利物浦官方網站
作者：Paul Tomkins
日期：03 June 2007
http://www.lfc.org.cn/news/newsvista.asp?unid=8084
利物浦中文資訊
編輯：格里和帶頭人
日期：2007-6-4
奪冠，我們需要什麼？
嗯，乍一看挺簡單的問題，但是絕非如此。這可不是簽什麼球員打什麼陣型就能搞定
的問題。可能基本無關戰術，無關球風。
這個問題不能再一個簡單的層次上分析，但是就個人觀點看來，主要包括兩個方面。
時間和金錢，管理才能——若是哪個教練想要在英超稱王其中之一都必不可少，兩者
有效結合才是硬道理。
這個夏天對利物浦來說沒有要麼生存要麼毀滅那麼誇張，但顯然會是一個重要的階段
，一個激動人心的階段。俱樂部交手讓俱樂部在市場上更具競爭力，而雅典的落敗也激發
了拉法的決心。好像失敗並沒有把我們的主帥擊敗，卻正因如此，他的欲望之火卻燒得越
來越熊烈了。
雖然這段時間有一些不和諧的聲音，但是並不一定是壞事。畢竟大家的目的都是為了
讓球隊向著聯賽冠軍發出更有力的衝擊。
不管等待我們的結果是怎樣的，雖然我們已經有很多關鍵因素配備齊全，可是還有很
多細節尚欠推敲，這我們賽前就了然於心。要改變這樣的事實我們都很明白，雖然相對
2005年我們已經有了很大的提高，可是新面孔的加入還是必不可少。球隊正在走上坡路，
而且我們還沒有走到頭。可是如果說我們想要快點把聯賽冠軍捧回家的時候改革就需要加
速了。
雖然說“成王敗寇”，但我一直不是很同意這樣的說法，我認為打入決賽就已經是一
個很大的成功：這說明了我們接二連三擊敗歐洲強隊的能力，這是貝尼特斯入主之後紅軍
的巨大進步。畢竟這是兩回合的比賽，而不是像國內一些單回合決勝負的比賽中運氣能成
為主導，可能在主場的戰果包含了一些非實力的因素，但是客場的艱難總是能把這些消除
。
總之能夠走到這一步已經很偉大了，因為在其中拉法的買人計畫也不是一帆風順。
球迷對利物浦抱有很大的期望，我們輝煌的歷史和無與比擬的支持也對我們的晉級之
路不無作用，看看我們半決賽中對陣切爾西你就不得不同意這話了——但是到了簽約球員
的時候你就不得不感慨他們的局限性，尤其是有些球員已經準備和原來的俱樂部續約，然
後你要是想橫刀奪愛就不能不花更多的銀子。
雖然說有的買賣的確很不錯，但是誰也不能這麼走運的就天天攤上好事。這樣的投資
方案雖然可以走向成功，但是肯定不如當年的切爾西來的快。2003年和2004年藍軍甩出了
大手筆在全隊上下做出大換血的同時還簽下了一些巨星級人物，所以即使花了10m的斯科
特‧派克和16.8m的赫爾南‧克雷斯波同時瞌睡也沒什麼大不了，因為他們有很多人可以
拿來填補空缺，不過當然了，他們的投入也更顯著。
如果你看年輕球員的眼光格外尖銳或者每天守株待那些經驗豐富的球員諸如馬斯切拉
諾在西漢姆失寵這樣的事情閃入你的生活，你當然可以不花什麼錢，但是這樣你付出的代
價就是把成功推遲。你得等年輕人成熟，而且還要算計好時間等著那些實力強的球員價位
降低。
金色的歷史，安菲爾德的令人驚歎的KOP讓利物浦的魅力煥發，那些頂級球員和希望
感受貝尼特斯的執教，希望和傑拉德，卡拉格，阿隆索等等共事。英格蘭的西北國際化程
度不如倫敦，天氣宜人惜敗巴薩米蘭，但是凡有志者都希望把英超作為考驗自己的舞臺，
而利物浦在其中毫不遜色。這些都是我們所佔據的有利因素。
大家都認為利物浦應該在英超的競爭中付出更大的精力，但是話說回來，什麼東西能
引誘著那些本來就是搶手貨的球員脫離原來俱樂部的手掌呢？——錢。有句話真是一語道
破天機：是個球員就有價。
和切爾西和曼聯還不同，利物浦近些年中還有那麼誘人的成績拿來當誘餌。自從2004
年拉法來到英國之後，俱樂部寫下的支票能拿到今天的這個成績已經沒什麼可抱怨的了。
現在利物浦最大的兩宗交易還停留在熱拉德‧霍利爾時期的埃米爾‧赫斯基（11m）和吉
布里爾‧西塞（14.2m）。
這年頭真正能夠判斷一個主帥的標準大概就是看他怎麼周轉資金，看他用多少錢來填
補球隊的漏洞。剩下的戲份還要錢來導演。
喬納森‧諾斯克勞福特在《星期日泰晤士報》上說：“貝尼特斯哪里有花過100m？這
是不可能的。”他又補充道：“自從他2004年6月來到利物浦之後已經簽下了29名球員，
然後被他解雇的球員有36個，這樣算起來，他的淨投入大概有44m英鎊。”
（其實也就是一個舍甫琴柯和半個賴特‧菲力浦斯的價碼。）
我之所以寫這些是因為我覺得心裏有點不平衡。利物浦的對手是英超的兩個大頭級人
物，可是為什麼別的教練就能因為他購置的性價比受到尊敬貝帥就不行呢？史蒂夫‧科佩
爾因為以寒酸的支票取得了聯賽第八而成為今年的最佳教練，雖然說他們還是屈居博爾頓
之下，可是他的執教能力還是得到了肯定。
如果你說科佩爾可是比貝尼特斯花的少多了，那貝尼特斯還比弗格森和穆裏尼奧花的
少多了呢。
金錢永遠不會萬能——他終究會敗在時間和天才的劍下，但是在你前面的那兩家俱樂
部都揮霍成這個樣子了，你還指望能不花錢？
如果就是按照正常水準的花銷，球隊中勢必缺少後備力量，試問誰能夠把好狀態維持
上9個月？就一場比賽來說，可能是一兩分的問題，但是積少成多差距就大了。
照這個說法，最實際的把獎盃捧回家的做法就是著眼杯賽，三年中紅軍進了四次杯賽
決賽，成敗各半。
阿森納的投資如果和切爾西曼聯比，那還是跟利物浦比較接近，於是他們從1997/98
賽季到2004/05賽季中三次奪冠五次亞軍的驕人戰績墮落到了2006/07賽季的第四名。然而
這兩個墮落賽季卻兩次打入決賽：2006年的歐冠，2007年的聯賽杯。
溫格可算是看透了英超的教授。除了三座英超冠軍，他還四次加冕足總杯冠軍。兩個
主帥都在重建球隊，這兩年在國內賽事溫格還不如貝尼特斯成功。
兩次貝尼特斯的英超成績都在溫格之上，而且貝尼特斯還抱了一個足總杯回來可是教
授卻兩手空空。還有一個有趣的現象就是三年中歐冠決賽都有英格蘭球隊亮相，卻都是這
兩支廉價組合的球隊。溫格沒有切爾西曼聯那樣的購買力，所以他就是要靠時間達到自己
的目的，他所倚賴的主要是在數年後即將成熟的青年軍。貝帥的球隊甚至比阿森納還要年
輕，所以他能做的也多不到哪兒去。
雖然說利物浦有著叫響歐洲足壇的名字，但是就憑著我們輝煌的歷史然後沒有理由的
寄託紅軍能和對手那樣成功這是不現實的。說利物浦應該追求英超冠軍很容易，而且
2005/06賽季之後我們也看到了希望，但是足球場可不是平的。
從來沒有懷疑過我們的貝尼特斯至少和有著豐功偉績的溫格啊，弗格森阿，穆裏尼奧
阿一樣聰明。
但是假想一下，如果後兩個人手中沒有現在他們擁有的那麼多可以周轉的資金他們現
在會在什麼位置？為什麼大衛‧摩爾斯要出售俱樂部？還不是因為和那兩家大富翁相比的
相形見絀的資金嗎？
10年前的利物浦可是在轉會市場上獨佔鰲頭的，1995年甚至還創下了英倫的轉會紀錄
，用8.5m從諾丁漢森林挖來了斯坦‧科利莫爾。2000年的時候拋出11m從萊斯特買來埃米
爾‧赫斯基，比1996年紐卡斯爾為阿蘭‧希勒開出的英國紀錄加碼只少了4m。然而當2004
年紅軍創下自己的紀錄用14.2m買下吉布里爾‧西塞的時候，這個數字已經寒酸到還不如
2002年曼聯從里茲購得裏奧‧斐迪南的一半了。
四年中，英格蘭足球發生了天翻地覆的變化。這一切的一切還都歸功於一個人。
羅曼‧阿布拉莫維奇來到這個世界之前，阿森納這種正常的豪門能夠通過謹慎的球員
交易稱霸英超，可是就是這三次的應該冠軍得主也被這突然襲來的經濟風暴沖下了水面。
為了經濟的可持續發展他們搬進了擁有60000座位的新球場，但是阿森納終究還是追趕者
而不是領跑者。阿布拉莫維奇的銀行帳單那不是人能比的。
有錢能使鬼推磨，但是多少錢才能推起來呢？我計算了一下英超六強俱樂部中的球員
平均身價，來看看投入和英超積分之間的關係。
被我選入樣本的是我基於這個賽季的表現認為在這些俱樂部中重要的20個球員，在大
家的狀態正常的情況下表現最好的20個球員。
利物浦在這20名球員身上花下了86.5m英鎊，在2006/07賽季平均每名球員4.3m英鎊。
這樣的開銷還是比較合理的，英格蘭球員價位低於這個的也不在少數。但是這並不能
說明我們就能是英超冠軍。如果你讓你個教練去買20個4m的球員他大概就該把奪冠的目標
放放了。
和曼聯的7.1m相比，我們可以看到曼聯的總共141.4m的投入已經是利物浦的兩倍之多
，這還是建立在他們隊中青訓畢業生的基礎之上。今年夏天他們將會用50m來追求3名球員
，如果被這三個換下的是三個收入低的邊緣人物，那對球隊2007/08的平均每人收入可能
會達到10m之多。
不用說你也應該知道，目前為止花錢最大手大腳的就是切爾西了。他們的20名球員大
概要值249.5m。
切爾西的平均每個球員的身價是12.5m英鎊，來瞭解拉法的對手的強大，這個比任何
資料都有說服力。貝尼特斯現在簽下的最貴的球員還是10.5m的哈威‧阿隆索，這甚至還
比切爾西球員的平均價格低2m。這還不能說明什麼嗎？
其實最讓我們吃驚的還是那些排名在利物浦之下的球隊的消費狀況，阿森納首當其衝
。
阿森納青訓的知名讓我們大約忘記了他們在大牌上的開銷。他們的球員平均身價是
4.8m，比利物浦的還高上0.5m。
當然，近些年來亞瑟‧溫格通過球員交易也有不菲的收入。
不管主帥多麼會算賬，聯賽的得分歸根結底還有算在球員身上，還有每一筆投入究竟
有多少回報。
淨消費雖然和這有著千絲萬縷的關係，但有的時候會有一些欺騙性。就拿賣出的球員
說，他們可是在你奪冠方面幫不上什麼忙，你所期冀的成績的取得只能倚賴那些現在效力
的。
話說回來，奪冠所依靠的不僅僅是金錢。時間也在其中發揮著不可替代的作用。
在這個什麼都快的年代，如果說弗格森能在新上任動盪的幾年之內被給予充分的時間
，那麼我們一味的指望貝尼特斯創造奇跡這是不公平的。
弗格森和貝尼特斯接任球隊的時候，曼聯和利物浦都是排名第四，只不過弗格森要追
溯到1986年。當他在曼聯三年後老特拉福德的球迷為他解開了一個標語：“你給我們三年
的藉口，我們給你再一次賭博機會”。回想一下上周我們在雅典看見的那些充滿智慧的條
幅你就知道貝尼特斯在這過去的36月中幹的究竟有多麼出色了。
1989年阿萊克斯‧弗格森還沒給曼聯帶來一座獎盃，他所做出的貢獻只不過是帶著曼
聯墮落到了聯賽11名。那個夏天曼聯開始了轉會市場上的大空襲，非但為了保羅‧因斯，
內爾‧韋伯撒了不少銀子，還創當時英國轉會記錄的買來了加里‧帕萊斯特。可是曼聯非
但沒有蘇醒，反而在1990年繼續栽到了14。
對於身為蘇格蘭人的弗格森，有人可能指責“他不瞭解英格蘭足球的精髓”。但是他
簽下的這些人，保羅‧因斯和加里‧帕萊斯特的的確確為曼聯奪冠立下了汗馬功勞，只不
過那是在四年之後的1993年。數不勝數的例子證明，你不能一個賽季之後就輕易的把球員
否定。
所以說，雖然磅礡的資金必不可少，身在其位之時間優勢也不可忽略。在充裕的時間
內你可以根據自身的判斷能力把那些比較水的青訓產品和不能達到期望值的球員一一清除
，而把那些閃光的少年和百年難求的成功轉會成果留在隊中。
那你又怎麼可能要求貝尼特斯在這麼短的時間之內超越一個花了21年對球隊進行了自
上而下的改革，在青訓中特投入大量精力的老狐狸？你又怎麼要求他在那麼短的時間之內
超越那個手揮讓人望而生畏的百萬支票帶領切爾西拿下了空前兩連冠的狂人呢？
實際上，上一名在無財無時間的情況下帶領球隊拿下英超冠軍的還是亞瑟‧溫格。
1997/98賽季，他剛剛來到阿森納兩年就成了聯賽領軍。這都是十年前的事情了，而下一
次阿森納奪冠就要在四年之後，這期間早已物是人非。
1997/98賽季曼聯可謂一枝獨秀，但是現在貝尼特斯卻要面對著四分天下的狀況，過
去的三年中曼聯，切爾西和阿森納這種具備真正實力的隊伍總在他的生活中陰魂不散。
說了這麼多，關於時間金錢的錯誤的理解還是很普遍。很多人都對利物浦過去的花費
持懷疑態度。
大家的判斷未免武斷，這個看看其他的球隊花了多少，收到的回報又是什麼，他們的
滿意度即可得出結論。現在利物浦主帥的壓力和1965年1990年紅軍的大手筆無關。我們都
希望高調，但是也要就時論事才對。
讓我們看看排名利物浦之下的兩個球隊就會明白。
熱刺和紐卡斯爾都有成為豪門的驕傲，其實從某些角度上就是如此，他們有難以計數
的球迷，雖然已時代遙遠但是畢竟是曾經輝煌。而且近幾年中他們的開銷都不可小覷。
可是他們為什麼成不了冠軍呢？放寬一點說，為什麼就不在冠軍的熱門人選之內呢？
難道僅僅因為他們歷史不及利物浦輝煌？紐卡斯爾也是個大戶，但是甚至8月還沒結束他
們的獎盃夢想就付諸一炬了。
我之所以說到沒有被認為是英超四強的熱刺和紐卡斯爾，是因為他們平均在每一個球
員身上的花銷分別是4m和3.8m。也就比利物浦的少那麼一點點。那麼現在我們就應該看看
他們在英超積分榜上的排名，在杯賽中的戰績了。
看了這麼多有趣的數字之後，突然覺得要是做一個按英鎊計算的球隊積分排行榜會很
好玩，這個會讓我們對球隊的花銷情況有一個深刻的瞭解。
以下我對每家“巨頭”在那20個重要球員付出的每m和積分的“性價比”：
利物浦...................0.78
熱刺.....................0.75
阿森納...................0.71
曼聯.....................0.63
紐卡斯爾.................0.56
切爾西...................0.33
雖然這僅僅是一個方面，但是能看到利物浦在榜首還是覺得很有趣，利物浦幾乎就能
每m就拿一分了。而且這個賽季還和2005/06賽季不同，這個賽季中利物浦的注意力沒有完
完全全的放在聯賽中。
利物浦不僅僅在性價比方面位列第一，還成功地打入了冠軍聯賽決賽，對手中不管是
巴賽隆納，切爾西還是AC米蘭，他們的消費都和利物浦不是一個檔次的。
每花費1m，利物浦拿到的聯賽積分比切爾西的兩倍還多，當然這不是說如果利物浦能
多花一倍的錢就能幾分翻番。首先理論上這是不可能的，因為最多只有114分可以拿，68
乘以2可是等於136的。
在這個積分榜上總是走的越高越貪婪。當然只是花錢什麼都保證不了：就看看紐卡斯
爾這些年投了500m但是還是跟切爾西沒法比。可是另一方面這給我們展現了切爾西曼聯和
利物浦阿森納之間的差異。
這麼說來我們可以很樂觀的認為貝尼特斯在這個暑期重建之後，下賽季將會擁有比較
充裕的時間和比較充足的金錢。
但他永遠不有最長的時間，弗格森的執教生涯有21年呢，溫格也有11年，也當然不會
有最流油的口袋。無論如何希克斯和吉列特連讓利物浦現在的資金翻番都不太可能，那翻
三倍去趕超級切爾西更屬於天方夜譚。（聲明這還是在切爾西不再花銷的情況下，但是這
是不可能的。）
奪取聯賽冠軍的曼聯向世人證明了他們不需要成為聯賽中最奢侈的球隊也能成功，但
是他們超越的僅僅是一家比他們能花錢的俱樂部。貝尼特斯需要做的工作是曼聯的兩倍。
弗格森現在的情況是在俱樂部的執教生涯已經很完美了，而貝尼特斯卻是這些強隊中任期
最短的。
說白了，就是貝尼特斯在花錢方面屈居第四，在執教生涯方面也排第四。紅軍如果意
欲奪冠，這個不是什麼積極的因素。
但是看到拉法在轉會方面的成功，我們完全可以樂觀，最起碼我們可以多花幾m英鎊
縮小點差距啊。
當貝尼特斯拋出5～10m購買的球員把我們推上了冠軍的道路，阿隆索，阿格爾，雷納
，路易士‧加西亞，克勞奇和西索科的價值也就得到了人們的認可。
人無完人，就算你30m買來的球員也未必如此；也不一定他們所有的人都會在利物浦
度過剩下的足球生涯——但是他們在這兒的時間內俱樂部得到了回報，而他們也在此期間
提高了自己的身價。這些球員發生的良性的化學反應，保證了紅軍三年內兩次打入冠軍杯
決賽。
大部分貝尼特斯簽下的球員都給我們帶來了驚喜，而且他們個個都是那麼年輕——二
十歲中旬甚至還要年輕，目前為止，讓我們感到很失望的只有莫倫特斯一個。
貝尼特斯在和時間金錢作戰，儘管在這個職位上呆的時間越長就要花更多地錢還可能
水準有所降低，他還會繼續戰鬥下去。簽新人的過程中他還會保持之前的性價高水準，長
此以往，新一輪的投資後他必定會收穫莫大的成功。
綜上所述，如果真的貝尼特斯能把獎盃捧回來，那將是可想像的最大的成功。
在巴倫西亞在利物浦他都在沒有多少周轉的錢的情況下向我們證明了他的能力。有這
樣的主帥你真的不得不浮想聯翩：未來幾年中我們可以明智的購買適合我們的球員，然後
結束我們漫長的第19座冠軍獎盃等待的日子就不會遠了。
| WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO MAKE REDS CHAMPIONS? Paul Tomkins 03 June 2007 | |
| Ah, a simple question? Clearly not. This is not a look at which players need to be signed, or which formation needs to be deployed. It is not a look at tactics or style of play. | |
| It can all be boiled down to this: time and money, allied to managerial talent. Either of those first two elements, or the two combined, are what it now takes a top manager to win the league in England. This isn't a make-or-break summer for Liverpool, but it's certainly an important one, and an exciting one, with the new owners determined to make the Reds more competitive across the board, and with Rafa clearly stoked up following defeat in Athens. I've been impressed with how fired up he seems, as if defeat has driven him to new levels of determination. There have been some frank discussions, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It is all aimed at better equipping the team for a tilt at the league title. Win or lose in Athens, everyone acknowledged prior to the match that, despite so many crucial elements in place, there was still plenty of work that needed to be done. We always knew there would be changes; while the squad is considerably better than in 2005, there is still the need for new faces. Things have evolved well year-on-year, and will continue to do so. But that evolution needs a bit of speeding up if the league title is to arrive sooner rather than later. I've said it before, but contrary to the 'first is first, second is nowhere' mentality, simply making the final was in itself a significant achievement: proof of an ability to consistently vanquish the top sides in Europe, as the Reds have since Benítez arrived. And not in one-leg games, like you see in the domestic cups, but in league stages and two-legged ties, where any luck of the draw is always evened out with a testing away leg. But most of all, making it all the way to the final was a significant achievement because Rafa has yet to write any really big cheques along the way. Expectations at Liverpool remain astronomically high, but phenomenal history and unrivalled support – while they benefit the team in a number of ways (see the semi-final against Chelsea, perhaps as proof of both) – only go so far when it comes to signing the very best players, particularly if those players are already under contract at their existing club, and that club will only sell at a premium. Bargains are always there to be had. But sometimes you unearth a gem, and other times you get what you pay for. It can lead to success, but it's a damn sight harder, and takes a lot longer, than the method Chelsea used in 2003 and 2004, where they paid whatever it took to procure a dozen or so big names, and where it didn't really matter if a few, like £10m Scott Parker and £16.8m Hernan Crespo, failed to deliver, because there were so many others on hand to slot in, and more money to replace them. If you are looking to source the best untapped young talent in the world, and waiting for your top experienced targets to fall out of contract (or be out of favour, such as Mascherano at West Ham), you can build a great side without spending fortunes; but what you sacrifice is the ability to succeed sooner rather than later. You have to wait for the youngsters to mature, and you have to bide your time for those experienced players' values to drop or become available at a discount price. Of course, Liverpool's history helps attracts top players, as does Anfield and the unrivalled Kop. And top players want to play for Benítez, and play alongside Gerrard, Carragher, Alonso, Mascherano, et al. And while the north-west of England doesn't have as much cosmopolitan appeal as London, or the weather of Barcelona or Milan, the Premiership is where quality players wish to test themselves, and Liverpool is as good a destination as anywhere. So they are all positive factors. Everyone accepts that the Reds need to put up a stronger fight in the league. But it all comes back to money: the thing that can prise that coveted player from the grasp of his owners. As the saying goes, every player has a price. And unlike super-rich clubs like Chelsea and Manchester United, Liverpool haven't been able to be persuasive enough in that score in recent years. The cheques the club has been able to write haven't been as big as those signed by the chiefs at the only two English clubs to better Benítez's league record since he arrived in England in 2004. And Liverpool's two biggest signings remain Emile Heskey at £11m and Djibril Cissé at £14.2m, both signed by Gérard Houllier. Budget is perhaps the only true way to judge managers these days; the 'weighting' used to even out increasingly disparate achievements. So much comes back to spending power. But as an argument it can be abused, as Jonathan Northcroft noted in the Sunday Times on May 27th. "The idea he [Benítez] has already spent £100m is creative accounting by his critics," Northcroft suggested, adding that "Since Rafa Benitez joined Liverpool in June 2004 he has signed 29 players. He has also unloaded 36, thereby cutting his net outlay to around £44m." (Or, one Shevchenko and half a Shaun Wright-Phillips.) Part of my desire to write this piece was down to the bracketing of Liverpool with the two ultra-big spenders in England. Why are other managers respected for what they achieve on more limited budgets than their rivals, but not Benítez? The reason Steve Coppell was voted Manager of the Year was for what he achieved – namely finishing 8th – on a miniscule budget. Coppell's financial clout was taken into consideration when awarding him the ultimate managerial gong. But they still finished below Bolton. If Coppell has spent a lot less than Benítez, then Benítez has spent a lot less than Ferguson and Mourinho. Money isn't the be-all and end-all, and it never will be – time and talent can eventually counter it – but such has been the spending of the top two in recent years that perhaps, as a rival, you can get only so far without it? Perhaps the limit 'normal' finances place on a club is in the strength of the squad, and in lacking those extra couple of players who can ally real class with consistency over nine months? Not much of a difference, but enough to tell a little in certain games, in order to win a few more points here and there along the way. Perhaps, with this in mind, cups become the most realistic avenue to silverware, as seen with the Reds reaching four finals in just three seasons, winning two and losing two. Arsenal, whose spending is much closer to Liverpool's than to that of Chelsea and Manchester United, have gone from being a top-two side for eight consecutive seasons between 1997/98 and 2004/05, with three league titles and five finishes as runners-up, to being well off the pace in 4th in 2006 and 2007. And yet in both those seasons they reached cup finals: the Champions League in 2006 and the League Cup in 2007. Wenger is obviously a supreme expert in what it takes to succeed in this country, with four FA Cups in addition to those three league titles, and yet, as both managers rebuild, his record in domestic football is markedly inferior to Benítez's in the last two years. Liverpool finished above Arsenal both times, and also won an FA Cup, while Wenger has ended up empty handed. It's also interesting that England's three most recent representatives in the European Cup final have come in the form of the two less-expensively assembled teams. Wenger, without anything like the spending power of the top two, is going down the route of 'time', in building a side that will mature together over the coming years. Benítez, whose main squad is even younger than Arsenal's, has little choice but to do the same. So while Liverpool retain a name as revered and respected as any in football, it's wrong to unquestionably expect the club to achieve as much as rivals with far greater resources based simply on historical success. It's easy to say Liverpool should be challenging for the league title, and I know I thought it was possible after 2005/06, but it has been such an uneven playing field. I have no doubts that in terms of talent Benítez is at least on a par with Wenger, Ferguson and Mourinho, three men who've achieved so much. But how much better than the latter two would he need to be to overtake them while spending far less? The whole reason David Moores sold the club to Tom Hicks and George Gillett was because the financial demands in competing at the top level have spiralled in recent seasons. A decade ago Liverpool were able to compete at the very top end in the transfer market, and as recently as 1995 held the British transfer record, with the £8.5m paid to Nottingham Forest for Stan Collymore. The £11m paid to Leicester for Emile Heskey in 2000 was only £4m short of what had become the British record when Alan Shearer moved to Newcastle for £15m in 1996. However, when Liverpool paid what remains the club's record fee – £14.2m on Djibril Cissé in 2004 – it was less than half the fee Manchester United had paid Leeds for Rio Ferdinand in 2002. English football has changed even more dramatically in the last four years. And it all comes back to one man. Prior to Roman Abramovich arriving in this country, a 'normal' big club like Arsenal could win the league with its highly prudent approach to buying and selling players, but even they, with their three-times league-winning manager, have been blown out of the water by the new financial explosion. In order to compete they've moved to a new 60,000 seater stadium, for a long-term generation of income. But it's more about keeping pace than setting it. And no club can self-generate the kind of money Abramovich has in his bank account. We all know money makes a difference. But how much? In order to look at the correlation between budget and Premiership points, I worked out the average cost of a player in six of the big clubs' squads. I looked at what I believed to be each of those clubs' squads of their 20 main players, based on the season that has just ended; the players whom I felt, over the course of a season, would feature the most, if everyone was fit. (I kept it to 20 because, beyond that, it's hard to tell who are the important players at any given club, and making calculations becomes more tricky given varying squad sizes, and the number of youngsters handed squad numbers but who may never go on to play league games for their club.) Having cost a total of £86.5m, the average transfer fee of Liverpool's 'top 20' squad for 2006/07 was £4.3m per player. A reasonable amount, and a lot of good players have been bought and sold in English football for less. But it's not something that in itself suggests any team should be league champions. After all, if you asked a manager to buy 20 £4m players he'd have his work cut out trying to win the league. Compare that with Manchester United's £7.1m per player, and you can see that, on average, United paid approaching twice as much for its main squad, which cost £141.4m in total. This, despite having the most youth academy graduates in their ranks. And this before apparently spending £50m on just three players this summer, which could take their average up to around the £10m mark for 2007/08, if they replace three inexpensive fringe players. Of course, if you hadn't already guessed, Chelsea are by far and away the biggest spenders, with its 20 main players costing a staggering combined total of £249.5m. There is no better way to put into context the challenge facing Rafa Benítez than noting the average cost of a player in Chelsea's squad is a phenomenal £12.5m. So, basically, Benítez, whose record signing remains Xabi Alonso at £10.5m, has yet to even spend within £2m of the Chelsea average. If that doesn't highlight the disparity, nothing will. Perhaps the biggest surprises involve teams who finished below Liverpool. And, especially, the spending at Arsenal. Because of the young players the Gunners procure on nominal fees, it's easy to forget the bigger fees they've paid. The average cost of their main 20 is £4.8m, half a million pounds more than Liverpool's. Now, of course Arsene Wenger has generated some significant fees from selling players over the years. However, irrespective of how well any manager has balanced the books, this is about current players – after all, they're the ones contesting the title – and what a side cost to assemble in relation to how many league points it attained. While a manager's net spend is relevant in a number of ways (and as seen earlier, Benítez's remains relatively low), it can distract from the task of evaluating the current squads competing for honours. You don't win titles with players sold to other clubs; you can only win it with who you have now. But winning the title is not just about money. Time clearly plays a role, too. If no manager in this impatient day and age can ever receive the time Ferguson was allowed to get things right after a shocking first few seasons, it's also not fair to expect Benítez to work miracles. Both Ferguson and Benítez inherited sides that had just finished 4th, with Ferguson doing so way back in 1986. And yet at this exact stage of his United career Ferguson saw a banner unveiled by fans at Old Trafford: "Three years of excuses and it's still crap. Ta ra Fergie." Compare that with the witty and supportive banners seen in Greece last week and you can get an idea of how supremely better the Spaniard has done in his first 36 months. In 1989 Alex Ferguson had yet to win even a single trophy at United, and rather than improve the situation had actually taken them down to an 11th-place finish. United would spend big that summer, splashing the cash on Paul Ince, Neil Webb and breaking the British transfer record for Gary Pallister, and, rather than spark a resurgence, it saw them finish way down in 14th in 1990. Of course, Ferguson, as a Scot, would not have been accused of "not understanding British football". And eventually those big signings, like Paul Ince and Gary Pallister, would succeed in helping United land the title, but fours years later, in 1993. As with so many other examples, you cannot write off any player after one single season at a club. So while large transfer budgets are important, it's a unique advantage to be a manager for such an incredible length of time that you are able to use your judgement to get rid of hundreds of youth team players and dozens of failed signings, but keep the great youngsters who pop up only rarely and retain the rare unqualified successes in the transfer market. How can Benítez be expected to quickly overtake a man who has spent 21 years shaping his club from the very top to the very bottom, and whose squad cost a lot more per-player to assemble? Or quickly overtake Chelsea, whose manager Jose Mourinho, unprecedentedly, won the title in his first and second seasons, but who also had a totally unprecedented mega-budget? Indeed, the last man to win the Premiership title without either time or money on his side was Arsene Wenger in 1997/98, in his second season. As you can see, that was almost a decade ago now, and it took another four years to reclaim the title. And so much has changed in the interim. In 1997/98 only Manchester United were a genuine force to be reckoned with. In contrast, Benítez has faced three real forces over the past three years: United, Chelsea and Arsenal, each with a world-class manager. But despite all of the arguments listed above – about the need for money and time – misconceptions are rife. And mainly about what Liverpool have already spent. People are too quick to base their arguments on perceptions, not facts. You only have to take a proper look at what some other teams have spent, and the far lesser expectations they have to measure up to, to see the disparity. The pressure on a Liverpool manager is not related to what he spends as much as what happened between 1965 and 1990. We want those high expectations, but they have to be put in the context of the current football climate. Two teams who finished below Liverpool highlight how true this is. Spurs and Newcastle have pretensions to be 'big' clubs, and in many ways are just that. Both have a lot of supporters (locally, if not globally), and can boast significant achievements in their history, albeit dating back a few years now. And both have spent a fair amount of money over the years. So, why aren't they expected to be champions? Or, if that's stretching things a bit, to even get close? Is it merely a case of history, where they do not traditionally compare with Liverpool's title-winning credentials? Newcastle spend big, but it's almost universally accepted that their hopes of any silverware will be dashed before August is even finished. The point of mentioning Spurs and Newcastle, who are not seen as part of the current big four, is that the average cost of a player in their squad is £4m and £3.8m respectively. Or in other words, just a few hundred thousand pounds less than Liverpool's. Now go back and look at the league tables and cup successes from the last three seasons. With the price of all these squads in mind, I thought it would be interesting to devise a table to take into account the cost per squad player, to see which club, pound for pound, has got the most from its spending. This is how many league points each 'big club' got for every million pounds spent on its 20 main players. Liverpool.....................0.78 Spurs.............................0.75 Arsenal ........................0.71 Man United.................0.63 Newcastle....................0.56 Chelsea.........................0.33 Now of course this is just an indication, but it's still interesting to see Liverpool come out on top, and closest to getting one league point for every million pounds. And this, unlike 2005/06, in a season that did not have the Reds firing on all cylinders in the league. (In 2005/06 Liverpool would have been even further out in front.) So not only did Liverpool get the greatest value for money (amongst the big clubs) in terms of Premiership points-per-million pounds spent, but the club also made it to the Champions League final at the same time. (And the three clubs the Reds faced in the final rounds – Barcelona, Chelsea and AC Milan – all cost far more to assemble.) Liverpool got more twice as many league points as Chelsea for every million pound spent. Of course, that doesn't mean that if Liverpool had spent twice as much they would therefore have ended up with twice as many points; for a start, that's actually impossible, as 114 points is the most available, and doubling 68 leaves you with 136. The higher up the table you go the more you have to pay for just a few extra points. And of course, simply spending the money doesn't guarantee anything: you get the impression that Newcastle could have spent £500m in recent years and still not got it right in the way Chelsea did. But all the same, it shows the disparity between the top two and Liverpool and Arsenal. So, in many ways Benítez, after a summer of rebuilding, should be looking towards next season as having had a fair amount of time and a fair amount of money. But he will never have the most time (Ferguson has 21 years, Wenger 11) or the most money. After all, there's no way Hicks and Gillett could double, let alone treble the average cost of a Liverpool squad player in a year or two, to make it in keeping with Chelsea's. (And this before Chelsea spend big again, as they no doubt will.) In finishing above Chelsea, United proved you don't have to possess the most expensive squad to win the league, but they only had to finish above one club who had spent more money; Benítez has to do it with two. And Ferguson, who spends big, didn't have to overtake a man with more time and experience in perfecting his job at one club, whereas none of the top clubs has a manager more recently appointed than Benítez. In other words, Benítez stands 4th in terms of squad cost, and 4th in terms of time spent at his club. That doesn't make getting to 1st an easy proposition. Optimism can spring from the fact that Rafa's record in the transfer market has mostly been excellent – at least when it comes to spending more than a couple of million on stop-gaps. When Benítez has spent between £5m-£10m on a player he has generally hauled in some real winners: no one can doubt the quality and value for money of Alonso, Agger, Reina, Luis Garcia, Crouch, Sissoko, Bellamy and Kuyt. Not all of them are perfect (even £30m players aren't necessarily that), and not all of them will spend the rest of their careers at Liverpool – although each arrived with plenty of time ahead of them in the game, and most have already significantly enhanced their values. And then there is the income Benítez's signings have generated with two visits to the Champions League final. The majority of Benítez's major signings offer exceptional quality in one form or another, and most are in their mid-20s or younger. To date, only Morientes in that price bracket has been a significant disappointment. So Benítez has been battling time and money. And he will continue to do so, albeit to a lessening degree the longer he spends in the job, and more money is paid out. When signing players he will need to continue to get the most points for every million pounds spent. And if he continues to do just that, following a new round of investment in the team, he stands a great chance of significant success. And, with all this in mind, if he does land the title it will be up there with the biggest achievements imaginable. Such have been his monumental achievements at Valencia and Liverpool with relatively small budgets, you can't help but think that, within a couple of years, and with the funds to spend on the right players, he'll have ended our long wait for a 19th title. | |
留言列表
Sobre Cultura (6)
