The Hodgson Out Thread
- Thread starter localny
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126285#msg1126285 date=1277475728]
This goes against netiquette, & the poster isnt around to ask, but I doubt he'll mind. This is from another forum & sums it up completely for me:
[/quote]
I'm not buying this at all.
We're not appointing Hodgson because of his stunning record, technical innovation or youtyhful promise.
Take a skim through his history - one thing is immediately clear - he doesn't hang around at clubs for long - he han't managed the same cloub for much lonfer than 2 years since we were regularly dominating the league.
As for his much vaunted record at Fulham... well, his wins to games played percentage is only marginally better than he achieved at Blackburn, while he was getting them relegated. When people question his suitability to manage Liverpool it's because his record is mediocre. He made a pigs ear of the Bkacburn job, depsite being financially backed.
In fact.. his management record in the English game is worse than Souness'
He's flavour of the month because of his European adventure with Fulham, but his appointmment can only mean we have no money to spend and there are no new owners on the horizon (can't see any Arabs wanting him for the job after his marvelous record managing the UAE).
It's not a matter of not getting behind him... it's more what his appointment would mean..
This goes against netiquette, & the poster isnt around to ask, but I doubt he'll mind. This is from another forum & sums it up completely for me:
[/quote]
I'm not buying this at all.
We're not appointing Hodgson because of his stunning record, technical innovation or youtyhful promise.
Take a skim through his history - one thing is immediately clear - he doesn't hang around at clubs for long - he han't managed the same cloub for much lonfer than 2 years since we were regularly dominating the league.
As for his much vaunted record at Fulham... well, his wins to games played percentage is only marginally better than he achieved at Blackburn, while he was getting them relegated. When people question his suitability to manage Liverpool it's because his record is mediocre. He made a pigs ear of the Bkacburn job, depsite being financially backed.
In fact.. his management record in the English game is worse than Souness'
He's flavour of the month because of his European adventure with Fulham, but his appointmment can only mean we have no money to spend and there are no new owners on the horizon (can't see any Arabs wanting him for the job after his marvelous record managing the UAE).
It's not a matter of not getting behind him... it's more what his appointment would mean..
S
Squiggles
Guest
[quote author=StevieM link=topic=40731.msg1126725#msg1126725 date=1277573878]
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126285#msg1126285 date=1277475728]
This goes against netiquette, & the poster isnt around to ask, but I doubt he'll mind. This is from another forum & sums it up completely for me:
[/quote]
I'm not buying this at all.
We're not appointing Hodgson because of his stunning record, technical innovation or youtyhful promise.
Take a skim through his history - one thing is immediately clear - he doesn't hang around at clubs for long - he han't managed the same cloub for much lonfer than 2 years since we were regularly dominating the league.
As for his much vaunted record at Fulham... well, his wins to games played percentage is only marginally better than he achieved at Blackburn, while he was getting them relegated. When people question his suitability to manage Liverpool it's because his record is mediocre. He made a pigs ear of the Bkacburn job, depsite being financially backed.
In fact.. his management record in the English game is worse than Souness'
He's flavour of the month because of his European adventure with Fulham, but his appointmment can only mean we have no money to spend and there are no new owners on the horizon (can't see any Arabs wanting him for the job after his marvelous record managing the UAE).
It's not a matter of not getting behind him... it's more what his appointment would mean..
[/quote]
His appointment means we've got very little money to spend, yeah, agreed. But there is still a case for getting behind him.
And comparing win percentages to a "bankrolled" Blackburn team to his Fulham side which operate the third lowest wage and transfer budget in the league is like comparing Man City and Hull. Just stupid.
He also didn't get Blackburn relegated. Skim through his history again, why don't you?
As I've said time and time again, some of the shit written about Hodgson is complete bollocks.
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126285#msg1126285 date=1277475728]
This goes against netiquette, & the poster isnt around to ask, but I doubt he'll mind. This is from another forum & sums it up completely for me:
[/quote]
I'm not buying this at all.
We're not appointing Hodgson because of his stunning record, technical innovation or youtyhful promise.
Take a skim through his history - one thing is immediately clear - he doesn't hang around at clubs for long - he han't managed the same cloub for much lonfer than 2 years since we were regularly dominating the league.
As for his much vaunted record at Fulham... well, his wins to games played percentage is only marginally better than he achieved at Blackburn, while he was getting them relegated. When people question his suitability to manage Liverpool it's because his record is mediocre. He made a pigs ear of the Bkacburn job, depsite being financially backed.
In fact.. his management record in the English game is worse than Souness'
He's flavour of the month because of his European adventure with Fulham, but his appointmment can only mean we have no money to spend and there are no new owners on the horizon (can't see any Arabs wanting him for the job after his marvelous record managing the UAE).
It's not a matter of not getting behind him... it's more what his appointment would mean..
[/quote]
His appointment means we've got very little money to spend, yeah, agreed. But there is still a case for getting behind him.
And comparing win percentages to a "bankrolled" Blackburn team to his Fulham side which operate the third lowest wage and transfer budget in the league is like comparing Man City and Hull. Just stupid.
He also didn't get Blackburn relegated. Skim through his history again, why don't you?
As I've said time and time again, some of the shit written about Hodgson is complete bollocks.
His appointment means he's a good manager, & all teh managers who are any fucking better arent utterly demented enough to come here.
Why the fuck would any manager with a decent job come to us?!
Hodgson is a proven Premiership manager who speaks multiple languages & never really got the shot at the big time his career deserved. Add into the fact he's prepared to risk coming into a club that could be bought at any time & therefore his job be on the line & it's a no brainer.
If you wanna start throwing win percentages round lets do it with his Inter Milan team second time round eh? 66%+ if memory serves me correct, 10% higher than Shanklys & even more than 10% on Paisleys. But that wouldnt be right, cos it was a shorter time period.
You can make stats read however you want.
Why the fuck would any manager with a decent job come to us?!
Hodgson is a proven Premiership manager who speaks multiple languages & never really got the shot at the big time his career deserved. Add into the fact he's prepared to risk coming into a club that could be bought at any time & therefore his job be on the line & it's a no brainer.
If you wanna start throwing win percentages round lets do it with his Inter Milan team second time round eh? 66%+ if memory serves me correct, 10% higher than Shanklys & even more than 10% on Paisleys. But that wouldnt be right, cos it was a shorter time period.
You can make stats read however you want.
[quote author=Terrier link=topic=40731.msg1126742#msg1126742 date=1277575651]
It's truly shameful that many think that no one would want the Liverpool job.
I'll give you 6 reasons why anyone with half a brain would love to manage us.
Torres, Gerrard, Reina, Masha, Carra, Johnson
[/quote]
If you were a manager on a good wage, & a chairman you got on with you'd be mental to come to LFC.
I shouldnt have to explain why.
It's truly shameful that many think that no one would want the Liverpool job.
I'll give you 6 reasons why anyone with half a brain would love to manage us.
Torres, Gerrard, Reina, Masha, Carra, Johnson
[/quote]
If you were a manager on a good wage, & a chairman you got on with you'd be mental to come to LFC.
I shouldnt have to explain why.
S
Squiggles
Guest
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126743#msg1126743 date=1277575758]
[quote author=Terrier link=topic=40731.msg1126742#msg1126742 date=1277575651]
It's truly shameful that many think that no one would want the Liverpool job.
I'll give you 6 reasons why anyone with half a brain would love to manage us.
Torres, Gerrard, Reina, Masha, Carra, Johnson
[/quote]
If you were a manager on a good wage, & a chairman you got on with you'd be mental to come to LFC.
I shouldnt have to explain why.
[/quote]
It's not that extreme mate, but it is a reason why the top managers won't look at us twice.
We are still Liverpool, and that does mean something.
The opportunity to coach a club of our stature does not come along very often, and the owners will hopefully be gone in less than a year.
[quote author=Terrier link=topic=40731.msg1126742#msg1126742 date=1277575651]
It's truly shameful that many think that no one would want the Liverpool job.
I'll give you 6 reasons why anyone with half a brain would love to manage us.
Torres, Gerrard, Reina, Masha, Carra, Johnson
[/quote]
If you were a manager on a good wage, & a chairman you got on with you'd be mental to come to LFC.
I shouldnt have to explain why.
[/quote]
It's not that extreme mate, but it is a reason why the top managers won't look at us twice.
We are still Liverpool, and that does mean something.
The opportunity to coach a club of our stature does not come along very often, and the owners will hopefully be gone in less than a year.
I can't see what difference a Radio City interview is going to make, other than to confirm prejudices one way or the other. Liverpool FC is going to be unaffected by the words of a former Manager unless they were to reveal some illegality or other.
On the question of his severance I think it was much less than Gerard Houllier received and was a negotiated settlement so I can't see that it's in the slightest controversial.
About charity donations, I don't think it's necessary to criticise it's value or use it to try and score some sort of political point. From what I've read moneys have been given to causes he and his wife were already involved in.
As for a new Manager I think it's unlikely we'll get a Manager as well qualified or sought after as Benitez but no doubt the club will attract some ambitious applicants. Given that the board have acted to remove a Manager now means that we have to choose from whats available rather than desirable.
This is a crucial time. I'm hoping the appointment comes immediately after the WC so some changes can be made.
On the question of his severance I think it was much less than Gerard Houllier received and was a negotiated settlement so I can't see that it's in the slightest controversial.
About charity donations, I don't think it's necessary to criticise it's value or use it to try and score some sort of political point. From what I've read moneys have been given to causes he and his wife were already involved in.
As for a new Manager I think it's unlikely we'll get a Manager as well qualified or sought after as Benitez but no doubt the club will attract some ambitious applicants. Given that the board have acted to remove a Manager now means that we have to choose from whats available rather than desirable.
This is a crucial time. I'm hoping the appointment comes immediately after the WC so some changes can be made.
[quote author=jexykrodic link=topic=40731.msg1126756#msg1126756 date=1277577809]
I can't see what difference a Radio City interview is going to make, other than to confirm prejudices one way or the other. Liverpool FC is going to be unaffected by the words of a former Manager unless they were to reveal some illegality or other.
On the question of his severance I think it was much less than Gerard Houllier received and was a negotiated settlement so I can't see that it's in the slightest controversial.
About charity donations, I don't think it's necessary to criticise it's value or use it to try and score some sort of political point. From what I've read moneys have been given to causes he and his wife were already involved in.
As for a new Manager I think it's unlikely we'll get a Manager as well qualified or sought after as Benitez but no doubt the club will attract some ambitious applicants. Given that the board have acted to remove a Manager now means that we have to choose from whats available rather than desirable.
This is a crucial time. I'm hoping the appointment comes immediately after the WC so some changes can be made.
[/quote]
I generally agree with you on this issue but I don't see how that bolded bit follows. We have to choose the right man for the job. That absolutely does NOT mean we have to restrict ourselves to what's currently available. Quite the contrary - we should give ourselves the time to make sure, not make do.
I can't see what difference a Radio City interview is going to make, other than to confirm prejudices one way or the other. Liverpool FC is going to be unaffected by the words of a former Manager unless they were to reveal some illegality or other.
On the question of his severance I think it was much less than Gerard Houllier received and was a negotiated settlement so I can't see that it's in the slightest controversial.
About charity donations, I don't think it's necessary to criticise it's value or use it to try and score some sort of political point. From what I've read moneys have been given to causes he and his wife were already involved in.
As for a new Manager I think it's unlikely we'll get a Manager as well qualified or sought after as Benitez but no doubt the club will attract some ambitious applicants. Given that the board have acted to remove a Manager now means that we have to choose from whats available rather than desirable.
This is a crucial time. I'm hoping the appointment comes immediately after the WC so some changes can be made.
[/quote]
I generally agree with you on this issue but I don't see how that bolded bit follows. We have to choose the right man for the job. That absolutely does NOT mean we have to restrict ourselves to what's currently available. Quite the contrary - we should give ourselves the time to make sure, not make do.
Well, who knows? That might indeed be possible. Nobody ever knows the answer to keni's question in advance when they begin an executive search. They go through the process, gathering info on the way about who might be up for the job (currently employed or not) then, when they're satisfied they've had a good look at the runners and riders, they make their move. Why should we be any different?
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=40731.msg1126871#msg1126871 date=1277588879]
Well, who knows? That might indeed be possible. Nobody ever knows the answer to keni's question in advance when they begin an executive search. They go through the process, gathering info on the way about who might be up for the job (currently employed or not) then, when they're satisfied they've had a good look at the runners and riders, they make their move. Why should we be any different?
[/quote]
How do you know that hasn't already been done?
It's not like there is some mystery 50 year old no-one has ever heard of waiting to become a world class manager.
If we know all the names in the game, it's safe to say that so do they.
Well, who knows? That might indeed be possible. Nobody ever knows the answer to keni's question in advance when they begin an executive search. They go through the process, gathering info on the way about who might be up for the job (currently employed or not) then, when they're satisfied they've had a good look at the runners and riders, they make their move. Why should we be any different?
[/quote]
How do you know that hasn't already been done?
It's not like there is some mystery 50 year old no-one has ever heard of waiting to become a world class manager.
If we know all the names in the game, it's safe to say that so do they.
Because there hasn't been the time to do it properly. No other company worth as much as LFC (still) is would jump into such a crucial appointment this quickly.
Other clubs appoint managers quickly as well. They have to... we can't just remain rudderless.
For all the talk of wanting us to take our time, you fail to give any concrete reasons for doing so other than random notions about not settling for second best.
At the end of the day, the list of candidates we have before us in 6 months or a year from now will be more or less the same as it is now. It's generally more or less the same bunch of guys moving from job to job and they're all pretty well known. If we intend on waiting, we're essentially gambling on a) Mourinho being available and wanting to come to us or b) the emergance of a really exciting young manager who will want to come to us.
It doesn't make sense and it just seems as though you're trying to construct an argument for appointing Dalglish any way you can.
For all the talk of wanting us to take our time, you fail to give any concrete reasons for doing so other than random notions about not settling for second best.
At the end of the day, the list of candidates we have before us in 6 months or a year from now will be more or less the same as it is now. It's generally more or less the same bunch of guys moving from job to job and they're all pretty well known. If we intend on waiting, we're essentially gambling on a) Mourinho being available and wanting to come to us or b) the emergance of a really exciting young manager who will want to come to us.
It doesn't make sense and it just seems as though you're trying to construct an argument for appointing Dalglish any way you can.
[quote author=keniget link=topic=40731.msg1126875#msg1126875 date=1277589396]
Other clubs appoint managers quickly as well. They have to... we can't just remain rudderless.
For all the talk of wanting us to take our time, you fail to give any concrete reasons for doing so other than random notions about not settling for second best.
At the end of the day, the list of candidates we have before us in 6 months or a year from now will be more or less the same as it is now. It's generally more or less the same bunch of guys moving from job to job and they're all pretty well known. If we intend on waiting, we're essentially gambling on a) Mourinho being available and wanting to come to us or b) the emergance of a really exciting young manager who will want to come to us.
It doesn't make sense and it just seems as though you're trying to construct an argument for appointing Dalglish any way you can.
[/quote]
^
This. Totally this
Other clubs appoint managers quickly as well. They have to... we can't just remain rudderless.
For all the talk of wanting us to take our time, you fail to give any concrete reasons for doing so other than random notions about not settling for second best.
At the end of the day, the list of candidates we have before us in 6 months or a year from now will be more or less the same as it is now. It's generally more or less the same bunch of guys moving from job to job and they're all pretty well known. If we intend on waiting, we're essentially gambling on a) Mourinho being available and wanting to come to us or b) the emergance of a really exciting young manager who will want to come to us.
It doesn't make sense and it just seems as though you're trying to construct an argument for appointing Dalglish any way you can.
[/quote]
^
This. Totally this
The introduction of transfer windows has impacted how you appoint managers too. Whereas previously you could take your time, now we need to get moving. Disappointing really.
I tell you what, that Florence (of the And The Machine) is a proper headwrecking cunty cunt. I'm fed up watching the stupid, toga wearing, warbling garbage on EVERY fucking festival. She's played about 3 different slots at Glasto already. And Terrier is a fucking cunting WHOPPER
Whopper is such a great word. Not used enough.
It is but don't quote me on it.
[quote author=Sheik Yerbouti link=topic=40731.msg1126878#msg1126878 date=1277589870]
I tell you what, that Florence (of the And The Machine) is a proper headwrecking cunty cunt. I'm fed up watching the stupid, toga wearing, warbling garbage on EVERY fucking festival. She's played about 3 different slots at Glasto already. And Terrier is a fucking cunting WHOPPER
[/quote]
It would make you feel like throwing your hands up in the air.
I tell you what, that Florence (of the And The Machine) is a proper headwrecking cunty cunt. I'm fed up watching the stupid, toga wearing, warbling garbage on EVERY fucking festival. She's played about 3 different slots at Glasto already. And Terrier is a fucking cunting WHOPPER
[/quote]
It would make you feel like throwing your hands up in the air.
Naughty Rosco messing around with my posts.
Tut tut.
Tut tut.
This taken from another forum just expresses how bloody negative some fans are:
[quote author=Squiggles link=topic=40731.msg1126728#msg1126728 date=1277574229]
[quote author=StevieM link=topic=40731.msg1126725#msg1126725 date=1277573878]
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126285#msg1126285 date=1277475728]
This goes against netiquette, & the poster isnt around to ask, but I doubt he'll mind. This is from another forum & sums it up completely for me:
[/quote]
I'm not buying this at all.
We're not appointing Hodgson because of his stunning record, technical innovation or youtyhful promise.
Take a skim through his history - one thing is immediately clear - he doesn't hang around at clubs for long - he han't managed the same cloub for much lonfer than 2 years since we were regularly dominating the league.
As for his much vaunted record at Fulham... well, his wins to games played percentage is only marginally better than he achieved at Blackburn, while he was getting them relegated. When people question his suitability to manage Liverpool it's because his record is mediocre. He made a pigs ear of the Bkacburn job, depsite being financially backed.
In fact.. his management record in the English game is worse than Souness'
He's flavour of the month because of his European adventure with Fulham, but his appointmment can only mean we have no money to spend and there are no new owners on the horizon (can't see any Arabs wanting him for the job after his marvelous record managing the UAE).
It's not a matter of not getting behind him... it's more what his appointment would mean..
[/quote]
His appointment means we've got very little money to spend, yeah, agreed. But there is still a case for getting behind him.
And comparing win percentages to a "bankrolled" Blackburn team to his Fulham side which operate the third lowest wage and transfer budget in the league is like comparing Man City and Hull. Just stupid.
He also didn't get Blackburn relegated. Skim through his history again, why don't you?
As I've said time and time again, some of the shit written about Hodgson is complete bollocks.
[/quote]
Don't get me wrong... I'll get behind whoevere our manager is... but that won't stop me having an opinion as to whether I think he's the right man for the job.
As for Blackburn... they were bottom of the League when he was sacked and they couldn;t be saved. I'd find it hard to blame Brian Kidd for getting them relegated... wouldn't you?
You are right... there is an awful load of shit written about Hodgson. He's clearly got certain managerial abilities. He's being hired because he's experienced and has a track record of getting reasonable results with little financial backing.
If we're looking for a manager that might bebale to coax a few fine performances out of the likes of El Zhar, PLessis, Lucas & Insua, etc in order to secure us a spot in the top half of the league and a good cup run... then I think he'd be a fine choice. He is adept at taking on problem clubs and stabalising them. So let's be clear what his appointment means.
If we're looking for someone to inspire the likes of Gerrad & Torres to stay and push on that little bit further than the 08/09 season and harness the attacking talents of the team to play a more fluid attacking style of football... then Hodgson is simply not the man.
As I said... don't dislike him... if appointed I'll be behind him... I just don't like the direction this is all heading.
[quote author=StevieM link=topic=40731.msg1126725#msg1126725 date=1277573878]
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126285#msg1126285 date=1277475728]
This goes against netiquette, & the poster isnt around to ask, but I doubt he'll mind. This is from another forum & sums it up completely for me:
[/quote]
I'm not buying this at all.
We're not appointing Hodgson because of his stunning record, technical innovation or youtyhful promise.
Take a skim through his history - one thing is immediately clear - he doesn't hang around at clubs for long - he han't managed the same cloub for much lonfer than 2 years since we were regularly dominating the league.
As for his much vaunted record at Fulham... well, his wins to games played percentage is only marginally better than he achieved at Blackburn, while he was getting them relegated. When people question his suitability to manage Liverpool it's because his record is mediocre. He made a pigs ear of the Bkacburn job, depsite being financially backed.
In fact.. his management record in the English game is worse than Souness'
He's flavour of the month because of his European adventure with Fulham, but his appointmment can only mean we have no money to spend and there are no new owners on the horizon (can't see any Arabs wanting him for the job after his marvelous record managing the UAE).
It's not a matter of not getting behind him... it's more what his appointment would mean..
[/quote]
His appointment means we've got very little money to spend, yeah, agreed. But there is still a case for getting behind him.
And comparing win percentages to a "bankrolled" Blackburn team to his Fulham side which operate the third lowest wage and transfer budget in the league is like comparing Man City and Hull. Just stupid.
He also didn't get Blackburn relegated. Skim through his history again, why don't you?
As I've said time and time again, some of the shit written about Hodgson is complete bollocks.
[/quote]
Don't get me wrong... I'll get behind whoevere our manager is... but that won't stop me having an opinion as to whether I think he's the right man for the job.
As for Blackburn... they were bottom of the League when he was sacked and they couldn;t be saved. I'd find it hard to blame Brian Kidd for getting them relegated... wouldn't you?
You are right... there is an awful load of shit written about Hodgson. He's clearly got certain managerial abilities. He's being hired because he's experienced and has a track record of getting reasonable results with little financial backing.
If we're looking for a manager that might bebale to coax a few fine performances out of the likes of El Zhar, PLessis, Lucas & Insua, etc in order to secure us a spot in the top half of the league and a good cup run... then I think he'd be a fine choice. He is adept at taking on problem clubs and stabalising them. So let's be clear what his appointment means.
If we're looking for someone to inspire the likes of Gerrad & Torres to stay and push on that little bit further than the 08/09 season and harness the attacking talents of the team to play a more fluid attacking style of football... then Hodgson is simply not the man.
As I said... don't dislike him... if appointed I'll be behind him... I just don't like the direction this is all heading.
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126888#msg1126888 date=1277593998]
This taken from another forum just expresses how bloody negative some fans are:
I think that's a problem for the club.
And to be honest I really don't understand the attitude. Is it borne out of some sort of loyalty to Benitez?
I find it strange.
This taken from another forum just expresses how bloody negative some fans are:
[/quote]
I think that's a problem for the club.
And to be honest I really don't understand the attitude. Is it borne out of some sort of loyalty to Benitez?
I find it strange.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=40731.msg1126917#msg1126917 date=1277622166]
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126888#msg1126888 date=1277593998]
This taken from another forum just expresses how bloody negative some fans are:
I think that's a problem for the club.
And to be honest I really don't understand the attitude. Is it borne out of some sort of loyalty to Benitez?
I find it strange.
[/quote]
I'd say it's more norne out of the fact that all the "positive" news that has come out of the club in the last while has turned out to be mostly be false.. youy know.. new stadium, shovel in the ground, new owners, money available for players.. etc
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126888#msg1126888 date=1277593998]
This taken from another forum just expresses how bloody negative some fans are:
[/quote]
I think that's a problem for the club.
And to be honest I really don't understand the attitude. Is it borne out of some sort of loyalty to Benitez?
I find it strange.
[/quote]
I'd say it's more norne out of the fact that all the "positive" news that has come out of the club in the last while has turned out to be mostly be false.. youy know.. new stadium, shovel in the ground, new owners, money available for players.. etc
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=40731.msg1126917#msg1126917 date=1277622166]
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126888#msg1126888 date=1277593998]
This taken from another forum just expresses how bloody negative some fans are:
I think that's a problem for the club.
And to be honest I really don't understand the attitude. Is it borne out of some sort of loyalty to Benitez?
I find it strange.
[/quote]
You don't understand why there'd be an overwhelming air of negativity around the club? Really?
I know you didn't rate Benitez, but surely even you must recognize that the margins for his success were narrowed immensely due to the parlous financial state of the club. That situation is one that will just continue to get worse until it's resolved. Until we see new owners, and attempt to read through their bullshit, there's bound to be negativity.
We are in a bad time for the club, at a moment of uncertainty, and due to poor performance following that, we have to make a crucial appointment from a moment of weakness. These things are the undoing of many clubs, especially now that due to no new stadium, we are relatively more dependent on CL money, with less assurance of getting it. We are also at a period of transition in terms of our most senior players.
I'm not like those on RAWK who are looking with suspicion at every piece of news coming from the club, but other than our commercial dealings of late, there simply hasn't been any positive news in the last couple years.
It's not that strange.
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=40731.msg1126888#msg1126888 date=1277593998]
This taken from another forum just expresses how bloody negative some fans are:
[/quote]
I think that's a problem for the club.
And to be honest I really don't understand the attitude. Is it borne out of some sort of loyalty to Benitez?
I find it strange.
[/quote]
You don't understand why there'd be an overwhelming air of negativity around the club? Really?
I know you didn't rate Benitez, but surely even you must recognize that the margins for his success were narrowed immensely due to the parlous financial state of the club. That situation is one that will just continue to get worse until it's resolved. Until we see new owners, and attempt to read through their bullshit, there's bound to be negativity.
We are in a bad time for the club, at a moment of uncertainty, and due to poor performance following that, we have to make a crucial appointment from a moment of weakness. These things are the undoing of many clubs, especially now that due to no new stadium, we are relatively more dependent on CL money, with less assurance of getting it. We are also at a period of transition in terms of our most senior players.
I'm not like those on RAWK who are looking with suspicion at every piece of news coming from the club, but other than our commercial dealings of late, there simply hasn't been any positive news in the last couple years.
It's not that strange.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=40731.msg1126924#msg1126924 date=1277624290]
I don't understand why everyone has become a Rebel style conspiracy theorist Fark. That's what I'm getting at.
There have been a plethora of stories/rumours with no obvious basis in fact or logic.
[/quote]
Simple black and white villains are a better target of completely impotent rage than are vague concepts like economics, debt, liquidity etc.
It's also fairly easy to hate management, during a recession, and there's an obvious precedent for the local fan base.
Especially when the owners are in fact cunts.
Did I leave anything out?
I don't understand why everyone has become a Rebel style conspiracy theorist Fark. That's what I'm getting at.
There have been a plethora of stories/rumours with no obvious basis in fact or logic.
[/quote]
Simple black and white villains are a better target of completely impotent rage than are vague concepts like economics, debt, liquidity etc.
It's also fairly easy to hate management, during a recession, and there's an obvious precedent for the local fan base.
Especially when the owners are in fact cunts.
Did I leave anything out?
Similar threads
