Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
and probably two or three successors before the start of the PL. They say that its all about results (ie "form"), which means they will judge managers on their recent past rather than their possible futures. That's not the Liverpool way I grew up with
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 16
|
By:
Football today wasn't as it was yesterday, i think most clubs living in this new sky sports era would have sacked Fergie back then, absolutely ridiculous really but that's the times now, sad times.
|
|
By:
i agree with you.
however, i think kenny lost friends on the board with his PR this year. |
|
By:
You have to say as a decision its a pretty big one, on one hand a club legend player and manager, who came back at their request, got them back into european football and won thier first trophy in six years, narrowly missing out on another,
However presided over the worse league form for decades, and a set of league results that would have seen most managers removed It seems to me they had calculated this and only a fa cup final win would/could have reversed the decision, I would imagine a shortlist of possible replacements was already in place before that game began |
|
By:
Any board worth their salt would have sacked him over the Suarez fiasco.
|
|
By:
after his outlay on carroll, henderson & downing and then delivering that league finish, the carling cup was never going to save him was it?
|
|
By:
there is a problem with this line of argument though.
as we all know fergie struggled in his first few years, and this is often referred to when a manager gets sacked for a poor performance. however, einstein got sh11te reports at school. that doesnt mean that every kid that gets sh1tte reports is going to make good. in a similar fashion, every manager that does poor isnt going to get the later success that fergie got. i know its a catch 22 situation, and there is no easy solution. when a manager is doing poorly, is it cos he needs more time or is it cos he is a poor manager. in an age of needing instant results i think that those managers needing more time will fall the same way as those that are poor. |
|
By:
obviously shows how desperately they need the CL money and like yesterday.
not that changing the manager will probably make any difference in the short term. |
|
By:
it can make a difference if it gives the team 'heart'. look at chelsea.
|
|
By:
the point of a board is to be able to put someone in place who can move the club forward, and they should be able to detect that progress as a general trend rather than simply base it on current form.
if the MD had said "we don't like the football, these players aren't progressing, we are heading the wrong way, the future looks bleak", then I would at least accept the rationale. but he didn't, he said its results based, which means that any manager will be held to hostage to immediate return rather than future ambitions. it means there is no upside in buying promising players, or blooding youth team prospects because you would only be feathering the nest for the next man. as I said its a real departure for the ethics of Liverpool as a club and they are simply not rich enough to work in such a haphazard way, writing off manager salaries, creating massive player turnover. it makes no sense |
|
By:
do you think kenny's abrasive nature could have been a factor?
|
|
By:
What they say publicly and what they think will not be the same thing. The league results have been so bad, the owners had a decision to make. Other factors such as the handling of Suarez then get thrown in. 8-10 more leagues points and he would probably have had another season. Too many terrible defeats in 2012 makes it difficult to say the team have made progress.
|
|
By:
Kenny was left in the lurch durin the Suarez episode. No PR, no management input.
|
|
By:
was he left in the lurch, or was he simply unable to handle the situation?
all he need to do was say "the lad said something he didnt mean, we all do it at times, he is going to see evra to apologise" even if he didnt mean it, that would have been the end of it. |
|
By:
left in the lurch and simply unable to handle the situation. Was Kenny a useful idiot for others? Obvious to anyone that he should not have been making comments or supporting t-shirt campaigns. Seems the management (and those at the club who should have been managing the situation) were happy to let him dig a hole for himself.
|
|
By:
think you are spot on marxist.
kenny boobed, and the board boobed even more by not stepping in. but maybe they were happy to let him shoot himself like that. not liverpools finest hour. |
|
By:
Don't see the issue here. Even Fergie has admitted that he'd have been sacked early on at United if it was the present day.
Even the United fans wanted him sacked back in 89/90 Pretty sure that if a new manager at United goes 3-4 years without winning or even looking like winning anything then they'd be sacked. |