Backroom Shake Up.. Marsh & Pascoe gone.. More to come..

[peterhague]

I don't think Rodgers threw Pascoe under the bus. He's his right hand man, good friend and isn't Rodgers' son engaged to Pascoe's daughter? I think the owners fired Pascoe as they feel our coaching staff isn't good enough and gave Rodgers no choice on the matter. I presume Klopp hasn't fully agreed to manage us yet so Rodgers will be kept on and an assistant will be parachuting in to help out in the short term until we can get Klopp. Just guesswork on my part.

I think that's probably fairly close to the truth.

I wonder if there was some sort of split actually within FSG as to whether Rodgers should stay? It's almost like they're setting him up for a precise examination - get him better coaches, let him sign his targets - to prove a point one way or another.

 

[ILD]

Yeah and there is no point sacking him to hire another up and coming manager of his ilk. It's either keep Rodgers for another while or sack him for a man like Klopp who seems to be a definite upgrade. But if Rodgers is staying then he is doing so under the owners terms. Also it might be easier to get rid of Rodgers to make way for Klopp if they have already disassembled his coaching team.

Rodgers must be fuming being undermined like this. i.e. the sacking of his staff. He obviously thinks highly of his staff, he has so in the past. I don't know how he'll spin this. He'll either look like a traitor to his own men or simply as a man willing to do anything to stay at the top. Liverpool is a big job and he knows that. He won't resign.

 

[mark1975]

Well I guess bang goes my theory that FSG talked to Gerrard about the staff! That's a strange one about his relationship with Rodgers - Rodgers was saying they were like brothers only a month ago, and now here's Gerrard suggesting they're pretty detached.

I think he just means that now he's out the loop and away from it, he knows less about what's going on. I'd imagine on some level that would be true in most similar scenario's, especially if Rodgers is now on the end of bollocking, we don't know what the club have stipulated in that sense about what he's allowed to make known, especially to people in the spotlight, like Gerrard. He does go on to say that Sterling should stay where he is because Rodgers is a good manager, so there's clearly no underlying bitterness from him.

If anything, I thought he was trying to say that it would be interesting to hear from Brendan about what's gone on, to find out who's decision it effectively was - like he's more or less suggesting the club have forced the decision.

 

[mark1975]

I don't think Rodgers threw Pascoe under the bus. He's his right hand man, good friend and isn't Rodgers' son engaged to Pascoe's daughter? I think the owners fired Pascoe as they feel our coaching staff isn't good enough and gave Rodgers no choice on the matter.

Pretty much.

 

[gkmacca]

I don't think Rodgers threw Pascoe under the bus. He's his right hand man, good friend and isn't Rodgers' son engaged to Pascoe's daughter? I think the owners fired Pascoe as they feel our coaching staff isn't good enough and gave Rodgers no choice on the matter. I presume Klopp hasn't fully agreed to manage us yet so Rodgers will be kept on and an assistant will be parachuting in to help out in the short term until we can get Klopp. Just guesswork on my part.

You're right. Apart from all of that, and the fact that Rodgers went on record last season saying how 'crucial' his assistants were to the team's success, it's hardly a clever move to go into that meeting and suggest that he was peripheral to what had happened. FSG don't want a coward in charge, and selling out his underlings would look cowardly. He didn't want Pascoe to go, plain and simple.

 

[Jack D Rips]

If they'd wanted Rodgers out they would have got him out. He was a sitting duck but they chose not to fire. My hunch remains that Rodgers went into the review expecting heads to roll so he decided to throw Pascoe and Marsh overboard in the hope it would be sufficient to appease the owners. Apologies for the mixed metaphors there.

Compensation may have been a factor. A resignation would be cheaper than a sacking.

 

[Spionkop69]

This all seems pointless. Get rid of staff, bring new staff in, Rodgers fails next season, sack Rodgers, bring in new manager who wants his own staff, sack the old new staff, bring in new staff....

With more compensation packages and wasted money on pay offs....

 

[Athens]

Oh I do love a bit of a backroom shake up.

Giggity.

 

[Ryan]

Hindsight is 20/20, we were playing some wonderful football last season under the same coaching staff, so it hasn't all been "punching on a par with midtable sides", like you would say.

They should have gone because we've had a poor season and their inexperience and lack of a winners instinct has shown, but you don't half exaggerate to get your point across - "They should have gone at the beginning of last season", on the back of nearly winning the title?

"We're terrible at bringing in staff" - which has now been turned on its head to "looking at who we've had under Rodgers". Make up your mind.

As for sucking it up with Ryan, you're right, no one else on the forum has ever questioned the quality of backroom staff like Mike Marsh or Pascoe, no sir, revolutionary, groundbreaking thinking there. There are threads going back fucking *aeons* from the likes of Macca which questioned the validity of our coaches and not just from "looking at Rodgers sitting on a milk crate", seeing what the rest of the footballing World can blatantly see.

You're like a vagina that no one wants to fuck these days Mark.

 

[mark1975]

You're like a vagina that no one wants to fuck these days Mark.

I know mate, constantly blowing your own trumpet must be a lonely life too though, eh?

 

[Spionkop69]

You're like a vagina that no one wants to fuck these days Mark.

Ouch...