Following the publication of a database called "Transfers_Premiership", which listed the Ins and Outs at a number of top clubs since 1992, I felt it was important to double-check the figures, particularly with people quoting it as fact.

There was also a section focusing on the spending of Rafa Benítez versus that of Alex Ferguson since 2004, which was used by another site (BIAWC), designed to denigrate the Spaniard. And this is what I focused on. The figures are significantly wrong. I can't guarantee that my figures are 100% correct either, as not all true fees are in the public domain, but I believe it's a more accurate representation.

There were a number of glaring errors in this database, such as including the £14.2m transfer of Djibril Cissé as a Benítez signing, when everyone knows it was sanctioned by Gérard Houllier, and listing Lucas Leiva's deal as £8m when it was €8m, roughly £2m cheaper. Luis Garcia's sale was also absent.

It also did not include the incremental fees payable for Wayne Rooney (£23m, plus £4m for appearances, etc.) and Michael Carrick. At the base of this article are images of the corrected database figures.

I have updated this report a couple of times since initially publishing it, and will continue to do so if there are any errors or omissions that come to my attention. The figures I have listed go from transfer activity in the summer of 2004, which was the transfer window in which Benítez arrived. (I've added Luis Garcia, whose sale was absent, and removed Saha from the comparison with Benítez as it was in the January before Rafa arrived.)

2004 Onwards

Whether or not Benítez has outspent Ferguson since 2004 is in many ways irrelevant, given that Ferguson had spent massively in the three years before Benítez arrived: Veron at £28m, Heinze at £7m and Van Nistelrooy at £19m have now gone (as have Forlan, Kleberson, Djemba-Djemba, Bellion and all manner of signings from that time), but Ferdinand, Saha and Ronaldo haven’t. That’s £60m spent on three players for his current squad while Rafa was still in Spain; £60m that the Scot hasn’t needed to spend since 2004. A £60m head-start.

Of course Benítez has had to spend differently to Ferguson in the last three years –– because Ferguson had already splashed loads of cash, whereas Benítez was starting his project from scratch. And as I’ve pointed out before, Benítez hasn’t had the chance (or desire) to cash in on his best players for big fees as they reach the end of their peak effectiveness after years of sterling service, as seen with the lucrative sales of Beckham and van Nistelrooy, and at Arsenal, Vieira and Henry. That’s the difference between starting out and having been in the job ten or twenty years. You sell one set of stars as the next bunch emerge.

This is what ignorant and dim-witted people cannot fathom. If I start building a high-quality house a few years before you,then I won’t need to spend as much to finish it once you finally get started. If that is not blindingly obvious and logical, I don’t know what is. And let’s not forget that until he’d won the league a first time, Ferguson had spent more than any other manager, breaking the British transfer record twice –– something Benítez is yet to do, or even get close to. And even then it took Ferguson seven years to make that breakthrough.

And of course, both Wenger and Ferguson are relying on their canny youth groundwork from a decade or two ago. Again, Ferguson hasn’t had to spend as much between 2004 and the present day because of players like Giggs, Scholes and Neville, who only came into the team five-ten years after Ferguson took charge. As an example, in ten years’ time, maybe the Liverpool manager won’t need to buy an expensive centre-half, if Jack Hobbs maintains his progress.

Tevez and Mascherano

The Tevez/Mascherano deals are the same type of "loan", but clearly different in terms of the initial fee. Mascherano was rotting in West Ham's reserves, and losing value, so it was in his owners' interests to get him back playing, and as such, put himself in the shop window. So Liverpool paid a bargain £1.5m, plus his wages, for the 18-month deal, but with £17m payable at the end of it. Tevez was a totally different situation - the hot property of English football, United loaned him at a reported £5m per year, plus his wages, over a two-year period, but with that £10m coming off the eventual transfer fee, which is in the region of £30m. There was no way on earth he was going to join United for a 'loan' fee in line with Mascherano, given the difference in their values as players (defensive midfielder vs striker) and their stock at the time.

The fact of the matter is that Manchester United and Chelsea’s current squads cost far, far more than Liverpool’s, and in United’s case, much of that stems from the years before Rafa’s arrival. I'm not writing this to knock Ferguson - clearly he's spent very well, on the whole. I just want some more accuracy in the reporting of such issues. Chelsea have also obviously bought a lot of good players, but have been able to pay way over the odds to get the signature at all costs, when Liverpool haven't been able to stretch that far for numerous targets.

Using figures taken from more reliable sources, I make the net spending by Benítez to be more than £30m less than was incorrectly stated. The net spend by Rafa drops by more than 33%, to £56.9m; Ferguson’s spending in the same period weighs in at £73.4m, £16.6m more than his rival’s –– the original figures claimed that Rafa had spent £8.5m more than the Scot.

(Scott Carson’s sale to Villa, should it happen, will also massively reduce Benítez’s net spending, as will the departure of Momo Sissoko, as looks possible. Martin Skrtel, signed for £6.5m and a permanent deal for Mascherano, if the money is found, will take it up again. But this deals with the period between 2004 and 2007, as that was the time-frame the original database covered; it can of course be updated in the summer, once the next proper round of spending has taken place.)

Such lists might seem harmless, as mere internet forum fodder for discussion, but the viral nature of the net is well known. The commentator on Sky’s Football First noted during the Reading game that only Chelsea had spent more since Benítez took charge at Liverpool; which, as I’ve pointed out, is total rubbish. Wherever the commentator heard this information, passing it on as fact is irresponsible.

(For the record, Mourinho's net expenditure is listed as £163m, at an average of three times what Benítez spent each season; I haven't double-checked the Chelsea figures, and there may well be inaccuracies in there, as there was with the Liverpool and United figures. Chelsea also spent £110m net in Ranieri's final season.)

On the whole, Benítez has bought extremely well. No manager ever gets it right 100% of the time; if they get it right 50% of the time they’re doing well.

Reina, Arbeloa, Agger, Alonso, Babel, Lucas, Mascherano, Benayoun and Torres are all top-class and 26 or under, and while a couple of the younger players naturally need to develop and continue to adapt to life in England, the potential is immense (as it is for some of the teenagers recently recruited). These players can be part of Liverpool’s team for years to come, and all should improve. A problem this season has been the absence of Agger’s passing and movement from the back.

Some of Benítez’s other signings aren’t playing too well at the moment, and perhaps a few need to step up their game to prove they can help take Liverpool to the next level, but they are not flops or failures. They have largely held their values, and have something to offer when on song.

So while it’s looking increasingly unlikely that the Reds can win the league this year, the development is definitely there. (Addition: having said that, events off the field are definitely undermining his efforts.)

And by looking at how quickly Arsenal and Manchester United suddenly transformed from sides that looked on a par with (or inferior to) Liverpool a year or two ago, it’s not unrealistic to think that with the talent at his disposal, and one or two key additions, Benítez’s team can go from strength to strength.

I have made every effort to list the transfer fees as correctly as possible. The majority of those in the original document appear perfectly correct, but where there was an error or omission I've altered it and marked it with an asterisk, and also listed it in bold. If there are any further errors, for the Ins and Outs of either team, please let me know.

The original database incorrectly lists:

• Benítez's net spend as £87.7m

• Ferguson's net spend as £79.2m

Concluding that Benítez had spent £8.5m more than Ferguson.

The true figures are:

• Benítez's net spend is £56.9m

• Ferguson's net spend is £73.4m

Therefore Benítez's net spend is £16.6m less than his rival's (a swing of £25.1m from the original figures)

Return to Blog