Report: FSG stance on selling the club as Liverpool risk financial blow of top-four failure

Add as preferred source on Google

A report shares the stance of FSG on selling Liverpool. The Reds run an increased risk of missing out on Champions League football.

This comes from the Liverpool Echo. They claim that FSG have zero intention of selling Liverpool Football Club.

It’s a question that many are asking right now. A perceived failure to refresh the squad is held up as a major reason for Liverpool’s failures this season, particularly a lack of midfield investment.

That lack of investment has led to calls for FSG to sell-up and move on. The likelihood of that happening seems greater as Liverpool run a risk of missing out on Champions League football next season. Previously taken for granted, that’s a considerable amount of money that the club could lose out on.

But the Echo claims that FSG aren’t worried. They have long-term plans to grow their investment at Liverpool. ‘Success on the pitch’ is said to be at the core of that.

FSG stance on selling Liverpool

There is an awful lot to say about this. All of it should hang over the safety net of ‘be careful what you wish for’ – there are far, far worse owners out there than FSG. Few Liverpool fans would want the club turned into a marketing vehicle for an oil state, either.

Now onto the concerns. There’s one massive one – that FSG’s model for success isn’t sustainable. It’s very possible (you could argue likely) that Jurgen Klopp has actually worked wonders with a system that wouldn’t work with any other manager.

Virtually every player who has arrived at Liverpool improved under the manager. Yes, scouting plays a major role in that but it’s primarily a coaching success. It’s difficult to say whether Klopp can continue that success indefinitely, let alone his eventual replacement.

And also, luck has been a factor. It’s the reality of the last six years – Liverpool’s plan of signing their first-choice target every time only works if that target wants to go to Anfield. One example sums it up.

If Virgil van Dijk had preferred the guaranteed success of Manchester City over Liverpool, would the Reds have had half the success since his arrival? We’re not sure they win anything.

Now, credit to Liverpool for realising just how good Van Dijk was, convincing him to move, and then waiting for his arrival. But when you operate with so few transfers and with an all-or-nothing approach, one decision like that can change everything.

Perhaps Aurélien Tchouaméni is the other example. It’s very possible that if he’d picked Anfield this summer, Liverpool wouldn’t be struggling right now. Only, he didn’t and the Reds signed no one.

Compare that to City. They spent £100m on Jack Grealish last season and he hasn’t actually done much. This season, he’s essentially delivered nothing and sat on the bench as Liverpool beat them 1-0.

Now, Liverpool can’t spend like City but it shows an advantage of signing regularly. Grealish has been a failure but City haven’t felt that. Liverpool would have with their own strategy. You can argue that an equivalent is the failure of Naby Keita to develop into a first-choice midfielder. The Reds certainly feel that right now.

We imagine the transfer ideas at Liverpool need a rethink, then, primarily from FSG and what they’re willing to back. The squad needs a refresh and without financial backing there, they won’t get the long-term growth they’re planning for.