• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

next villa manager

Forums Unread posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41729.msg1169008#msg1169008 date=1283422898]
I did read your post, but it sounds like an incredibly simplistic attempt to justify the buying of shit players at incredible prices.

Does that suit you better, peter?
[/quote]



right, i'll answer this properly despite the massive temptation to tell you to fuck right off.


1. i never said diouf price would be treble now, in fact i actually suggested around double.
2. i never asserted that tv income is the sole determinant of transfer spending, i quote 'so while there are other factors governing transfer prices'.
3. the truth remains, however, that the more than fivefold increase in tv income from the start of GH's reign to the end of RB's had a substantial effect on transfer prices, you only have to look at the increases in players' wages to deduce that much.


[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41729.msg1169014#msg1169014 date=1283423501]
I have to say that the idea of using 'inflation' to justify shit transfers is dangerous,otherwise we might be excusing Houillier by saying that had he bought Nicky Tanner in 2001 it'd have cost 8 million instead of what was actually paid.
[/quote]


it's not dangerous or in any way notional or abstract, it's rooted in reality and absolutely crucial for making a meaningful comparison between spending over the years.
 
Well, I would have never told you to fuck off.

(In fact I think the only poster I've told to fuck off was rebel)

I used flippancy to reply to your flippancy.

I'm not denying the application of inflation; but I think it's still misleading to use that as an excuse to justify incompetent transfers.

I know you said 'double', my use of the word triple was to suggest just how flawed such a comparison was..If I bought a clunker at 10 pounds, I wouldn't say 'well 10 pounds isnt bad since i bought another clunker 5 years ago at 5 pounds and that clunker would have probably cost 10 pounds now'.

I'd just say I wasted 15 pounds on clunkers.
 
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41729.msg1169017#msg1169017 date=1283424229]
Well, I would have never told you to fuck off.

(In fact I think the only poster I've told to fuck off was rebel)

I used flippancy to reply to your flippancy.

I'm not denying the application of inflation; but I think it's still misleading to use that as an excuse to justify incompetent transfers.

I know you said 'double', my use of the word triple was to suggest just how flawed such a comparison was..If I bought a clunker at 10 pounds, I wouldn't say 'well 10 pounds isnt bad since i bought another clunker 5 years ago at 5 pounds and that clunker would have probably cost 10 pounds now'.

I'd just say I wasted 15 pounds on clunkers.
[/quote]


right, no apologies necessary, i shouldn't have mooted the idea of telling you to fuck off.


but, and i know this is just going to go round in cirlces, i don't see your problem in what i'm saying. way back i replied to a post by gene in which he said that rafa had a lot more to spend than GH, i contested that because of what i see to be considerable inflation in market prices, and have provided *some* evidence to back up the argument.

fine if you want to challenge the accuracy of my claims, but you seem to have a problem with the whole notion of using 'real' prices altogether, which frankly mate, make you the incredibly simplistic one.

i mean, what's the problem?
 
No problem, but in fairness it comes across as justification for buying dross players.

Rafa spent 230 million pounds, and even if that is the same amount as Houillier (148 million) after adjusting for inflation; I don't feel that exonerates either manager.

It's like when Rafa went after Ferguson talking about how much money the Mancs had spent..The main problem wasnt that they had more money, even if it obviously WAS a problem..the main problem was that we kept buying crap players.

I know I come across as a Rafa-basher, but it's mainly because I KNOW he could have been a great manager had he changed a few things about him.

Opportunity lost.

The fact that we can use sums to say 'well, he spent less than Houiller after adjusting for inflation' rings a little hollow.
 
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=41729.msg1169009#msg1169009 date=1283422904]
He was African player of the year in 2001 and 2002, and a star of the 2002 WC.
Click to expand...

African player of the year? So fucking what? In the year he won it, fucking Papa Bouba Diop came second and that useless fat cunt Mido came third.

And we secured his transfer before he was a "star" in the 2002 WC. In which he - surprise! - scored precisely no goals.

Next.
[/quote]

Ahhh not exactly Bren. the announcement from Ian Cotton on 1st June, saying he would sign was the day after Senegal had beaten the defending champions France in a shock defeat , orchestrated by Diouf , and in which he provide the assist for the goal,on the opening day of the World Cup (31st May). Although the agreement was made (but not announced) prior to that game)






Senegal shocked France and the footballing world by claiming victory in the opening game of the World Cup.

Midfielder Pape Bouba Diop upstaged France's cast of star names to score the decisive first goal of the tournament after 30 minutes.

France now need to beat both Uruguay and Denmark to keep their World Cup challenge alive.

The defending champions struggled to find their stride and clearly suffered from Zinedine Zidane's withdrawal through injury.

In his absence it was left to Senegal's El Hadji Diouf to claim the starring role.

Diouf repeatedly harassed the French defence into mistakes and was instrumental in Bouba Diop's goal.

After all the hype and build-up and a spectacular opening ceremony, the first match of the tournament lived up to expectations - even if France did not.

Roger Lemerre's team were patient to the extent of being pedestrian at times, and in an open game their probing play was often predictable.

Senegal captain Aliou Cisse shone at the back, sitting in front of his defence, marshalling his men and snuffing out any signs of danger.

And further up the field it was the 21-year-old Diouf who stole the limelight.

The African footballer of the year signalled his intent in the early stages, beating Marcel Desailly on the right flank, before turning his attentions to Frank Leboeuf.

The ageing Leboeuf had been pinpointed as the Achilles heel of the French line-up and was unable to cope with Diouf's pace.

Diouf, playing as a lone striker, took on the 34-year-old, and raced clear on the half-hour mark before crossing to the centre from the by-line.

His Lens club team-mate Bouba Diop was on hand to steal in and make the most of a misunderstanding between Emmanuel Petit and Fabien Barthez to score.

Barthez and Petit's misjudgement at the near post was symptomatic of France's play.

The goal failed to ignite 'Les Bleus'. Despite enjoying the majority of possession they lacked the inspiration and imagination that Zidane provides.

Trezeguet and Thierry Henry had chances which they failed to convert and Patrick Vieira's free header from a corner went straight to goalkeeper Tony Sylva.

Instead it was Senegal who were to go closest, Khalilou Fadiga skimming the crossbar having twisted and turned Leboeuf to a standstill in the build up.
Fadiga's effort stung France into action and moments later, after latching on to a Christophe Dugarry flick-on, Henry stabbed a shot onto Sylva's crossbar.

But France were unable to sustain their efforts over the remaining 25 minutes bar a last-ditch Henry effort that Sylva saved at the second attempt.

The glory of their 1998 campaign now seems a distant memory after Senegal's sensational World Cup debut four years on.
Click to expand...

However some doubt was thrown about the deal by his club Lens................................

Diouf move still unclear

Senegal striker El Hadji Diouf has not yet signed a five-year deal with Liverpool, according to his club Lens.

But Diouf has again insisted he will be playing for the Merseyside club next season.

"I agreed a deal with Liverpool before the France match" said the striker after a training session in Korea's Daegu Stadium on Monday.

"I wouldn't have minded staying in Lens but personally I want to play for a big club.

"What I want to say is that I have already signed and you can be sure I will play for Liverpool next season."

A statement on Lens' website denied a transfer that had earlier seemed certain.

"Contrary to the announcement made on Saturday, Lens would like to make it clear that El Hadji Diouf has not been transferred to Liverpool, and no contract has been signed," said the statement.

"The player's representatives and the two clubs agreed on Friday to continue discussions at the end of the first round of the World Cup.

"Knowing that replacing a player of his potential and ability would be complicated, the Lens president Gervais Martel will continue to think over the matter."

Liverpool spokesman Ian Cotton had said: "We can confirm that African Footballer of the Year El Hadji Diouf has now signed a five-year deal with Liverpool, which is wonderful news for everyone at the club.

"The Senegal striker will join up with his new team-mates when the squad report back for pre-season training in July."

Liverpool have already agreed terms with French side Sedan to sign Diouf's Senegalese team-mate Salif Diao.
Click to expand...

So the apparently the deal was not agreed until after the first round of the World cup, and certainly after probably the best game anyone had seen him play, which was no doubt the only game I had seen him play and that coupled with his reputation as African player of the year would have been why I was so made up when we got him.......sadly

regards
 
Both managers were good but not good enough.

Houllier took over a club that needed reform and he did very well, installed some much needed professionalism and got us winning trophies again.
Sadly he went wrong trying to turn an effective cup team into a League winning team and I don't think he would ever have turned it around. It was right that he went when he did but he did more good than harm certainly

Benitez took over a team that was generally in good shape, better than the one Houllier inherited, and one that had qualified for the CL. His achievement in winning that in 2005 was incredible and whatever you say about him you can't take that away from him.
It could be that Houllier laid the groundwork and Benitez built on that and took us a bit further.

Ultimately though he also failed to make the next step. People can argue that he had a more difficult situation but he still made mistakes, he still made bad decisions and he still made shit signings. We were right to get rid of him when we did.

In terms of legacy, immediately Houllier left a CL campaign for Benitez to work with. The same can't be said for Benitez for Hodgson. And I would lay the blame firmly with the manager for last season's failure. In terms of squad, its touch and go there, but I do know that even with the dead wood Benitez left there aren't so many 'Oh PLEASE do not pass to him' type players that Houllier left (Biscan, Traore, Diao, Diouf)

Longer term time MIGHT tell but its too early to say now
 
If only Houllier had signed Anelka permanently instead of Diouf and bought Duff instead of Cheyrou and Diao.
 
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41729.msg1169024#msg1169024 date=1283425532]
No problem, but in fairness it comes across as justification for buying dross players.

Rafa spent 230 million pounds, and even if that is the same amount as Houillier (148 million) after adjusting for inflation; I don't feel that exonerates either manager.

It's like when Rafa went after Ferguson talking about how much money the Mancs had spent..The main problem wasnt that they had more money, even if it obviously WAS a problem..the main problem was that we kept buying crap players.

I know I come across as a Rafa-basher, but it's mainly because I KNOW he could have been a great manager had he changed a few things about him.

Opportunity lost.

The fact that we can use sums to say 'well, he spent less than Houiller after adjusting for inflation' rings a little hollow.
[/quote]


well, i can't really disagree with much of that, but i was never claiming to excuse mistakes, just trying to explode the myth as i see it that rafa was particularly well supported in the transfer market.

and having forced myself to look over the figures, i'm more convinced than ever that i'm right. i think from memory that they both spent around £80m net in total, so unless one thinks that there was no increase in prices whatsoever, it's barely deniable that GH was better supported than benitez.
 
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41729.msg1168957#msg1168957 date=1283414772]
Yes, it's a bit excessive.

I'll admit that, but I think the point still stands..Houiller was quite profligate in buying crappy players, as was Rafa.

Perhaps Houillier was worse in relative terms considering inflation, but it's not surprising that we're suffering with many tears of bad buys.

One thing I will suggest is that Hodgson is in a position worse than Rafa's and Houlier's put together.
[/quote]
I think all managers can be profligate at buying crappy players. Ferguson may not buy as many, but he certainly spends the money on them when he does - Hargreaves, Veron, Anderson, Taibi to name a few. Its just that because we support LFC, we put our managers under the microscope. Souness bought some rotters as did Dalglish. I won't go back further because the transfer market then was incomparable imo.

I'd agree that Hodgson is in a worse position. He clearly has little or no money to spend, which I think was part of the reason for his appointment - ie a man to get the best out of a bad / worsening financial situation.

As an aside, are Arsenal suffering due to years of bad buys? They've not won a trophy for longer than us and although their playing style is better, even their fans moan that style over substance can't go on forever. So if they haven't had years of bad buys what's their malaise?

PS Is there any update on the subject of the thread? I've got £20 on Houllier!
 
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=41729.msg1169039#msg1169039 date=1283428275]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=41729.msg1169024#msg1169024 date=1283425532]
No problem, but in fairness it comes across as justification for buying dross players.

Rafa spent 230 million pounds, and even if that is the same amount as Houillier (148 million) after adjusting for inflation; I don't feel that exonerates either manager.

It's like when Rafa went after Ferguson talking about how much money the Mancs had spent..The main problem wasnt that they had more money, even if it obviously WAS a problem..the main problem was that we kept buying crap players.

I know I come across as a Rafa-basher, but it's mainly because I KNOW he could have been a great manager had he changed a few things about him.

Opportunity lost.

The fact that we can use sums to say 'well, he spent less than Houiller after adjusting for inflation' rings a little hollow.
[/quote]


well, i can't really disagree with much of that, but i was never claiming to excuse mistakes, just trying to explode the myth as i see it that rafa was particularly well supported in the transfer market.

and having forced myself to look over the figures, i'm more convinced than ever that i'm right. i think from memory that they both spent around £80m net in total, so unless one thinks that there was no increase in prices whatsoever, it's barely deniable that GH was better supported than benitez.
[/quote]

Yep, I'd agree with that.
 
[quote author=Wilko link=topic=41729.msg1169037#msg1169037 date=1283427433]
If only Houllier had signed Anelka permanently instead of Diouf and bought Duff instead of Cheyrou and Diao.

[/quote]

That decision to pass Anelka up in favour of Spit was his first serious gaffe IMO. We'd been flying the previous season, but GH went and decided to "fix" what wasn't broke. Keegan dropped a very similar rick when he brought Asprilla into a set-up over at the Toon which had been firing nicely.
 
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41729.msg1169050#msg1169050 date=1283430103]
[quote author=Wilko link=topic=41729.msg1169037#msg1169037 date=1283427433]
If only Houllier had signed Anelka permanently instead of Diouf and bought Duff instead of Cheyrou and Diao.

[/quote]

That decision to pass Anelka up in favour of Spit was his first serious gaffe IMO. We'd been flying the previous season, but GH went and decided to "fix" what wasn't broke. Keegan dropped a very similar rick when he brought Asprilla into a set-up over at the Toon which had been firing nicely.
[/quote]

I wouldn't say it wasn't broke as such. Admittedly we could have just kept Robbie but after he had gone we did need another striker. Problem was that Diouf was not the one we needed and Anelka MIGHT have been.

What made matters worse was that Houllier decided to stick with Diouf, moving him to other positions etc, rather than admitting the transfer was a mistake and moving him on. In fairness to Benitez I don't think he would have done that. He might well have bought him in the first place but he did move his mistakes on quickly. Shame he had to do it SO often!
 
Fair points Richey, and yes, we did need another striker too. The "fixing what wasn't broke" bit refers to the fact that Anelka had been an important part of the line-up which took us so close to the league and that, in refusing to sign him up permanently, GH ignored the role Anelka played in getting us to where we stood that summer. Letting him go would have been a blunder whoever we signed instead. The fact that his replacement turned out to be a vastly overrated waster with an IQ lower than his neck size just added insult to injury.
 
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41729.msg1169050#msg1169050 date=1283430103]
[quote author=Wilko link=topic=41729.msg1169037#msg1169037 date=1283427433]
If only Houllier had signed Anelka permanently instead of Diouf and bought Duff instead of Cheyrou and Diao.

[/quote]

That decision to pass Anelka up in favour of Spit was his first serious gaffe IMO. We'd been flying the previous season, but GH went and decided to "fix" what wasn't broke. Keegan dropped a very similar rick when he brought Asprilla into a set-up over at the Toon which had been firing nicely.
[/quote]

Slightly different with Asprilla. If memory serves, Ferdinand got injured around January and Keegan decided to spend money on a replacement to keep up the Title charge. It took so long to push the transfer through that by the time the lad arrived Ferdinand was almost fit again. Having spent so much money on Faustino, Keegan felt obliged to squeeze him into the team which messed up the balance which contributed to throwing the League away.
 
I'd forgotten the background, so thanks for that, but I think the point stands. Asprilla was a totally different type of player from Ferdinand, so WTF Keegan thought he was doing signing him in the first place was a bit of a mystery (which I remember some querying at the time), and after that long delay Keegan should have had the courage/tactical nous/both to keep him back until they'd secured the title. I know that would have been easier said than done, but there was a title at stake.
 
[quote author=Delinquent link=topic=41729.msg1169067#msg1169067 date=1283435830]
I'm glad he did - I loved watching Asprilla play. Such a languid, almost clumsy style. Deceptively skillful.
[/quote]

His performance against Bara was majestic.
Newcastle v Barcelona
 
Oh, he had tremendous ability, no question, but in a way that was the problem. It got to be that everything went through him and the balance of the side was ruined.
 
Don't remember Keith Gillespie being that good.

Showing some fresh pair of heals there.
 
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=41729.msg1168706#msg1168706 date=1283358264]
Houllier would be about the best possible manager they could appoint.

Perhaps McDonald would agree to be his assistant. Nice Liverpool link, and some Villa continuity.
[/quote]Well Brandon, Houllier has been really shit.
 
[quote author=Tuher link=topic=41729.msg1244678#msg1244678 date=1294307254]
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=41729.msg1168706#msg1168706 date=1283358264]
Houllier would be about the best possible manager they could appoint.

Perhaps McDonald would agree to be his assistant. Nice Liverpool link, and some Villa continuity.
[/quote]Well Brandon, Houllier has been really shit.
[/quote]

Hodgson has been much worse though...
 
[quote author=Tuher link=topic=41729.msg1244678#msg1244678 date=1294307254]
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=41729.msg1168706#msg1168706 date=1283358264]
Houllier would be about the best possible manager they could appoint.

Perhaps McDonald would agree to be his assistant. Nice Liverpool link, and some Villa continuity.
[/quote]Well Brandon, Houllier has been really shit.
[/quote]

He certainly has, Tahor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom