COMMENT: Erling Haaland. He sounded surprised, didn't he? Even put out. And it's understandable. Trent Alexander-Arnold, with that trophy swipe on the eve of Sunday's showdown, really should be looking closer to home...
Firstly, as this column has stated in the past, claiming Manchester City's dominance is all due to the UAE's wealth fund is lazy and misses the mark. City are where they are simply because they've done things better than their opponents. With their money. Their resources. City have made it work better than Manchester United, Chelsea and even Liverpool.
But for Alexander-Arnold and those at Anfield, this should run deeper. And as we say, the reasons for failing to keep up with City have nothing to do with their spending - but instead, Liverpool's.
"Looking back on this era," stated Alexander-Arnold earlier this week, "although they've won more titles than us and have probably been more successful, our trophies will mean more to us and our fanbase because of the situations at both clubs, financially. How both clubs have built their teams and the manner in which we've done it, probably means more to our fans."
Yeah, okay, there is a point there. How he can read the minds of City fans, only Trent can tell us this. But when he raises the 'financial situation' of both clubs, unwittingly, Alexander-Arnold does make a point. But this has nothing to do with Manchester City FC...
Instead, for Liverpool, the issue is about priorities. Totem poles. And where the club - and it's personnel - stand in the portfolio of their owners, Fenway Sports Group. The Americans are lauded by the majority - though not the entire - of the Reds support. Helped in no small way by the ever gushing local newspaper.
But again, when you compare FSG's approach to what City's personnel experience from their owners, there's no contest. At City, they're the priority. The apex. If there's a problem. If someone wants to talk. Those in charge will drop everything to accommodate. If a position needs strengthening, City will find a way to make it happen.
The manager is a case in point. If he wants a certain player, City will make it happen. If he wants to add an extra coach (Lillo for example), there's no push back. City have offered Pep Guardiola the environment and the colleagues - like good friends Ferran Soriano and Txiki Begiristain - so he can be the best he can be. The Catalan has been given everything to fulfil his potential as a manager. Not because of unlimited wealth. But due to City being the be-and-end-all of the club's owner. There's no sense of being second best. There's no sense of Pep having to fight his ground or sell his ideas. He doesn't need to convince those above him. He has their full and prioritised support.
Which is in contrast to what Jurgen Klopp has had to battle at Liverpool. Just consider the physical change Klopp has undergone these past nine years, compared to Pep. City's manager looks fresh and ready for another eight years. Klopp? Well, we'll let you make a call on what we see today.
This can't coincidence. It's a result of a very different approach to management between the two clubs. Klopp does need to fight his ground. He does need to sell his ideas. And in terms of priorities, if LeBron James or Klopp was in the need of a meeting, who do you think John W Henry would accommodate? Or what about Klopp versus Sam Kennedy or Alex Cora of the Redsox?
This is the problem that Klopp and Liverpool have faced. How often over these nine years have we heard the German hint (it's rarely a full-blown complaint) at frustration over a lack of spending power at Liverpool? This has nothing to do City. FSG have the resources, but they've always chosen a conservative approach to team investment. If Liverpool was their sole 'property', or at least their priority, then you know things would be different. But they're not. And in comparison to City's owners, it's clear FSG have failed to give Klopp everything he needed to fulfil his potential as a manager over his time at Anfield. Indeed for those LFC fans reading, if Klopp was in Pep's place, do you really think he would be stepping down as he will come season's end?
Liverpool have missed an opportunity. They could have - and should have - won more with Klopp. And this season shouldn't be a farewell parade for the German. Not enough scrutiny has been devoted to why Klopp has made this decision. Worn out? Blown out? Okay, sure. But why is he so world-weary and Pep appears like he's just getting started?
A Premier League and a Champions League title read well - at least for most clubs. But for Liverpool? A Liverpool with one of the great managers of the modern game? Is that really good enough?
"If he wants to say that okay," Haaland stated in response to Alexander-Arnold just yesterday, "I have been here one year and I won the treble - it was quite a nice feeling. I don't think he knows exactly this feeling. That's what I felt last season, it was quite nice.
"They can talk as much as they want, or he can talk as much as he wants. I don't know why he does that but I don't mind..."
Haaland's right. Why do Liverpool's players "talk like that"? It's not Man City who have held them back during this Klopp era. They'd do well to look closer to home.
