James Milner and Danny Ings, positive signings for Liverpool FC?

Liverpool new boys; Milner left, Ings right

Today, Liverpool FC have confirmed the signing of Danny Ings on a free transfer, subject to compensation, a deal that follows another free transfer signing, James Milner. Both will join the club on July 1^st when the summer transfer window opens.

In a summer where Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers has to get every signing absolutely right with no margin for error, it seems his first two deals are fairly safe ones. Milner, a steady performer, who brings a wealth of Premier League experience and Ings a pacey young player with potential in a position that needs improving most, up front.

There have already been wholesale changes to the backroom staff at the club as they look to change their fortunes following a rather drab season that petered out with two embarrassing defeats to Crystal Palace, Steven Gerrard’s Anfield fairwell, and Stoke. Rodgers’ two main right hand men Colin Pascoe and Mike Marsh are the first of many (should we believe the media) to be given the boot by the Liverpool hierarchy, but have remained faithful to Rodgers himself, however I feel this is a final warning. A poor start to next season could be curtains.

Another thing that is blindingly obvious is that Rodgers needs help in the transfer market with recruitment and negotiation. Last summer we paid premium prices for average players. £26m for Adam Lallana and £20m for Lazar Markovic among others when in the same transfer market Toni Kroos, one of the worlds most coveted midfielders who had just won the World Cup, was bought by Real Madrid for between £20-25m. Unbelievable. Liverpool need to follow models of clubs such as Atletico Madrid and Juventus who have spent a fraction of the money Liverpool who spent in recent years but have had far more success. Dejan Lovren, Lallana, Markovic and Mario Ballotelli were bought for around the same money it cost Juventus to assemble their starting 11 in the Champions League final on Saturday, £85m.  When you look as figures like this, it’s obvious where Liverpool are deficient. If other clubs in Europe had Liverpool’s wealth, they would be challenging on all fronts.

However, Milner and Ings do provide an improvement to the squad with little money spent which in my mind is positive.

James Milner

With Liverpool facing their first season post Gerrard, it is important to at least replace his experience and Premier League know how, as replacing his ability will be almost impossible. Milner provides this without commanding a fee, a safe option; he’s hardly an exciting signing or a player that will get you off your seat, but a good one. I’d much rather him in the team than Joe Allen or Lucas.

In his Man City career he was an underrated player (who wouldn’t be next to David Silva and Sergio Aguero) that grafted and did the leg work that allowed these players among others to shine.  A midfield with Milner in allowed players such as Yaya Toure and David Silva more of a free role to win matches, knowing that Milner would cover them. His work ethic for the team was to be admired but was never fully appreciated by certain fans. Many Man City fans would tell you how good he was, deceptively good technical ability and a turn of pace to beat a man, who was a useful cog in the Man City midfield. It comes as a surprise that they were willing for him to leave on a free considering he made 51 appearances in all competitions last season, often being preferred over Samir Nasri. This says something about his pedigree. Coaches seem to love him, dependable, reliable and consistent, you know what you’re getting with Milner which is why Rodgers went for him, he’s a fool proof signing, almost certain to do well which is exactly what Liverpool need. It says a lot about him that he’s willing to give up Champions League football for a starting position and regular football. He should fit nicely into Liverpool’s midfield alongside Jordan Henderson and Emre Can, a player I want to see in midfield next term.

Verdict: Good signing.

Danny Ings

Ings will arrive at Liverpool with less of a reputation than Milner, however still a useful acquisition. It’s no secret that Liverpool’s front line needs strengthening as Daniel Sturridge can’t seem to stay fit and the other forwards not cutting the mustard. Ings fits the bill. Young, pacey and a decent finisher, he has the ingredients to be a good player. He performed well in a struggling Burnley side last season that were very lacklustre in attack which wasn’t really Ings’ fault; they just lacked quality in all departments. He still managed 11 goals, more than all of Liverpool’s strikers last season combined, despite playing in a number 10 role, but I see him as a number 9.

He’s a player with good technical ability consisting of an excellent first touch and dribbling ability to beat defenders, a good strike but can sometimes be wayward with his passing. The one thing I liked about him most last season was the type of goals he scored; headers, tap ins, difficult and accurate finishes, in the right place at the right time, all this in a team that created very few opportunities for him.

My hopes are high for him. It will be interesting to see how he fits in with Sturridge, providing he’s fit, and Divock Origi another new signing. He may be deployed wide in his first season but hopefully he’s played in the number 9 role from time to time.

Verdict: Decent signing.

Both Milner and Ings are useful and needed signings but if they are the best players Liverpool buy this summer, they will look distinctly average ones. Liverpool still need big players, a world class striker if we can attract one, a new right back, goalkeeper, a winger to replace the want-away Raheem Sterling.

Liverpool just need to be a little more astute with their buys. There is plenty of talent available for reasonable money around Europe, something Rodgers has failed to get to grips with in his time at Liverpool, apart from Phillipe Coutinho and Sturridge who were bought relatively cheaply in January 2013.

I just hope there is more to come.

Do stats ruin football?

Stats. They’re everywhere. All you have to do is watch football for 5 minutes and you’re bombarded with 5473 stats about pass completion, shot accuracy or how many Arsenal fans have voted in the latest poll about the quality Olivier Giroud’s hair.

But do they ruin football? Do players become so self-conscious about they’re heat map or shot conversion percentage that it actually inhibits performance? I've been reliably informed that some players actually check their stats from the previous game on a Monday morning after the weekend’s fixture. Mad? Maybe.

Of course, there are some purposes that they’re beneficial, for example I have no problem with scoring stats, or to an extent assist stats, they actually give a good indication to a players form. However it’s when the media become obsessed with stats like pass completion that I believe football is beginning to be ruined.

Since when was it not ok to fully focus on the stat that’s usually in the top left of the screen? That little thing called the score? The only stat that actually matters. The only one that determines the result of the game.

But no, it’s touch maps, distance covered and tackles won that are at the forefront of the modern pundits’ mind. Don’t get me wrong, it gives the media plenty to talk about to fill the time. Half time, full time, all the time with ‘stuff’, often irrelevant to matches.

I was in the pub recently with friends, having a group debate about football, and the age old argument about Messi and Ronaldo popped up, who’d have thought. It seems to be the case that you’re either pro Messi or pro Ronaldo, you just can’t be a fan of both. However the debate quickly turned to using stats to back those involved up. Messi has scored 108 goals in 32 games, Ronaldo has scored 123 in 38 games. Well obviously not, but the exaggeration levels were reaching fever pitch. Incredible stat after stat reeled off explaining why one was better than the other. However how many games this season had anyone watched them play? Only a handful.  How can you judge a player you’ve barely watched? Oh, of course, by using stats.

So back to the argument whether stats inhibit performance, they probably do. But it’s an immeasurable concept, something that no stat can be provided for. Players like Joe Allen and Tom Cleverley (there are others) pride themselves on their ‘ability’ to never give the ball away. The stats do back this up; Joe Allen has an 88% pass completion this season, Tom Cleverley is at 87%, which in all fairness is impressive as a standalone figure.  But it doesn't take a football genius to watch either of them and realise that they’re very ineffective in most games. Sideways pass after sideways pass, very little invention and a timid outlook looking forward paints a much more accurate picture. Maybe their passing figures are on the forefront of their mind rather that if they can affect the game.

My criticism of stats doesn't stop here. In my opinion football has been Americanised in a lot of ways, not least stats. An example of this is basketball which is far more figure and number based than football, but football is slowly catching up.

Football used to be about a grass pitch, a ball and two teams trying to score more than the other. It’s an extremely simple game. No longer it seems, certainly from an analysis point of view.

It’s players like Andres Iniesta that break away from the clutches of stat based judgement. Statistically, he’s not the most impressive, only a handful of goals and assists per season, numbers that would have players such as Gylfi Sigurdsson deemed poor. But is Iniesta one of a few players worthy of escaping stat based critique?

I would argue that most players should. I’m not going to claim that impressive goal and assist tallies mean nothing and should be disregarded when judging a player, but it shouldn't be so protruding when judging some players. It’s the overall contribution that gets ignored by stats based findings, something that’s much more relevant than perceived by many football fans.

Facts and figures miss out so many vital elements of a player and their ability, quality of first touch, awareness, football intelligence are just some of the things that can’t be quantified yet imperative to any quality player.  

Stats have become so prominent in football that even Arsene Wenger, one of the most careful and astute transfer dealers, reportedly used stats to weigh up and sign new Arsenal signing Gabriel Paulista from Villarreal. Boasting impressive duels won, tackles won and clearances made numbers, all seems well, but can he position himself defensively when containing the play? Only time will tell.

There will always be arguments that stats do indeed enhance our knowledge of football, to an extent they do. They allow us to analyse players in ways that were never accessible even 10 years ago. The rate of growth in the use of stats proves that they’re well regarded even by the most respected names in football. I’m playing devil’s advocate here by heavily critiquing their validity, however my point stands that they warp our opinion on how good players are, or aren't.

Do stats ruin football? Not entirely, but I do feel that some players are heavily influenced by them as mentioned. They should be used in moderation, without risk of sounding like your mum when talking about alcohol.