BASCOMBE EXCLUSIVE:RAFA WILL BE AXED

[Rashid]

It has nothing to do with Pro or Anti Rafa but more to do with what people are seeing wiht their own eyes and deciding for themselves what is right and wrong. Deciding between Hicks and Rafa is like comparing George W. Bush and Winston Churchill.

[Sangria]

This forum was full of Rafa dissenters a few weeks ago. A lot seem to have changed their minds very quickly though.

 

Do not agree with that mate. Some question his decisions at times but the majority on here are behind him. His team selections etc are open to question when things do not go right, but to say the forum is or was full of Rafa dissenters is of the mark.

I for one have always been behind him, he is a man of principle and in todays game it is a rare characteristic. One thing is for sure he wants the best for our club.

[Moschops II]

3) Bascombe had a good relationship with Rafa. Do you seriously think Rafa said, "Fuck off, I don't want to know you now" when he left for the NOTW? Who knows what editorial control Bascombe had to put up with at the Echo? If he'd still been at the Echo, we might not have heard any of this. Not because the NOTW editor is telling him to put a load of shite out, but because the Echo editor could well have said "Don't talk about that, LFC asked us not to."

 

Nail, head. Any change in the kind of stories Bascombe is running with now will have as much to do with no longer working for a local paper that *has* to maintain a good relationship with the club as now working for a Murdoch tabloid.

[Cardie]

It has nothing to do with Pro or Anti Rafa but more to do with what people are seeing wiht their own eyes and deciding for themselves what is right and wrong. Deciding between Hicks and Rafa is like comparing George W. Bush and Winston Churchill.

 

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

 

Are you not just using Rafa and pretending you want him around to promote an agenda?

 

Surely the reality is you want both parties out and replaced with DIC + a Clone of Wenger but for now you're willing to jump into bed with Rafa and pretend otherwise to work on the bigger of your two targets?

[fin-bat]

Maybe Bascombe left to work for NOTW by Rafas permission in the first place... "Look Chris, could you move to London, so I can get my voice better heard in the national media. Go and get a job from NOTW so we can spout some crap every once and a while if needed. Start with a made up story about Diego Forlan, will you Chris."

[spider-neil]

I read plenty of post where people didn't believe he could win the league, therefore it must naturally follow you want him sacked at the league is the bread and butter and there is no point in him being here, well careful what you wish for.

 

personally I think rafa being sacked would set us back years and our slump was nothing more than injuries to key players.

[t1971]

Maybe Bascombe left to work for NOTW by Rafas permission in the first place... "Look Chris, could you move to London, so I can get my voice better heard in the national media. Go and get a job from NOTW so we can spout some crap every once and a while if needed. Start with a made up story about Diego Forlan, will you Chris."

 

:thumbup: very good! lol

[RedPower]

I think he is being spendthrift with the truth.

 

Bascombe is saying that Rafa is definitely going to get sacked, so, if this story is a really one that has been placed on behalf of Rafa I can see see two scenarios:

 

1. Rafa has somehow caught wind of his imminent sacking and has asked Bascombe to break this news in order to cause outrage amonsgt the fans with the slim hope of frightening Hicks and Gillett into changing their minds.

 

2. Rafa is trying to strengthen his position against Hicks and Gillett so scare strories revealing his 'immenient' sacking are planted in the media, thus galvanising support for Rafa amongst the fans and sending a mesage of: "don't fuck with me" to the owners.

 

If scenario 2 is correct then Bascombe is making things up.

[ScouseAndy]

Bascombe is saying that Rafa is definitely going to get sacked, so, if this story is a really one that has been placed on behalf of Rafa I can see see two scenarios:

 

1. Rafa has somehow caught wind of his imminent sacking and has asked Bascombe to break this news in order to cause outrage amonsgt the fans with the slim hope of frightening Hicks and Gillett into changing their minds.

 

2. Rafa is trying to strengthen his position against Hicks and Gillett so scare strories revealing his 'immenient' sacking are planted in the media, thus galvanising support for Rafa amongst the fans and sending a mesage of: "don't fuck with me" to the owners.

 

If scenario 2 is correct then Bascombe is making things up.

 

Scenario 3. Editors have demanded a bullshit story to sell newspapers and as usual their shit rag journalists have obliged.

 

Shit newspaper, talks bollocks, why is everyone going mental over it?

[Randy Marsh]

Isnt there a direct route through to Gillets office, remember him always spouting on about how he will always talk to the fans. Someone give the man a ring! And another thing George, you where going on about one day wanting to sit on the kop. If you get shut of Rafa, then id stay away if i where you, for your own safety.

 

Ive got a feeling that maybe the rumours of a rift between the two are true. Gillet has been alarmingly quiet in all of this, its Hicks who is calling the shots. I find it hard to believe Gillet would behave the exact opposite to how he said he would. It was him that pushed and pushed and pushed Parry to sell him the club. I find it hard to thing he would come in and be so destructive after all the effort he has made. Got a feeling its Hicks calling the shots here. Maybe the rumours of Gillet looking for a buyer of Hicks' stake are true

[RedPower]

Scenario 3. Editors have demanded a bullshit story to sell newspapers and as usual their shit rag journalists have obliged.

 

Shit newspaper, talks bollocks, why is everyone going mental over it?

 

My post was in response to the theory that this story has been placed on behalf of Rafa, so although I'm inclined to agree with your scenario 3, it's not really applicible in this case.

[G Richards]

I'm really troubled by all of this. I will continue to hope that it is all salvaged.

 

If there are underlying issues between the owners, perhaps a good way forward would be if Hicks can sell out to Kraft. Gillett and Kraft might be a lot more palatable to Rafa, and Foster might take up his role with renewed vigour, thus marginalising Parry's lackadaisical transfer workrate and getting the business done in a timely manner. (By the way, Foster Gillett has been criticised for being absent, but he might have had to go back to America because both of the owners were arguing, so he couldn't really do his job).

 

I really hope Rafa stays. Just keep winning Rafa, so hopefully the time will be bought (terrible that it's needed, mind) to give the owners a chance to sort out what they need to.

 

I'm troubled, gutted, yet strangely hopeful. It might be that one of the owners will change and this will keep Rafa for the long term, as well as keep the purchase debt off the club.

 

Win-win. Is this still posible?

[ScouseAndy]

My post was in response to the theory that this story has been placed on behalf of Rafa, so although I'm inclined to agree with your scenario 3, it's not really applicible in this case.

 

Yeah sorry man not having a go at your post.

 

Just adding another scenario! :thumbsup:

[Randy Marsh]

Scenario 3. Editors have demanded a bullshit story to sell newspapers and as usual their shit rag journalists have obliged.

 

Shit newspaper, talks bollocks, why is everyone going mental over it?

 

The one thing we all have to take stock and look at here. Scum Of The World is a Sunday newspaper. Just look at what is going on, on here especially. 18pages of discussion on THAT newspaper. Probably countless reds will go out today and buy the rag, purely for this story. It generates publicity. Headlines sell newspapers. Im not going to question whether or not Bascombe's article has any truth, not for me to do. But what i will say is, he has done his job. He has sold newspapers and pleased his bosses. Think about it

[Unrighteous]

Hey guys? Foster HICKS is the 31 year old son... no?

[Red Nick]

Scenario 3. Editors have demanded a bullshit story to sell newspapers and as usual their shit rag journalists have obliged.

 

Shit newspaper, talks bollocks, why is everyone going mental over it?

 

Silence is golden

[Captain]

Scenario 3. Editors have demanded a bullshit story to sell newspapers and as usual their shit rag journalists have obliged.

 

Shit newspaper, talks bollocks, why is everyone going mental over it?

 

Because it's written by Bascombe, a journalist with a proven track record when it comes to Liverpool FC.

[Red Sun Rising]

It was written by Bascombe, not his employers. And all of you slagging him off and accusing him of making it up are bang out of order, as none of you know him. I know him, and I know he believes 100% that what he's written today is true.

 

Question whether he's right or wrong by all means, but don't question his integrity or honesty.

 

Anyone who thinks he's written this to make a name for himself or because his bosses want him to cause trouble is fucking kidding themselves.[/QUOTE]

 

Doing quite well until those last 12 words. It's the News of the World, trouble/scandal/shock -horror/circulation/lowest common denominator is exactly what they are about. So Bascombe believes/knows 100% that Maureen's 'no English club 'til next season' contractual clause is false? That in itself would be an 'exclusive'!

 

Bascombe is getting used to peddle an agenda, Murdoch's lackeys are loving it. His mates feel they have to say 'honest, he wrote it himself'; he's a journalist for fucks sake, what does that statement say about his integrity and the integrity of the bog roll he's writing for?

[Red Nick]

I'm really troubled by all of this. I will continue to hope that it is all salvaged.

 

If there are underlying issues between the owners, perhaps a good way forward would be if Hicks can sell out to Kraft. Gillett and Kraft might be a lot more palatable to Rafa, and Foster might take up his role with renewed vigour, thus marginalising Parry's lackadaisical transfer workrate and getting the business done in a timely manner. (By the way, Foster Gillett has been criticised for being absent, but he might have had to go back to America because both of the owners were arguing, so he couldn't really do his job).

 

I really hope Rafa stays. Just keep winning Rafa, so hopefully the time will be bought (terrible that it's needed, mind) to give the owners a chance to sort out what they need to.

 

I'm troubled, gutted, yet strangely hopeful. It might be that one of the owners will change and this will keep Rafa for the long term, as well as keep the purchase debt off the club.

 

Win-win. Is this still posible?

 

Yes but unlikely

[Anubis]

The only way to hurt the cunts is in the pocket. A volatile credit market, with increased stipulations on their borrowing will have made them more twitchy. Who has the balls to boycott LFC? It doesn't have to be mass demonstrations as, like you say, they are tucked away in ivory towers in America. Non-attendance and a refusal to buy or watch LFC related products is the only way to make them reassess their decisions. Who wants to do this? The average man will roll over and take it up the arse. We are the apathetic generation that doesn't protest.

 

PS What the fuck is The Liverpool Way? We fought Thatcherism, we can handle this pair.

That is spot on. The internet makes it entirely possible to co-ordinate with supporters groups worldwide, and once the press have hold of the fact the supporters are going to war with the owners by way of a boycott, they'll add publicity.

[Dirk]

That is spot on. The internet makes it entirely possible to co-ordinate with supporters groups worldwide, and once the press have hold of the fact the supporters are going to war with the owners by way of a boycott, they'll add publicity.

 

I tried to guage opinion in the "Whatyagonnado?" thread, most people weren't even arsed to vote and, even then, a lot of them don't give a shit. It's a sad, sad indictment.

[Moschops II]

Scenario 3. Editors have demanded a bullshit story to sell newspapers and as usual their shit rag journalists have obliged.

 

Shit newspaper, talks bollocks, why is everyone going mental over it?

 

"News of the World? Shit rag newspaper, prints bollocks."

"The Mirror? Shit rag newspaper, prints bollocks."

"The Echo? Shit rag newspaper, prints bollocks."

"BBC website? Shit rag website, prints bollocks."

"The lunchtime TV news right in front of my fucking face on the day it actually happens? Oh. Right."

 

I'm sure there were a lot of Chelsea fans who refused to accept Mourinho and Abramovich couldn't work with each other right up until the end too. After all, it was only the shit rag papers that kept saying so.

[Dermot]

I want not to believe what CB has written but feel sick about it.

 

Would be devastated if Rafa was sacked and cannot imagine how I would feel if Maureen was appointed.

 

I think the bottom line is if we win the next two CL games then we have nothing to worry about as I see that as the 'reason' the Americans might use to sack him.

[ratcatcher]

It potentially looks like the relationship between Benitez and the owners has broken down. Something akin to that between Benitez and Ayesteran.

 

That relationship couldnt be fixed and the parting of the ways happened. I hope this is not the case here but one thing is for certain, manager against owner(s), means only one winner (and I use that term lightly).

 

I really dont think this should be played out in the media and, my only criticism here is that is what Benitez opened up, a media debate.

[ScouseAndy]

"News of the World? Shit rag newspaper, prints bollocks."

"The Mirror? Shit rag newspaper, prints bollocks."

"The Echo? Shit rag newspaper, prints bollocks."

"BBC website? Shit rag website, prints bollocks."

"The lunchtime TV news right in front of my fucking face on the day it actually happens? Oh. Right."

 

I'm sure there were a lot of Chelsea fans who refused to accept Mourinho and Abramovich couldn't work with each other right up until the end too. After all, it was only the shit rag papers that kept saying so.

 

You can't be trying to tell me the NOTW is a credible newspaper surely?

 

There may or may not be facts behind the article. There certainly isn't any evidence or quotation within it.

 

Any information Bascombe may have has been presented in such a dramatised fashion I can't take it seriously.