Did Liverpool Make a Mistake Signing Rickie Lambert?
The title for this article is almost a rhetorical question; of course Liverpool made a mistake signing Rickie Lambert. Why else would they be happy to let the player leave within a year of his arrival?
The Reds allowed Lambert to hold talks with Aston Villa in the winter transfer window, a move the player rejected, per the Guardian.
Lambert explained the experience to James Pearce of the Liverpool Echo:
"It was very close. It was touch and go. We agreed everything. ... It was something I just couldn't do. It was too short notice. It was too big of a decision to make in the short amount of time I had.
"
Presumably, the veteran striker wanted one full season at his boyhood club after joining for £4.5 million from Southampton last summer. He may also have envisaged an FA Cup final or medal to end the campaign.
Instead, Liverpool's season fell to pieces, and Lambert himself started just twice in all competitions after turning down a move to the Midlands. In total, he started just 12 games, plus 24 appearances from the bench.
Those appearance stats are in stark contrast to his previous Premier League campaign, when he played the full 90 minutes 22 times and was named in the starting XI in 31 of Southampton's 38 league games.
The season before, 2012/13, Lambert started 35 of the Saints' 38 league games.
Such regular playing time brought the best out of the Kirkby-born forward, who scored 15 goals and assisted seven in 2012/13 and added 13 goals plus 11 assists the season after. That's two very consistent seasons in the top flight.
Twenty-eight goals and 18 assists in his only two seasons in the Premier League certainly meant Lambert was worth the £4.5 million Liverpool paid for him. You will never see a player move for such a low sum with such a proven return.
Lambert, therefore, made a superb acquisition for a Premier League side looking to acquire a proven, experienced player who can score goals—especially from set pieces—and add assists.
The problem is that that club should not have been Liverpool.
The even bigger, and most damning, issue is it was abundantly clear that in order to get the best from Lambert, he simply had to be playing regularly, starting 86 percent of Southampton's Premier League games in the two seasons before joining Liverpool.
So why exactly did Brendan Rodgers bring in Lambert if he had no intention of playing him regularly?
And clearly, he never did intend to be playing him regularly despite claiming the then-32-year-old was "one of the most accomplished footballers I've seen."
If Lambert was intended to be Rodgers' plan-B option, that idea completely overlooked the fact Lambert needed regular playing time to be at his best.
Rodgers gave Lambert his full debut for the club at the end of September against Middlesbrough in the League Cup, but he had to wait until October for his full league debut against West Bromwich Albion. By this point, it was even more clear Lambert needed to be playing regularly to be match fit and sharp.
Instead, Rodgers told the media how Lambert "worked tirelessly every day"—a compliment that was regularly afforded to the forward throughout the season.
It wasn't until Mario Balotelli suffered an injury in November, joining Daniel Sturridge on the sidelines, that Lambert was finally offered a run in the side, scoring against Crystal Palace and PFC Ludogorets in consecutive starts.
All of a sudden, though, from starting just two games in three months, Lambert started three games within a week, and the effects were clear to see. He looked leggy and struggled, even more so due to being joined in attack by 34-year-old Steven Gerrard.
For Liverpool's must-win Champions League group game against FC Basel, Rodgers opted for a Gerrard-Lambert front two—a combined age of 66 years. The Swiss side were hardly worried about pace in behind, and Lambert was unable to do what he did best at Southampton: hold up the ball for other attacking players and bring them into play.
Lambert isn't a bad player. Far from it. Rodgers has just woefully used him.
As Dave Usher of ESPN FC noted, Lambert "was the same player last year that he was at Southampton, it's just that Liverpool were not set up in a way that would allow him to be that player."
Usher added that Lambert "would still be an asset to three-quarters of the sides in the Premier League," which is certainly true. Wherever the now-33-year-old ends up this summer, his new club should be looking to play him regularly and play to his strengths.
He'll leave Liverpool having fulfilled the dream of every football supporter, playing for his boyhood club. It is, though, a huge shame he never managed to get a goal at Anfield.
Overall, the bigger mistake was not signing Lambert but how Rodgers used him during his one season at the club.
All appearance data via Transfermarkt.
.jpg?w=600 "Offseason Moves for Every Team 👉")
.png?w=600 "New NBA Mock Draft 📝")
