Liverpool transfers: Making sense of the Oxlade-Chamberlain move

A month later and the Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain move to Liverpool looks more confusing by the day. We make sense of the controversial move.

Some transfers come out of nowhere and happen over night. Some simmer on for months before they get done. The possibility of Liverpool moving for Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain was bubbling along all the way back to January. The combination of his expiring contract and rumored Liverpool fandom made this news.

While the move was not a surprise, despite happening on deadline day, it is no less confusing. The player wants to play in central midfield and yet he is clearly not better at that position than the Reds’ incumbent midfield men.

For Liverpool, it is highly unusual to outlay such a huge fee for a player we don’t imagine being a first team regular. His transfer fee equalled our pre-summer transfer record. And yet with everyone fit it will be hard for him to see starting minutes outside of the domestic cups.

So was this move pointless for everyone involved? Actually, there is some method in the mess.

I gotta get out of this place

For Oxlade-Chamberlain, he wanted to leave Arsenal. The Gunners’ arrow is pointing down. Mesut Ozil and Alexis Sanchez are both less than a year away from leaving. Arsene Wenger casts an increasingly lonely and tired shadow over the future of the club.

It can’t be much fun being an Arsenal player right now. Who at that club is really enjoying their football right now? Aaron Ramsey, maybe. Oxlade-Chamberlain is too nice to come out and say ‘yeah Arsenal is a dumpster fire’, but that is surely what he thinks.

The curious thing is: why didn’t he go to Chelsea? That is what Arsenal wanted. The deal was all tied up. He would have been paid way more money and have a much better chance of short-term silverware. The only reason I can think of is the people at Liverpool.

Would you rather have Jürgen Klopp or Antonio Conte as your boss? Me too. Also he has a host of England buddies at Anfield. Daniel Sturridge, Jordan Henderson, Adam Lallana and Nathaniel Clyne are all good friends from his England duty or Southampton days.

He is here to have a better job and a better life. But why did the club by an attacking utility player when we really needed a first team center back or defensive midfielder? I think it was opportunity and circumstance.

More from Rush The Kop

• Set to return, Virgil Van Dijk facing heavy criticism back home
• Liverpool making late comebacks all the rage once again
• Wolves tilt gives Klopp opportunity to tinker with lineup following international duty
• Players to watch in the matchup with Wolves
• Predicting Liverpool’s Next Five Premier League Fixtures

The Jurgen Klopp School for Under Performing Players

Klopp was adamant that Virgil van Dijk was the only center back he wanted to bring here this summer. He trusted his existing players to be okay. Of course he was wrong about that, but when the van Dijk didn’t happen he had money in the bank. We needed more players with the Champions League on top of a Premier League campaign.

I think Klopp like him. As person and a character. I also think Klopp likes a project; coaxing out the best of underperforming players. He did it masterfully last year with Roberto Firmino and Lallana. He’s trying this year with Moreno and Lovren to mixed results. Add Oxlade-Chamberlain to the ‘Jurgen Klopp Academy for Disappointing Football Players’.

Next: 11 Craziest Liverpool Transfer Rumours of 2017

It has been hard first month for English international at Anfield. We have only won one game in seven since he arrived. His only start against Leicester in the League Cup was painful to watch. There is much hard work to do to make his time at Anfield a success. But the transfer may not be as stupid as it does on first glance.