit

 

No actual comment from Tomkins on the game itself. Probably because they is nothing good he can say about the manager in relation to the game.

 

Tomkins articles are a load of cr@p. sick of them

 

Reasons Benitez Belongs

http://tomkinstimes.com/2010/04/reasons-benitez-belongs/

It’s getting to the stage where a big ‘Fail’ sign will be waved at Benítez, who turns 50 this week (still young for a manager), even though the club is within touching distance of a trophy.

I’ve said for ages that Benítez will never get a fair assessment from certain fans, and sloppy, or vindictive journalists. I’ve spent years countering the myths that surround the manager, and now is the time to draw a number of those points together, in short recaps that include links to the more detailed analysis.

Context

Prior to his arrival, Liverpool had qualified for the Champions League on just two occasions following its rebranding in 1992; a third time was secured around the time of the last game of Gérard Houllier’s final season.

Of course, this (2003/04) was when Chelsea were only just gearing up (Ranieri was in charge, and £100m was about to be invested by new man Mourinho), and long before City assembled a £250m squad.

So strong were new Chelsea, they leapfrogged Liverpool and even all-conquering ‘invincible’ Arsenal in no time at all. It was now up from three to four places for qualifying, but one was effectively sewn up by Chelsea’s unprecedented wealth.

It was also in the days before David Moores found the going too expensive, and before he sold up in order for fresh investment, only to see Liverpool quickly turn into a ‘break even’ club in the transfer market.

Benítez himself has overseen five consecutive further qualifications, the first having something to do with winning the actual thing.

Of course, that was suddenly seen as ‘par for the course’ by many pundits, even though, to be honest, it hadn’t been the case for over 20 years.

They failed to note this progress, choosing to make out that Europe was all that mattered to the manager, even though two of his first five seasons clearly showed the Reds’ domestic form to be far superior to that on the continent.

And, as he took the club time and time again into, and beyond, the group stages of the Champions League, “where’s the silverware?” they said, including when the club posted a league points tally that no runner-ups had ever matched (86 points being a bit like running the 100m in last year’s world-record time: it’s still the mark of a fantastic athlete – a great achievement – but people say “so what?”)

And yet with silverware a possibility going into the last few weeks of this season, it’s “where’s the top four finish?”

So it seems that when Liverpool are winning trophies, it’s about being in Europe’s premier competition; when Liverpool aren’t winning trophies, it’s about “winning trophies”. And when Champions League finals were being reached, it was “ah, but the league is the bread and butter.”

Critics also say “Sure, the owners might be bad, but Benítez is to blame for the season”. Presumably they’d say the same if the owners sold everyone and replaced them with Yeovil Town reserves? Was Terry Venables to blame when Leeds got relegated after selling all their players, or Avram Grant for Portsmouth going down without a real fight in the Premiership? (Extreme examples, admittedly – Liverpool aren’t a selling club yet; but they aren’t a buying club either.)

Surely you can only judge a manager fairly if he has a stable situation to work with: the ‘basic minimum’ any boss deserves? Would you judge a top Formula One driver if he had flat tyres and an unstable steering mechanism? – the job surely becomes just keeping four wheels on the track.

Jose Mourinho did a great job at Chelsea until he had difficulties with Abramovich; then he was sacked, with them having made a mediocre start to the 2007/08 season. But people who say he’d definitely win the title at Liverpool, even with such unhelpful owners, seem to overlook the nature of his Chelsea demise.

You’ll also know all about the hypocrisy, too.

By now, Rafa will be damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. People like Henry Winter will say that he blames everyone but himself, while excusing Alex Ferguson yet another tirade against a referee, and allowing Arsene Wenger to ‘never see anything’ if it involves his players doing wrong. David Moyes was (rightly) excused his injury crisis this season; Rafa was told to get on with it and stop moaning.

The same people who slated Rafa for ‘guaranteeing’ that the club would finish in the top four condemned him just days later, for refusing to ‘guarantee’ that his side would beat Portsmouth.

If he’s positive and confident, trying to instil belief in his troops, he’s arrogant; if he’s cautious, he’s negative.

Belief

Let me be clear: I do not have a misplaced loyalty to the manager. Given the abuse I get for defending him – people seem to blame me personally for any dropped points, which means I feel added responsibility – it would probably be a lot easier for me if someone new was in charge.

But I do not think that this would be the right thing for Liverpool Football Club, and that’s where my loyalties lie. Yes, I like and respect Rafa, the man and the manager, but it goes beyond that. This is not about the easy way out.

One thing I really hate is the saying “In Rafa [or any other manager] We Trust”, because it implies a faith borne of blind devotion, rather than, in my case at least, a belief borne of serious research, comparisons and realistic barometers; a belief in world-class managers, even when all is not going their way.

My reasons?

Well, there are plenty, all backed with strong evidence.

It’s his team

While it’s true that a new manager can inject fresh life into a team, it’s also true, according to Soccernomics, that he will want money of his own to spend. The trouble is, a new man is in a situation of desperation; other clubs know that if he wants to reshuffle, he cannot expect full market value for the players.

This is a squad in Benítez’s image, albeit without the finishing touches he craves to put on it, to make it something special. He has bought in players who fit the system, and got them to understand his way of working.

The same applies to Arsene Wenger at Arsenal. Last year, all we heard was that he was too stubborn, and that it’s time to abandon his lofty ideals and get in some cloggers to toughen them up.

Very little has changed at The Emirates in terms of personnel, but a clean break over the summer meant that they could start again with a fresh slate.

This time, unlike last season, they didn’t get off to a bad start. And getting off to a bad start only increases the pressure.

Indeed, Arsenal last year resemble Liverpool right now, and Arsenal right now resemble Liverpool last year. (Except Liverpool last season were a bit better than Arsenal are this – they won’t reach 86 points – and Arsenal, by the end of last season, were a little bit better than the Reds – who are unlikely to finish 4th – are at present.)

Although it’s his team, Benítez gets little credit for bringing in Torres, even though other clubs weren’t convinced enough to part with the cash for a player yet to better 13 goals from open play in a season. But he was bought by Rafa, and he was improved: 33 goals in his debut season, and even 22 this season, despite missing almost half of it, and despite not taking a single penalty in all his time at the club.

(It’s part of this media narrative that Benítez is not good in the transfer market. Ditto Javier Mascherano, who is also now seen as a no-brainer, when at the time he was in West Ham’s reserves and looking ill-suited to English football. Similarly, Pepe Reina rarely gets mentioned as a good Benítez buy, when he might be his very best.)

Now all we hear is that Torres might leave. Or that Liverpool rely too heavily on him.

Well, according to Opta, “Arsenal have averaged 3.3 goals per game in 11 Premier League games with Robin van Persie playing this season, compared to 1.8 without him”.

And we’ve all seen United struggle in recent weeks without Wayne Rooney – and that’s with a £32m striker still in the team. That’s the trouble with those rare talents: they’re rare, and hard to replace.

Perhaps instead of one £20m striker, Benítez should have bought two £10m ones. But then the side, while theoretically stronger in terms of back-up, would never be capable of hitting the heights when the main striker was included.

Youth/reserves: on the up

This cannot be overlooked, or underestimated. With less money to spend than most rivals, it is vital that Liverpool go down the path seen at Arsenal at look to a strong youth system (even though Arsenal, over the past five years, have an arguably inferior record to Liverpool; like the Reds, it’s been up-and-down in the league, and the same in Europe).

Of course, one part of emulating the Gunners’ plan is in tatters; the new stadium hasn’t arrived, to bring in double the match-day takings Anfield provides. In its place, however, is the debt that Arsenal accrued by building the Emirates, without any of the bonuses (such as: no need to spend on a new one, or renovations, for decades, and massive match-day income).

Equally, it takes time to bring players through after overhauling a youth system, and for Benítez, his control was very limited when he arrived in 2004; slightly less limited by the departure of Steve Heighway in 2007 (although Rick Parry appointed Piet Hamburg and Malcolm Elias); but only fully unlimited since the summer of 2009.

Therefore, anyone expecting youth team graduates within nine months is living in dreamland.

It is less than a year since Rololfo Borrell, the man who discovered Fabregas and who managed the youth team that also included Messi and Pique, was installed by Benítez as a man who finally shared his ethos (which dated back to his own successes with the Real Madrid system) in the development of young players.

The club appear to have stepped up its search for outstanding 15-year-olds; just as Arsenal did a decade ago, and United did so aggressively 20 years ago. (At the time, a young David Beckham was out of United’s geographical range; but they still snared him.)

Meanwhile, the current England U17 team has three Liverpool defenders in its back four.

Plenty of the talent will fall by the wayside, as happens – kids fail to develop physically, or mentally, and pick up injuries (see the wonderfully talented Francisco Duran, making another comeback after a third cruciate knee injury in two and a half years) – but the more top-class kids you have, the greater the odds of one or two, or even three or four, coming through.

Point Of Difference

If you have less money, you need points of difference to distinguish yourself. In the case of Benítez, it is his tactical acumen. Even that, though, will only get you so far.

But there are other areas.

Appointing arguably the best Sport Scientist in the world is a big step in the right direction. As Liverpool’s squad/wages investment is largely tied up in players like Torres and Gerrard, it’s important that they play as often as is humanly possible (without them burning out).

If you have less money to invest in the squad, it’s imperative that the best XI is available as often as possible, and rotated as part of the manager’s plan, not due to long-term injuries and enforced changes. And if you have players with recurring or persisting injuries – Torres, Aurelio, Aquilani, Agger – then someone who can help limit absences would be more valuable than a new £50m player. (Of course, new players are still needed, too.)

And as noted above, a manager with limited resources has to bring in the best young players, before they are world-renowned stars who cost £35m.

But this also requires patience on the part of the fans, who are too quick to call for their inclusion when they impress in the reserves, and too hasty in writing them off after their first bad game or mistake.

Expectations

By rights, 5th is all Liverpool should have expected this season.

Like others, I felt the momentum of last season might take us to the very summit, but equally, I was fully aware (as detailed in my limited edition 2009 book, Red Race) that the club was not geared up for such honours. It was massively overachieving.

Liverpool are funded like a 5th-placed side: 5th-highest wage bill (behind Chelsea, United, City and Arsenal), with the 5th-costliest squad (at least £50m behind Spurs, and even further behind United, Chelsea and City).

Then there’s the stadium, whose capacity currently also ranks 5th (behind Utd, City, Arsenal and Sunderland), and which will slip to 6th following the promotion of a certain barcoded Championship side.

Liverpool still have the best history, though.

But as the saying goes, that won’t keep us warm at night, or put bread (and butter: aka the league title) on our table.

Expenditure

The massive Transfer Price Index © study was undertaken for TTT to help get a better idea of who spent what, and when – and how that outlay (or lack of) correlated with success. I had done something similar with my Relative Transfer System for Dynasty, which enabled me to compare spending between 1959 and 2009 on an even playing field, using the transfer record of each year by way of comparison. TPI takes that a little further, and is a bit more scientific.

While it deals with football inflation – how much a player in, say, 1995, or 2001, would cost in today’s market – it also exists to work out the actual squad costs of clubs each season between 1992 and 2009. The database is immense: every player to play in the Premier League, and each is listed once for every season they featured, and calculations are even made on how many games they played in each given campaign (to see what value came from the investment).

One thing Graeme Riley and I looked at was what percentage of the Premier League’s overall net spend each season each individual club was responsible for:

“Rafa’s yearly totals register at 13.9% (including a £14.2m signing, Cissé, who was actually signed by Houllier), 6.9%, 6.3%, 12.5% and 1.6%, with the current season standing at a miniscule 0.2%. Indeed, strip out Cissé’s fee and Benítez’s total in his first season was yet again below the 7% mark.

“Even the one big outlay during his tenure – the season the Americans briefly looked like they might stump up the money that was required – the net figure (12.5%) still fell below those registered that year by Sunderland, Spurs and Manchester City.”

The top 3 big spenders this season, in net terms? Manchester City, Chelsea and Birmingham – who just happen to be in better shape than last season (while Manchester United, who sold better players than they brought in, to make a net profit, are clearly not as strong.)

“The drop in overall spending has meant that City’s 2009/10 outlay rockets by comparison – to a truly astonishing 113% of the Premier League’s net spend. (This is due to the fact that, when combined, the other 19 teams in total had a Net INFLOW of £11.7m, mainly due to the sales of Ronaldo and Alonso to Spain, whereas City spent £99.5m, resulting in a net spend for the EPL of £87.8m.)

“At the other end of the scale, Chelsea, after two seasons of virtually insignificant Net spend [when they somewhat 'stagnated'], once again return to the top two, with a figure of 29.6%. City are clearly the new richest team on the block, but they also had a long way to go to catch up with Chelsea’s previous squad investment.

“Behind Chelsea come Birmingham (27.6%), Aston Villa (22.9%), Sunderland (19%), Wolves (17.8%), Stoke (15.3%) and Everton (11%). Liverpool sit way back in 12th, with just 0.2%.”

Progression/regression

Some people don’t see a progression between 2004 and 2010, because they think a one-season backwards step is fatal, like falling off a cliff; when, in truth, it’s just a backwards step, from which you can regain your poise and make a forward step. It’s the panic-mongers who suggest there’s a cliff right behind us.

(There is no cliff; however, consistent underfunding in the team will almost certainly see a gradual decline. Liverpool can still attract very big names, but it needs to be able to afford their fees and pay their wages.)

While there is no guarantee that Liverpool will bounce back with brilliance in 2010/11 – and certainly winning the league on the current budget needs to be returned to the ‘pipe dream’ file – it’s essential that people realise the same arguments were made against Arsenal a year ago: Wenger had taken them as far as they could go; the squad needed overhauling (“get rid of Eboue, Bentdner, Gallas, Almunia, Denilson, Diaby, Walcott, et al”).

Yet they lasted until this week – mid-April – with a realistic chance of the title, with those very players; indeed, they actually lost Toure and Adebayor, two of their most touted stars, and only really added Vermalen. (Oh, and 137-year-old Sol Campbell.)

With injury problems, perhaps the Gunners were undermined by a few squad weaknesses, and even though their wage bill is greater than Liverpool’s, it still told me that they almost certainly wouldn’t win the league. In other words, Wenger, like Benítez last season, has done exceptionally well to get this far in a title race.

These critics of Rafa and Liverpool also fail to see the progress of other clubs, whose resources allow for accelerated growth.

Liverpool’s net investment, each season since 2007/08, has been virtually zero. By 2008, a lot of the expenditure had gone on first XI players (Reina, Torres, Mascherano, Agger, Alonso, Kuyt, Benayoun), with one or two exceptions (including Babel, even though he was originally bought for inclusion; he essentially swapped with Yossi).

But rather than strengthen the squad since then, there has been a one-out, one-in policy. Good players have come in, but only in place of good players going out.

The issue of squad depth has not been addressed, because the funds haven’t stretched that far.

Anyone who says “Liverpool spent £40m” this season misses the point that out went Alonso, Arbeloa and Hyypia (plus Voronin and Dossena) for the same amount. Given that both Arbeloa and Hyypia left for below their actual worth (due to freedom of contract issues), Liverpool lost more than £40m worth of talent.

Manchester United have also clearly ‘gone backwards’ this season, with the loss of two top players. But as with Liverpool, that doesn’t mean they are on a permanent downward spiral.

Ferguson has been here in the past (2003-2006), and he’s always gone out and purchased a new crop of players. If he is given the money, he will do so again. The same applies to Benítez. The fascinating thing will be to see if either is backed in the market, given the debts placed on their respective clubs by American owners.

But while United and Liverpool have fallen away from last year’s standard, and Chelsea have improved slightly, Arsenal have had an almost inexplicable bounce back to form (in that it wasn’t precipitated by new players). Then there’s Manchester City and Spurs, with their deep, expensive squads, now crashing the 4th-place party.

Had City been one year further ahead in their plans, it would probably have been Arsenal exiled from the Champions League last May. Had Ronaldo and Tevez left United a year earlier, it could have been Liverpool crowned champions for 2008/09.

But that’s football: Holland in 1974 and 1978 were better than many of the greatest teams seen before or since; they won nothing. Greece will never be remembered as a truly great side, yet they won Euro 2004.

Timing is everything.

And the worst timing for Benítez was to arrive in England when City and Chelsea would elevate themselves with wealth (as Liverpool’s finances ran dry), and when United had arguably their strongest-ever side. Even three-time title- and -multiple-cup winner (not to mention finishing in the top-two for nine consecutive years) Arsene Wenger has been starved of silverware – and anything better than a 3rd-placed league finish – in the same period.

Too Negative

Two seasons ago, Liverpool were the top scoring English team across all competitions.

Last season, Liverpool were the top scoring side in the Premier League.

This season, going into the Fulham game, the Reds were matching the free-scoring 1987/88 team of Barnes, Beardsley and Aldridge when it came to goals scored in home games by the same stage of that season, and had just gone 16 months since last drawing an Anfield blank.

Room for improvement? Definitely, especially away from home (although weirdly, the Reds had their best-ever season on the road in 2008/09). But with players like Peter Crouch and Robbie Keane leaving in search of regular first team football (but not necessarily getting it), and Bellamy leaving for the same reason – and, in part, funding the move for Torres – it’s not been easy for Benítez to keep international strikers happy on the bench.

This is a two-fold problem: a) Any striker in the world knows he’ll be behind Torres (if he is fit) in the pecking order, and may therefore steer clear of Liverpool; b) The Reds can’t afford to pay reserve strikers £80,000 a week, as Chelsea do with Kalou, City do with some of their strikers, and United did between 2007 and 2009 with Tevez (not to mention Berbatov, who spends a fair amount of time in the dugout).

Involvement

Under Benítez, Liverpool have been involved in the hunt for silverware until at least April 29th, when this season’s Europa League semi-finals conclude.

If the Reds beat Atletico Madrid, it will mean that only once did the season ‘end’, in terms of potential to win a trophy, before May: the Champions League semi-final defeat to Chelsea on 30th April 2008 (just an hour before May began).

This is purely about contesting trophies; nothing to do with Champions League qualification going to the wire.

Under previous Liverpool managers – in the post-Dalglish era – some seasons were effectively over by February or March. In Souness’ case, even January.

The perfect example of ‘evidence above instinct’

To end with, an example about counterintuitive thinking.

Apparently Liverpool are “crap at scoring from corners”.

I hear this all the time.

And yet the universal average is a goal scored from every 30 taken; which means most teams see a very large number of them come to nothing.

This season, Liverpool have scored 10 league goals from 240 corners. So gut instinct – intuition – is wrong. The Reds have scored a goal with every 24 they’ve taken.

This isn’t bad at all for a side lacking any real giants (and containing a few diminutive players: Mascherano, Benayoun, Lucas, Maxi, Insua), and when only really tall/set-piece specialist teams – City, Villa, Blackburn, Stoke, Sunderland and Portsmouth – have better conversion rates.

Chelsea, meanwhile, with Drogba, Terry, Ballack, Alex, Mikel and various other aerial menaces, have so far only scored a goal from every 38 corners. Incredibly, United have only managed a goal every 68 corners, and Burnley have yet to score in 140 attempts. Ouch!

So it turns out that Liverpool, while not outstanding, are rather good at corners – which is the perfect evidence that you really need to find the facts first, and speak after. Otherwise you are just perpetuating myths.

The same applies to rotation (truth: Ferguson does it more than anyone, usually with success); Liverpool’s zonal marking, which still stacks up better than champions-elect Chelsea’s man-marking this season; Gerrard in central midfield; Rafa’s timing with substitutions; and so on.

I’ve never claimed that Benítez is perfect, or infallible. No manager is, and no manager is even close. It’s impossible. All I’ve done is ask that criticisms be subjected to scrutiny; some may stand up, but the vast majority, in my experience, collapse like Didier Drogba on a particularly windy Wednesday.

 

I stopped reading after this bit. Had there been four CL spots available in 90s Roy Evans would have qualified every year

 

I agree and I don't know why he continues to mention it, but it is not a bad article..... the rest of it.

 

He says 5th is all that should expected this season, that is a load of **** in my opinion. this has been one of the weakest Premier League seasons ever. Man U and Arsenal have lost 7 games, Chelsea have lost 5. LFC has lost 10 games, the third highest in the top ten. Rafa has a lot against him this season, injuries, bad luck and also the worst owners you could get, however even the man himself would agree with the squad he has had this season, 10 defeats is not acceptable in the league.

 

I have gone off Tomkins for a while now his complete inability to truely have a go at Rafa or admit there are serious problems with the squad and constantly looking at everything through rose coloured glasses using stats the back up his opionions is getting old. You can find stats to practically back up everything.

Shrek this year is odds on to win the PFA despite the fact Drogba has one goal less than him, twice the number of assists, didnt get to play against Pompy the league where Shrek scored 4, missed a month with injury and wasnt he in the African Nations too?, yet every stat is ignored as Shrek is english and their only hope for the WC.

Its all well and good being positive but it cant be at the expense of denying problems exist.

 

Been a huge fan of Tomkins for many years, and have read a number of his books. I subscribe to his website, and like doing so because of all the entertainment he's given me over the years, as well as the fact he's ill and it's a source of income for him.

The above said, I have to say I've been disappointed in him this year. Even for me (probably a glass half-full merchant) a lot of the time his articles have been a little too sugar coated. A bit of a shame.

 

Is he really ill, whats wrong with him? didn't realise that

 

I read somewhere before that stats are like mini-skirts, they show a lot but hide the most important bits

 

From the about page of his website:

"My Health, and Why I Discuss It

Suffering from M.E. (Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/ Encephalopathy) is a fairly defining part of my existence. It affects my ability to make a living, and it affects how I support Liverpool. Therefore I make mention of it in my writing from time to time.

Having been a season ticket holder for a number of years, it is important for me to make people understand that I cannot go to games regularly not out of fickleness, or from being a fairweather fan. When I do get to a game, it can take a number of days to fully recover. I am not seriously ill when compared with many other, but it does affect what I can do on a daily basis.

It means that I cannot hold down a regular job, and therefore have to look for alternative ways to generate an income; this means that I require people to support my ventures, such as writing books or developing this website, if they appreciate what I do.

Also, as a misunderstood condition (a lot of illnesses start out this way, before medical knowledge catches up), it is important that I make people more aware of what it is and how it affects me. I don’t seek sympathy in the slightest, but understanding is helpful to anyone who has specific difficulties."

 

Cheers Faces... wasn't aware of that, must be tough going alright! I must sign up myself, it doesn't cost much in fairness!

Regarding his writing I know he's a glass half full kinda bloke and it can be over the top sometimes but god knows how many monday mornings I've came into work p!ssed off after a bad game the weekend and been more than happy to read someone trying to balance up the rest of the meeja bandwagon with some positives, of course he's still a fan and i'm sure like the majority of us looks at the club through rose tinted glasses but once you know that before reading what harm can it do!