KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum James Pearce on Transfer comitee

Liverpool Echo's James Pearce one of the most trusted persons regarding LFC affairs has come out to suggest that the Transfer Committee (TC) could have made BR's work difficult at Anfield. The sale of senior players on big wages and the signings that BR made this season were not totally his choice, but the committee's. Many managers refused to work under a sporting director when they were interviewed by FSG for the job before BR came in. FSG later set up this committee that is identical, or perhaps wields more power than a sporting director, whilst giving the idea that the manager is totally in charge. Whatever decision the manager makes with regards to signings and contracts, will be voted by 5 people in the committee. Only in the case of a majority vote, BR can sign the players he wants. Otherwise he has to improvise with the players chosen by the TC. Pearce says BR NEVER wanted to sign Balotelli but was forced to settle for him. In other words, it was the TC that ultimately failed to replace Suarez despite getting big money by selling him. Pearce says BR also made it clear that he wanted Michel Vorm and that signing a GK is a priority. But he says the transfer committee refused to pay his value despite only spending over 30mil in net spending this summer. This also had a significant impact on Mignolet's form as LFC didn't try to provide competition for the Belgian. Pearce says paying top bucks for Lovren made perfect sense at that point, as he was not one for the future, but was coming in as a top centre back, based on his form with the Saints and his Premier League experience. He was bought to hit the ground running. However he's had a major dip in form which is disappointing says Pearce. Similar tone has been voiced by Mike Bernard, a former employee of FSG, who said BR failing to see eye-to-eye with some of the TC members and their signings, is getting a little unsavoury. Mike noted that BR wanted Eriksen and Bony but was overruled. This also goes back to previous failures to show the money and securing players early when they had interest to move to LFC. Plenty of dragging negotiations and low-balling saw the failure of securing targets such as Willian, Salah, Mikhtaryan, Konoplyanka and more. Diego Costa was identified by BR as a transfer target when Costa was playing as a wing-forward, long before he became a star in that out-and-out striker position and caught the whole world's attention. TC thought his release clause of 20mil back then was too much. The rest is history. While we drag our feet on targets, other clubs come into the picture, showed the money and swooped them as we watch helplessly. Even for Sanchez, Phil Thompson declared during the world cup that we had Sanchez in the bag. However too much negotiations into details and conditions in payment method allowed Arsenal to sneak in and turn his and his wife's head.

Pearce also does not believe with the popular excuse that BR got founded after Suarez left, and that it was the Uruguayan who made BR look good last season. He says BR's tactical acumen led the team prosper last season, not Suarez alone. The expectations has been raised by last season's football and LFC are struggling with the pressure now he adds. Pearce labels Borini's position as strange and wonders if it could be the club showing frustration against him, for not being able to secure 14mil from Sunderland and another 13mil from QPR. They're certainly making it clear to Borini that he shouldn't reject another deal in January. Another journo Graham Beecroft says Borini could have indicated that he rather sit on the bench and take the wages or run down his contract, than moving to a small club ie Sunderland, QPR who are also refusing to pay more wages than LFC. Could be the reason why he's strangely frozen. Could be the club's decision not the manager's.

The last time Pearce spoke to BR, the manager said Can and some of the new players are still trying to adapt to his philosophy of football and it could be the reason why BR resorts to playing those who know what is expected of them for now. But Pearce says he will speak to BR again about Can to find out more on his position. Pearce says LFC's season could depend on Sturridge coming back to be paired with Balotelli upfront, and then allow the rest of the team to click. Pearce doesn't know if FSG are willing to spend in January but it's a question of can they afford not to. As champions league new TV deal brings in over 40mil next season compared to 25mil before, he opines that LFC must spend. Especially on a top quality striker, taking into account Studge's fitness.

The audio of the interview is here

https://soundcloud.com/anfieldhq/james-pearce-corrected

Good read that (or terrifying depending on how you look at it)
I honestly don't know what to think anymore, so much politics in the game.

Sack the transfer committee's asses now!!

After reading a few of James Pearce's comments recently I have to admit I'm starting to look at this a little more from Rodger's point of view.

Pearce is a friend of BR's, this write up is pure fallacy.

If BR was so keen to sign Costa when he was merely a 20m winger then why didn't he? it's alright saying now he's one of the best strikers in the world that he wanted him, at that time Rodgers was in sole charge of transfers as that was the terms of his deal, there was no "committee", Rodgers was more bothered about signing golden boy Allen and other players he had worked with before.

This article also says that Rodgers wanted Lallana, Lovren and Lambert and he got those targets, so why are tey all sudden't average players. It says the committee wanted Can, Markovic and Balotelli, not being funny but the latter are much better players than what Rodgers' targets were.

As far as Eriksen in concerned, his agent at the time said there was no offer of any sorts from Rodgers or LFC and as far as he was aware LFC were not interested. Same was said about Willian and Kono, the only player in this article we made a move for was Salah and he chose to sit on Chelsea's bench.

This article stinks of nothing more than Rodgers arse kissing and hindsight. That player's in good form now, did you know we wanted him.

This is fcking unbelievable, how can a committee possibly know what a manager requires by way of players in respect to tactics, style of play, qualities and so on. If members in the fcking committee have a say in player purchase they should very well be managing their own club!

From what I understand about Costa, we met the buy out clause but he didn't want to come to us - wanted to "stay in Spain for another season". Can't blame him for waiting for better offers to be honest, we'd just finished 7th the season ended.

It's mental tho innit???

X amount of money should be made available for the manager to spend it how he sees fit. I can't for the life of me understand it.. if the manager wants to spunk all the money on three players as opposed to eight for the same total then what's the difference???

Drives me 'round the bloody bend

Apparently it's the wages eh sixties???

Not strictly true, we upped Suarez wages twice in his last 6 months, he was on over 200k per week. Gerrard is close to that amount as well. Johnson is on around 120k per week. Lallana is on a hefty pay as is Balotelli.

Yet again pure myth that we don't pay excessive wages.

We don't seem to offer them up front though. Suarez, Gerrard and Johnson all had to work for what they get/got. I'm not sure Lalanna is on the reported £100k and it was reported that Mario took a pay cut to join us.

I'm not against offering what we do but it would appear to limit who we can attract. I think players should prove themselves before getting to be top earners just like any employee would in life.