Don’t Expect Moyes to be Bullied

In today’s transfer market the spending gulf between the top and bottom clubs is vast. But there is now even a money gulf between the top clubs. Two teams who have recently lived in their neighbour’s shadow are enjoying their own very different resurgences, one is free-spending whilst the other uses its limited funds wisely. Manchester city’s new owners have limitless bags of cash to spend and are attempting to mount an attack upon the established top four. Meanwhile, Everton have improved unrecognisably under the expert management of David Moyes. Everton, not a rich club by premier league standards, manage to consistently out-gun their big spending premiership rivals and to finish in the European places. I personally wouldn’t bet against them doing it again this year. Like their close neighbours, Everton could really do with some investment and a new stadium, But Moyes and chairman bill Kenwright continue to just get on with the job, and Everton continue to impress. Everton and Manchester City are now embroiled in one of the most interesting transfer stories of the summer.

Big Money has now made certain super-rich clubs capable of signing a all their transfer targets, leaving the smaller clubs in a position where saying ‘no’ is impossible. City’s impressive spending power has allowed them to amass a formidable strikeforce, but any armchair analyst can see that there is a lack of balance in the side and defensive players are urgently required. Mark Hughes’ primary target is Everton’s Joleon Lescott, who last year had the season of his life. In the Everton defence Lescot was partnered with Phil Jagielka who is now a long term injury victim. If Moyes were to lose Lescott to Man City, the defence that performed so well last year will be broken up entirely. Recent experience tells us that the amount of money available at Eastlands means that a deal is likely.

Hughes has made offers of 15 and 18 million to date, But Moyes has refused to do business, aware that selling his best players to what will probably prove his closest rival is a bad move. Hughes has clearly been riled by Everton’s position on the matter and has, somewhat embarrassingly stating that he would “go over Moyes’ head” and do a deal “with the decision makers”. This has left David Moyes understandably furious, and interestingly, reports have begun to emerge linking city with other defensive targets, notably Matthew Upson.

Even if Everton hold firm over the player’s not for sale status, they will never be able to match City’s wages, and Lescott, who is earning the going rate for a player of his ability at Everton, can suddenly match the league’s top earners with a move to City, tempting even to the most committed of players. In the face of these amounts of money the player will always want to move. In response Lescott has duly handed in a transfer request, which Moyes has rejected. His man-management skills will now be put to the test.

Looking at the transfer sagas of the close season in a wider context we can see that with such huge amounts of money involved managers will be made to work just as hard during the close season as they will have to during the regular season. The precedent was set last season by Martin O’Neil in the big story of last summer, the proposed transfer of Gareth Barry to Liverpool. O’Neil remained determined that if Barry was to leave, it would be for an inflated fee, regardless of the players wishes and contract length. This approach however achieved limited success, as Barry, who was nearing the end of his contract stayed at Villa, only to leave for Man City a year later, for 12 million, while Liverpool were willing to pay around 20 million. Similarly this year, Rafa Benitez attempted to keep Alonso at Liverpool in the face of heavy pressure from Real Madrid. Benitez ultimately failed, his position undermined somewhat by his willingness to sell Alonso for 15 million, just a year earlier. But for Moyes a happy ending is more likely, Lescott has four years remaining on his contract, so a the prospect of him leaving under the Bosman ruling in the near future is out of the question and with the transfer window set to slam shut in a little over two weeks, Hughes has little option but to look at other targets or make an over the top offer that has to be accepted. Either way expect more twists in this story. As for the impact of limitless money in football, it looks as though transfer market hostility is more popular than ever.

Points on the Sale of Xabi Alonso

As a Liverpool fan, it would be churlish of me to ignore the ongoing story of Xabi Alonso’s future at the club. Real Madrid’s spending spree has been incredible since the transfer widow opened and with oligarchic amounts of money having been spent on some of the world’s top attacking talent, and their sights are now set on a central midfielder. Alonso would be a perfect acquisition for them in this second Galactico era. A deep lying playmaker, capable of setting up attacks for the likes of Ronaldo and Kaka to finish off, and as such, could be the final ingredient in their Champions League push.

Last year, Alonso was clearly upset when Benitez touted his services to Europe’s top clubs in order to raise the cash to sign Gareth Barry. Alonso managed to put the affair behind him, having one of his best campaigns in a red shirt. But a repeat scenario emerged this year and it now looks as though Alonso has decided that his future lies away from Anfield. The new stadium project and the financial problems of the American co-owners have left Benitez with limited funds, and consequently a sell-to-buy approach is required, and after the £17 million signing of Glen Johnson, it is likely to be instituted. A bid in the region of £35 million is what Benitez is rumoured to be holding out for. If Madrid were to offer this figure, then Alonso, despite Benitez’s public statements insisting that no first team regulars are for sale, would in all likelihood leave Anfield.

In his time at Liverpool, Alonso has provided the passing finesse in a hard-working midfield. But could his departure be beneficial? The £35 million would be put to good use but it is not enough money to make a marquee signing of David Villa proportions. Some of it would have to be spent on a replacement in the middle; Lee Cattermole and Roma’s Alberto Aquilani have been suggested at around £6 million and £15 million respectively. In other areas of the pitch, Valencia’s David Silva and Ashley Young also appear to be realistic targets for the money that the sale of Alonso would create. Anything leftover would have to be spent on squad building, as there is a well-documented lack of quality cover, with the midfield and attack being particular areas for concern. If no central midfielders are signed, Lucas will have to make a big improvement. Towards the end of last season he looked to be improving, and for me, some of the fans’ criticism is unjustified when we consider Lucas as a player who is capable of filling the role of a squad player.

Would it be worthwhile for Liverpool to trade Alonso’s skill for a better all round squad? A midfield reshuffle could give Liverpool more options against the teams that caused them their well-documented problems last term. Against teams who make up what they lack in funds and with technically ability, with tenacity and teamwork, Liverpool often lacked the cutting edge. Alonso was Rafa’s key man in a five-man midfield, the playmaker, providing Gerrard and Torres with the sort of passes they needed to create chances. The biggest problem here was that the reliance upon Alonso made Liverpool play narrow, making it easier for defences to cope. If Liverpool were to play a 4-4-2, and the rumours regarding the signing of Silva and Young would seem to support this view, Steven Gerrard could either be deployed in central midfield or as a second striker, allowing other attacking players such as Kuyt, Benayoun and Riera more opportunities in the wide areas.

The problem here would be that against the rest of the top four, where Liverpool, and Alonso played fantastically last year, the defence could be exposed without two holding midfield players. Against attacking opposition, Benitez’s preferred a 4-5-1 formation, which offered balance between attack and defence, but against less ambitious play it didn’t offer enough going forward, especially if Gerrard or Torres were not selected. Despite remaining unbeaten at home, the seven home draws recorded last season were not good enough, with Arsenal, Everton, Man City, West Ham, Hull, Stoke and Fulham all earning a point at Anfield. Whilst the Arsenal and Everton matches were even games, Liverpool weren’t positive enough against the others. Manchester United’s home record of two home draws and one loss was a far better achievement, and it was attained with an attacking philosophy. All season long United seemed to be able to find what they needed to win at home, meanwhile at Anfield, opponents seemed to have enough to hang on. Benitez’s cautious approach is nothing to do with Alonso but his absence from the team could force Liverpool into a more adventurous style of play. On the other hand, without Alonso, Liverpool’s 4-4-2 could prove to be ineffective away from home.

It would be a shame to see Alonso go, but if the price was acceptable then his sale could allow Liverpool to take a forward step. However, any successes without Alonso would be dependent upon the signings made with the funds his transfer would create and the implementation of a more positive philosophy.