With Liverpool looking a bit thin in central midfield of late, would Charlie Adam have made a difference if he were still at the club?
Kenny Dalglish signed Charlie Adam from Blackpool in July 2011 for a fee thought to be £9million. Dalglish famously drove Adam himself to Melwood so that he can sign his contract. At the time of Adam’s arrival, many Liverpool fans were excited by this signing as Adam had put in a great display for Blackpool the season before, with Alex Ferguson talking Adam up by saying his corner kicks are worth £10million.
Unfortunately Adam did not have the best of seasons at Liverpool as he only managed two goals in 35 appearances. When Brendan Rodgers took over from Dalglish, the new Liverpool boss decided to sell Adam to Stoke for £5million, a move that Adam regrets.
‘A new manager went in there and changed the circumstances,’ Adam said in the Daily Mail. ‘It wasn’t a disaster by any means and that’s why I was so surprised that the club got rid of Kenny Dalglish.
‘But when owners put in the money that they do, they want instant success.
‘I should probably have stayed the season after and tried to work my way into the team. But I got itchy feet and I wanted to play.
‘A decision had to be made. I made the choice to go in the space of 24 hours and it probably wasn’t enough time to think it through properly.’
Adam looks at the current Liverpool squad and sees the amount of game-time Jordan Henderson is now getting and thinks that maybe if he had stayed on, he would be getting the game-time Hendo is enjoying now.
I think Liverpool expected too much from Adam when he joined the club and he did not live up to expectations. All too often you see players playing very well for their clubs but when they make the step up to a bigger team they crumble; that is exactly what happened to Adam. Coupled with his lack of speed and poor tackling ability, he quickly lost the faith of Liverpool fans. Maybe if he had stuck it out for another season he could have improved but it seems like Rodgers was not going to have it and opted to ship him off.
Those are some highlights of Adam’s time at Liverpool. Do you think Liverpool should have kept in on for longer?
I think Rodgers was right to get rid of him right away.
The strongest part of Charlie Adam’s game is his creative/attacking ability, none of which live up to the standard created by Rodgers now, with the likes of Coutinho.
At one point, Adam only created 11 chances in 12 games, that is appalling. And even his passing, another one of his ‘strong areas’ was fairly average at around 78%, he just isn’t good enough for us.
In the system we play now, Adam would also be required to do a lot of running and moving, something he isn’t great at. He’s not exactly the fittest specimen.
Don’t forget, Rodgers will have been under pressure to have some sort of immediate impact too, so he wouldn’t want to be waiting around to see if he could improve players when there are better players out there on the market.
I’d look at it this way: His move to Stoke hasn’t affected us negatively, nor has it been a regrettable move, where he’s move and shown us how good he is and what we’re missing out on. So all-in-all a good move for everyone involved (bar Stoke, maybe).
Lucas has’nt created 11 chances in all his time at Anfield .
He did the right thing by going to Stoke. If he had stayed BR would not have given him even to sit on the bench.Liverpool seriously need another defensive midfielder to replace Lucas. Lucas had been such a big disappointment in the last game.
Lucus is a defensive mid. You win games by scoring and protecting your goal. Lucus’s job is to defend. Why don’t you plastic fans get it. He does his job exallently. If everyone attacks who defends?
Would be a half decent argument if he could actually defend
Lucas did not do a good job at the Gunners game. Liverpool’s midfield was non-existent.