Jurgen Klopp's revealing comments late last week, which hinted at discord within the upper echelons at Liverpool Football Club over recruitment of a centre-back, has again brought scrutiny upon its owners FSG. In this thread, I try to explain what is influencing their thinking.

Firstly, I think it's important to note that this likely wouldn't even be a discussion had the club managed to offload a number of players during the summer transfer window. The club was looking to sell the likes of Origi, Grujic, Wilson, Shaqiri and perhaps a couple more.

Sale of even some of those players should've secured sufficient funds for the club to sign a replacement for the departed Lovren before the window closed on 5th October. My understanding is that was the intention, but so many sales failing to materialise affected those plans.

Responsibility for that lies with Michael Edwards. Clearly, he felt values he attached to players on the 'for sale' list were not being met, but nonetheless, if he sold some players for less than he was hoping, enough funds should still have been secured for a new centre-back.

Going into a season with only three senior centre-backs was a risk, and Klopp and Edwards clearly knew that, but it was terrible misfortune to lose the preferred two from that three early into the new season for what is likely to be the remainder of the season.

However, that's precisely why all top clubs tend to have five or more senior centre-backs in their squads, so ultimately, this was poor planning to end up in this situation.

After VvD got injured on 17th October, signing a centre-back should have become a high priority; when Gomez went down and out for the season 23 days later, lining a centre-back up to lean against the Wall of Champions at Kirkby on 1st January should've become an absolute must.

Yet with just over a week to go of this window, Klopp made his feelings known and didn't disguise the fact that decisions on spending money ultimately lie elsewhere. The question is, why would FSG have dithered, rather than sanction an incoming several weeks ago?

Obviously, an £80m+ hit on matchday revenue plus rebates on EPL and CL prize money (that will reduce income from both sources) as well as an impact on commercial activities will all ensure the club will be well over £100m shy of earnings had Covid not come along this season.

On top of that, FSG will be nervous about next season's potential revenues- to assume that everything will be completely back to normal for the start of the 2021/22 season would be unrealistic.

Furthermore, the upcoming domestic TV rights auction is looming, and there are real fears the next three-year cycle will see an appreciable drop in revenue. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/jan/11/tension-everywhere-premier-league-back-foot-uk-tv-rights-auction-nears

The future aside, cashflows currently are bound to be very strained and very careful financial management needs to be exercised so as to ensure the club doesn't end up in significant financial difficulties. All that said, that is no different to damn near every football club.

FSG acquired the club in 2010 after identifying it as an investment opportunity. To that end, their objectives were about seeing their asset appreciate in value and establishing financial self-sustainability. In an interview with David Conn almost exactly a decade ago, JWH said:

"We've always spent money we've generated rather than deficit-spending and that will be the case in Liverpool... It's up to us to generate enough revenue to be successful over the long term. We have not and will not deviate from that."

From that perspective, trophies and success are important (and all aid appreciation of the worth of a football club), but from FSG's perspective, it absolutely cannot be at even the slightest detriment to tight financial control.

That's a noble and admirable position to take, but when they appear to be stubbornly sticking to those principles during unprecedented times, there is a real risk that doing nothing and ostensibly being financially prudent could create even greater monetary predicaments.

If the club has to play either of Rhys Williams or Nat Phillips (two players whose level is League 1-2 at present) in the games against RB Leipzig in next month's CL Round of 16 ties, the club's chances of progressing beyond that stage are at real risk.

That, on its own, could result in a hit of £20m or more from that competition. Worse still, failure to make top four could result in a hit of £50m or more next season. Commercially, the Nike deal (which is hinged on sales volumes) could deliver substantially less revenue too.

All told, the 'do nothing' approach could have significant consequences. Even if cash flows are so tight, why can the club not borrow a moderate amount of funds (even from owners FSG, who have never spent their own money on club operations) like many others have done recently?

Indeed, there are an assortment of ways in which clubs can finance permanent deals - and if that is seen as too great a risk - then actively looking to bolster the squad's ranks with a loan signing or two should absolutely not be beyond the means of this footballing world power.

Granted, the recent poor spell is hardly because of defensive personnel issues, but consistently relying on key midfielders to fill gaps impacts on other areas of the pitch- and that is bound to affect morale and confidence too.

It's really telling that in the last few days, even journalists who have been nothing but supportive of the owners are calling for them to show financial pragmatism. It is hard to disagree- the opportunity cost of inertia is significant.

Beyond just the loss of income, even the ability to do business in the summer transfer window could be massively impacted by failure to hit key targets this season. Furthermore, the contracts of so many key players will have only two years left to run after this June.

The contracts of Virgil van Dijk, Fabinho, Sadio Mane, Mo Salah, Roberto Firmino, Naby Keita, Xherdan Shaqiri, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain and club captain Jordan Henderson all end in June 2023. Contract negotiations, too, will be impacted if key targets are not achieved.

FSG have one of their biggest decisions to make since taking over Liverpool over a decade ago. Never mind silverware for this season, being able to adequately strengthen in the summer and retaining key personnel could all hinge on what happens. I hope they do the right thing.