Tony Barrett
Last updated at 12:01AM, September 25 2015
Fenway Sports Group had an ambitious vision for Liverpool, but its policy is stuttering.
‘The model” as it became known was non-negotiable. A director of football was an absolute requirement. In the transfer market, “short-term, quick fixes” and overpaying for players were out of the question. A “talented young manager” was appointed to “instil a philosophy”.
Almost five years on from the purchase of Liverpool by Fenway Sports Group (FSG), all that remains of that blueprint is Brendan Rodgers. Given what was the model, it is not looking good.
Perhaps partly because he represents the last vestiges of the vision that they arrived with, Rodgers is yet to be dispensed with by FSG in the same manner as Damien Comolli, the director of football that they appointed, although there is no question that his position is subject to heightened consideration. Presiding over a run of form that has seen Liverpool win five matches out of their past 15 means that Rodgers can have few complaints about the mounting pressure that he is coming under, particularly with Jürgen Klopp and Carlo Ancelotti being available.
Having his tactics criticised, his signings rubbished and his approach questioned has become as much a part of the Liverpool manager’s daily routine as taking training at Melwood. There is no escape from the spotlight. But for all the scrutiny Rodgers is coming under, much of it as justified as it is inevitable, the question of whether the club he manages are giving him, or his potential replacements, the best possible chance to succeed is in danger of being lost in the clamour for change.
The focus on FSG and the decisions that it has made has become minimal. There is, though, a sense that Liverpool, on the pitch at least, are back to square one under their ownership. The league position they occupy, 13th, is only five places and two points better than it was in October 2010 when the American investment vehicle bought one of world football’s most famous clubs.
Then, their arrival came after an ignominious exit from the League Cup at the hands of League Two opposition, Northampton Town, a repeat of which was narrowly averted on Wednesday when Liverpool scraped past Carlisle United on penalties.
Just as Roy Hodgson, the manager FSG inherited, was beleaguered in 2010, Rodgers is under pressure in 2015. What took place in the intervening five years, save for a remarkable and wholly unexpected title challenge in 2013-14 has been wholly underwhelming — no trophies won and Champions League qualification achieved once.
Financial stability off the pitch, something that should not be underestimated, has not been followed by success on it.
“Most of all, we want to win,” John W Henry, Liverpool’s principal owner, once stated. “That ambition drives every decision. It is the Liverpool Way.” It may have been once but whether that is still the case is a moot point. Recently, Liverpool enlisted Ask Ten, an international leadership consultancy, whose website presents a case study of how a global football brand can “obtain commercial success off the pitch when the team is not performing on the pitch”. As an indication of where Liverpool are, it is compelling.
Were it not for the implications it would have for his job security, Rodgers would be entitled to cite the restrictions that he works under in mitigation. In the recent past, he has claimed that “fifth is par” for Liverpool, an argument that does hold weight when one considers that they have the Premier League’s fifth biggest wage bill, its fifth largest revenue and, when the redevelopment of Anfield is complete, they will have the country’s fifth biggest stadium. The problem for Rodgers is that last season Liverpool did not achieve that limited objective and they are several shots over par this season. That is why his job is in jeopardy.
Regardless of Rodgers’s failings, FSG needs to ask itself whether or not it has given him the best possible opportunity to deliver. If it is as honest as it was when Henry used an open letter to Liverpool fans to admit that mistakes had been made, it will acknowledge that its shortcomings, revolving primarily around an inconsistent approach with numerous deviations away from the course that it intended to follow, has not created the ideal conditions for any manager, particularly a relatively inexperienced one, to thrive in.
Five factors in Liverpool’s fall from grace
1 Losing Luis Suárez
His move to Barcelona will go down as the turning point if this downturn under FSG continues. In the 38 league games before Suárez left, Liverpool scored 101 goals; in the 44 games since, they have scored only 56. Suárez’s infectious will to win has also been lost.
2 Failing to replace Suárez
Armed with £75million from the sale, Liverpool went on a spree. Instead of replacing Suárez with one player of similar talent, such as Alexis Sánchez, they went for quantity. Of the nine players recruited, four, including Mario Balotelli, aren’t at the club this season.
3 Playing an understrength team away to Real Madrid
In terms of dressing-room morale and supporter confidence, the damage done by Rodgers’s decision not to pick his first-choice team for the Champions League tie cannot be understated. Steven Gerrard admitted later that the episode played a key role in his decision to leave.
4 Allowing Gerrard to leave
By his own admission, Gerrard, at 35, is not the player he was at 25. But given the lack of leaders, his departure should have been avoided. The brain drain that has seen Jamie Carragher, Pepe Reina and Daniel Agger leave has had a profound effect on Liverpool’s stature within the game. Allowing Gerrard to follow Carragher, Reina and Agger out of Anfield was a mistake.
5 Too many symbolic defeats
It isn’t just losing games, but the manner in which they lose. A pitiful performance in the FA Cup semi-final against Aston Villa; capitulation to Crystal Palace in Gerrard’s Anfield farewell; surrender at Stoke on the final day of last season, left; West Ham winning at Anfield for the first time since 1963. Each one has caused significant collateral damage.
Words by Tony Barrett
The transfer committee system that replaced the director of football template that was initially implemented has misfired. The idea of sharing votes on potential new signings between the manager, recruitment staff and executives may be democratic and reflect a desire to provide checks and balances, but its implementation has resulted in no one involved getting exactly what they want.
While Rodgers has been able to sign players such as Christian Benteke and Nathaniel Clyne as his first-choices, he has previously been prevented from pursuing interest in Ashley Williams and Ryan Bertrand. For their part, the committee, and particularly the owners, have been frustrated at the way that Rodgers has deployed signings that they have prioritised, with Lazar Markovic and Mamadou Sakho being two of the most obvious examples. That disconnect has been apparent from the summer that Rodgers took over as manager when he blocked a move to sign Daniel Sturridge from Chelsea only to backtrack the following January in the wake of pressure from FSG.
It is that dysfunction in their relationship that is at the heart of everything that is going wrong at Liverpool. Rodgers has long harboured doubts about whether he can succeed given the conditions that he works under, while FSG has had its own concerns about the Northern Irishman’s willingness to work collaboratively. Those mutual misgivings coupled with Liverpool’s slump mean that Rodgers is at growing risk of being replaced. Should either Klopp or Ancelotti succeed him, “the model” will be gone for good.
