Georginio Wijnaldum

[54]

Nominated for the Ballon d'Or.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

He was class against Man Utd, probably the best I’ve seen him for Liverpool.

[Guest]

Imagine if we’d used Sissoko & Wijnaldum as a central two instead of Colback and Anita man. Thauvin (then Townsend) and Perez either side of Mitrovic. Thauvin might still have been crap, Mitrovic would have still missed chances, but I bet we’d have been able to threaten teams more and create more chances where even just 2-3 more goals would have kept us up and given Rafa a higher platform to start from.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

He was class against Man Utd, probably the best I’ve seen him for Liverpool.

 

Thought he disappeared myself and although he’s a quality player and how he plays obviously helps them or gives the team more, he has zero creative effect and he needs someone like that buzzing all over around him further up and the team needs that as well. He’s a bit like Park was for Man Utd in many ways. They need a Maddison in there or an Eriksen.

 

They should look to pay the going rate for someone like them. I rate Henderson but Gini and Fabinho can do what he does, although they don’t quite have his leadership and no nonsense when needed qualities, but on the ball, in the pass, in discipline towards shape/role/position etc they can do it and lately when Henderson moves up Matip steps in to do his job and effectively too.

 

Henderson is the odd one out at the moment long term against more organised teams or teams deploying a higher quality level of tactics, as proved when he does go more advanced tasked with creating more, as Gini does or Fabinho or Kieta, he has zero creativity like them. Ox does have creativity, but he’s more of a free ACM who drives forward into shooting areas or into the box, he doesn’t make the play, so they need a playmaker who does. Had they kept Coutinho, maybe Klopp could have turned him into such that player? Maybe resigning him could fix this creativity problem from central midfield?

 

Maddison has impressed me, but can he play make on the move in a quicker more non stop pressing of the ball, never mind pressing off it, as that’s easy. Eriksen can, he’s brilliant at it as is Silva at Man City and DeBruyne, as Hazard was at Chelsea.

 

For all of how good Liverpool are, it’s their front free who provide the creativity which they do better than anyone else and allows Liverpool to have 3 central ball recyclers behind them, who get the ball give it, get the ball back, give it. Moving the ball around until one of the front free combine and open up the opposition. If that’s not on, they look to the flanks for the full-backs for creativity, for service and as good as they are, restrict them and it’s literally down to Salah, Mane and Firminho.

 

Tactically Man Utd pushed their wing backs deeper or narrow into more centre areas than wide and in the end Gin more than anyone the most become a nothing player and disappeared, hence why he was brought off.

 

Liverpool will wear any team down and because of their defensive strength and ability to be a goal threat they will not be beaten by anyone no matter how good they are or will be kept out. They are a great team, but tactically they can be quietened and their weakness exposed. Ironically the man who got their equaliser is someone who can fill that creative gap, but he’s never fit and doesn’t have the stamina for their system anyway.

 

Maybe Grealish at Villa could be who they are looking for?

 

Add that kind of player and this Liverpool win the league, right no a long term injury to Salah or Mane and they have problems. City don’t have that because even their none playmakers have sone degree of creative forward quality, whether it’s out wide, deep lying, up front or central. That’s why they can get by without De Bruyne still. That’s why they will win the league unless Liverpool keep their front three fit and they produce the goods or they get a playmaker in in Jan.

 

Cheeky loan for Foden...

[Guest Howaythetoon]

England have the same problems in midfield especially centrally as Liverpool, only Liverpool have the likes of Allison, Matip, Robertson and Virgil in defence and England have Pickford, Stones, Maguire. Not bad players, but not exactly top players. A playmaker alone for England would make all the difference the most though.

[Guest reefatoon]

Imagine if we’d used Sissoko & Wijnaldum as a central two instead of Colback and Anita man. Thauvin (then Townsend) and Perez either side of Mitrovic. Thauvin might still have been crap, Mitrovic would have still missed chances, but I bet we’d have been able to threaten teams more and create more chances where even just 2-3 more goals would have kept us up and given Rafa a higher platform to start from.

 

Shit the bed, we did actually play Colback and Anita ahead of those two in the middle.....Absolutely terrifying man.

[Guest]

Not saying they’d have been the greatest and they’d have still had their lazy days but it would have been a shitload better than Anita & Colback. Thauvin with regular game time might have been a different story too.

[loki679]

Nobody remembers Wijnaldum being completely absent in every away game then?

 

With better management it could have worked but at the time we had what we had so it all went to shit.  Don't gloss over the fact that both him and Sissoko couldn't give two shits while they were here, bad manager or not.

[Guest]

Like I said, even taking that into consideration it would have still be a massive upgrade on what we had in there.

[TRon]

Nobody remembers Wijnaldum being completely absent in every away game then?

 

With better management it could have worked but at the time we had what we had so it all went to shit.  Don't gloss over the fact that both him and Sissoko couldn't give two shits while they were here, bad manager or not.

 

I just saw a good player and a really shit management set up. Probably every post in this thread that I made even when he was here was along those lines.

 

We'd find a way to make Mane look shit.

[HawK]

I remember seeing him play once for us in central mid, in an almost holding role, did better than he ever did before for us.

 

Where he played and how he contributed for us meant he was a completely irrelevant player. Under a different manager, he might have done a lot better, or maybe he would still just go through the motions in using us as a stepping stone. At least Sissoko gave us an out-ball, like Jonas did before him. Wij was our modern-day Kevin Nolan, except he contributed even less to overall play and only turned up for the cameras/big games (I've included some analysis in an older post in this thread).

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I never really rated him for us, but he clearly has quality.

[Happinesstan]

He's a bit like Paul Ince. One of the best at keeping things ticking over so that the creative players can express themselves. He's not going to look very good in a team that lacks creativity.

[TRon]

I remember seeing him play once for us in central mid, in an almost holding role, did better than he ever did before for us.

 

Where he played and how he contributed for us meant he was a completely irrelevant player. Under a different manager, he might have done a lot better, or maybe he would still just go through the motions in using us as a stepping stone. At least Sissoko gave us an out-ball, like Jonas did before him. Wij was our modern-day Kevin Nolan, except he contributed even less to overall play and only turned up for the cameras/big games (I've included some analysis in an older post in this thread).

 

Honestly think it's this sort of mentality which will always hold us back. Kevin Nolan was never the sort of player who had either the techique or mobility to be part of a genuine class football team. He was a working class hero at his most effective in an old fashioned English team. Wijnaldum was probably too poncey and soft in a lot of people's eyes.

[HawK]

I remember seeing him play once for us in central mid, in an almost holding role, did better than he ever did before for us.

 

Where he played and how he contributed for us meant he was a completely irrelevant player. Under a different manager, he might have done a lot better, or maybe he would still just go through the motions in using us as a stepping stone. At least Sissoko gave us an out-ball, like Jonas did before him. Wij was our modern-day Kevin Nolan, except he contributed even less to overall play and only turned up for the cameras/big games (I've included some analysis in an older post in this thread).

 

Honestly think it's this sort of mentality which will always hold us back. Kevin Nolan was never the sort of player who had either the techique or mobility to be part of a genuine class football team. He was a working class hero at his most effective in an old fashioned English team. Wijnaldum was probably too poncey and soft in a lot of people's eyes.

 

Not sure what you mean ? If you mean that we shouldn't be using 'Luxury' players than I disagree, give me a Hatem any day. If you mean that I was incorrect in comparing Nolan to Wijnaldum, then I also disagree.. in terms of how they both contributed to the team, they were unerringly similar. Nothing off the ball, nothing on it apart from a goal-scoring finish. In the position that Wij played for us, that's all he did. And I always wondered why, when it seemed so obvious due to where he played for his previous club, he wasn't played in a deeper role more often.

[TRon]

I remember seeing him play once for us in central mid, in an almost holding role, did better than he ever did before for us.

 

Where he played and how he contributed for us meant he was a completely irrelevant player. Under a different manager, he might have done a lot better, or maybe he would still just go through the motions in using us as a stepping stone. At least Sissoko gave us an out-ball, like Jonas did before him. Wij was our modern-day Kevin Nolan, except he contributed even less to overall play and only turned up for the cameras/big games (I've included some analysis in an older post in this thread).

 

Honestly think it's this sort of mentality which will always hold us back. Kevin Nolan was never the sort of player who had either the techique or mobility to be part of a genuine class football team. He was a working class hero at his most effective in an old fashioned English team. Wijnaldum was probably too poncey and soft in a lot of people's eyes.

 

Not sure what you mean ? If you mean that we shouldn't be using 'Luxury' players than I disagree, give me a Hatem any day. If you mean that I was incorrect in comparing Nolan to Wijnaldum, then I also disagree.. in terms of how they both contributed to the team, they were unerringly similar. Nothing off the ball, nothing on it apart from a goal-scoring finish. In the position that Wij played for us, that's all he did. And I always wondered why, when it seemed so obvious due to where he played for his previous club, he wasn't played in a deeper role more often.

 

I said it in that quote: "Kevin Nolan was never the sort of player who had either the techique or mobility to be part of a genuine class football team"

 

Yet he had a cult hero status here. I just saw a player who would ensure we would always be mediocre. Wijnaldum ended up at Liverpool. I don't think Klopp would ever have considered Nolan. That's the difference.

[HawK]

I remember seeing him play once for us in central mid, in an almost holding role, did better than he ever did before for us.

 

Where he played and how he contributed for us meant he was a completely irrelevant player. Under a different manager, he might have done a lot better, or maybe he would still just go through the motions in using us as a stepping stone. At least Sissoko gave us an out-ball, like Jonas did before him. Wij was our modern-day Kevin Nolan, except he contributed even less to overall play and only turned up for the cameras/big games (I've included some analysis in an older post in this thread).

 

Honestly think it's this sort of mentality which will always hold us back. Kevin Nolan was never the sort of player who had either the techique or mobility to be part of a genuine class football team. He was a working class hero at his most effective in an old fashioned English team. Wijnaldum was probably too poncey and soft in a lot of people's eyes.

 

Not sure what you mean ? If you mean that we shouldn't be using 'Luxury' players than I disagree, give me a Hatem any day. If you mean that I was incorrect in comparing Nolan to Wijnaldum, then I also disagree.. in terms of how they both contributed to the team, they were unerringly similar. Nothing off the ball, nothing on it apart from a goal-scoring finish. In the position that Wij played for us, that's all he did. And I always wondered why, when it seemed so obvious due to where he played for his previous club, he wasn't played in a deeper role more often.

 

I said it in that quote: "Kevin Nolan was never the sort of player who had either the techique or mobility to be part of a genuine class football team"

 

Yet he had a cult hero status here. I just saw a player who would ensure we would always be mediocre. Wijnaldum ended up at Liverpool. I don't think Klopp would ever have considered Nolan. That's the difference.

 

Oh on that I agree 100%, they are different players. The point I was making is that in our team, Wijnaldum was limited to basically what Kevin Nolan could do for us, most certainly by managerial instruction. Not that that's all he could do, as demonstrated by his performances in Liverpool's midfield.

 

I did like Nolan though, I'm sure in one season he was the top scorer in the PL for a month or two

[TRon]

I remember seeing him play once for us in central mid, in an almost holding role, did better than he ever did before for us.

 

Where he played and how he contributed for us meant he was a completely irrelevant player. Under a different manager, he might have done a lot better, or maybe he would still just go through the motions in using us as a stepping stone. At least Sissoko gave us an out-ball, like Jonas did before him. Wij was our modern-day Kevin Nolan, except he contributed even less to overall play and only turned up for the cameras/big games (I've included some analysis in an older post in this thread).

 

Honestly think it's this sort of mentality which will always hold us back. Kevin Nolan was never the sort of player who had either the techique or mobility to be part of a genuine class football team. He was a working class hero at his most effective in an old fashioned English team. Wijnaldum was probably too poncey and soft in a lot of people's eyes.

 

Not sure what you mean ? If you mean that we shouldn't be using 'Luxury' players than I disagree, give me a Hatem any day. If you mean that I was incorrect in comparing Nolan to Wijnaldum, then I also disagree.. in terms of how they both contributed to the team, they were unerringly similar. Nothing off the ball, nothing on it apart from a goal-scoring finish. In the position that Wij played for us, that's all he did. And I always wondered why, when it seemed so obvious due to where he played for his previous club, he wasn't played in a deeper role more often.

 

I said it in that quote: "Kevin Nolan was never the sort of player who had either the techique or mobility to be part of a genuine class football team"

 

Yet he had a cult hero status here. I just saw a player who would ensure we would always be mediocre. Wijnaldum ended up at Liverpool. I don't think Klopp would ever have considered Nolan. That's the difference.

 

Oh on that I agree 100%, they are different players. The point I was making is that in our team, Wijnaldum was limited to basically what Kevin Nolan could do for us, most certainly by managerial instruction. Not that that's all he could do, as demonstrated by his performances in Liverpool's midfield.

 

I did like Nolan though, I'm sure in one season he was the top scorer in the PL for a month or two

 

I like midfielders who are mobile, Nolan had an eye for goal, but that was pretty much it.

[Menace]

There was always a player there when he played for us, I'm not surprised he's doing as well as he is tbh.

[triggs]

He was a disgrace for us. He was anonymous in most games home and away after Christmas and Rafa dropped him towards the end of the season. One of the only players who didn't improve at all when Rafa came in

[Collage]

I've always rated him. Sure, he was often poor for us, like the rest in that shite setup under McClaren, but his quality was evident IMO.

[The College Dropout]

System player. 

 

Had no pride in the shirt.

[Away Day Gadgie]

The way i remember it, he played with tons of effort and enthusiasm for the first few months but then seemed to realise he was playing with bunch of wankers who couldn’t give a fuck.  He got dragged down by the poor attitude of others i reckon.  He probably realised what a shitshow of a club we are aswell.

[Guest]

Probably not far off the money there. I loved the video when he signed and he’s in awe seeing the stadium for the first time. This club can still attract very good players if it tried.

[TRon]

The way i remember it, he played with tons of effort and enthusiasm for the first few months but then seemed to realise he was playing with bunch of wankers who couldn’t give a fuck.  He got dragged down by the poor attitude of others i reckon.  He probably realised what a shitshow of a club we are aswell.

 

Pretty much. I can remember being particularly impressed how good he was at keeping the ball under pressure, something which is crucial if you want to build a side that can pass. Definitely towards the latter part of the season he looked less enthusiastic, like most players who know they are playing a level below where they should be. Good players want to compete for honours, the Kevin Nolans of the world are just glad to be playing in front of 50k crowds who will cheer their chicken dance.