Hicks ready to sell (according to Ice T)

[Dirk]

Dave implies the same in his match report, go and slag him off as well, then.

[Cardie]

So why are they waiting?

[7dalglish]

I don't know if anyone on here can answer that question Cardie

[TheDrowningMan]

I love the way Mourinho is mentioned. Assuming this is true....Planning to give him £100m to spend in the summer, eh? It's the only way he'll guarantee you success (and even that will be a bit ho-hum relative to the resources at his disposal, unless his underperformance at Chelsea wasn't his fault in the slightest for some mystical reason).

[Dirk]

The fact is, Bascombe is an easy target because he works for a paper people perceive as the Sunday S*n. However, before this CB had a reputation of predominantly reporting facts. Let says CB is reporting what he was told first hand by prominent LFC sources (which he has many of) , that would mean he is being attacked for trying to report fact.

[Cardie]

I don't know if anyone on here can answer that question Cardie

 

There are enough people with sources at the moment, someones bound to have a conspiracy theory as to why a manager who was definetly going to be sacked irrespective of results is still in a job.

[Cardie]

The fact is, Bascombe is an easy target because he works for a paper people perceive as the Sunday S*n. However, before this CB had a reputation of predominantly reporting facts. Let says CB is reporting what he was told first hand by prominent LFC sources (which he has many of) , that would mean he is being attacked for trying to report fact.

 

I was critical of him long before he moved to the NotW/Screws of the World/Sunday S*n or any other name you care to give it.

[Dirk]

I was critical of him long before he moved to the NotW/Screws of the World/Sunday S*n or any other name you care to give it.

 

But you are critical of everybody and everything, that's your MO.

[aws]

So why are they waiting?

 

Because it's stupid to sack a manager while

 

1. he's on a winning streak;or

 

2. it's the middle of the season and you might struggle to find a quality replacement;or

 

3. you don't want to pay him compensation so would prefer to make life uncomfortable so he walks;or

 

4. you're trying to raise a huge slug of debt in a difficult finance market and don't want it to look that the club is in turmoil; or

 

5. you're trying to sell your half of the club at a profit (see 4 above)

 

etc. etc.

 

Maybe they're not going to sack him at all. Who really knows apart from them?

[Cardie]

But you are critical of everybody and everything, that's your MO.

 

Except Rafa....nope actually him as well.

 

Can't seeing it being an issue if I was pretending to have a source who told me Parry was responsible for 9/11 though.

[7dalglish]

The fact is, Bascombe is an easy target because he works for a paper people perceive as the Sunday S*n. However, before this CB had a reputation of predominantly reporting facts. Let says CB is reporting what he was told first hand by prominent LFC sources (which he has many of) , that would mean he is being attacked for trying to report fact.

 

For me this is nothing to do with 'sunday s*n', it's simply a disgusting paper bought by disgusting people. I did and still do take Bascombe's article seriously though.

[Cardie]

Because it's stupid to sack a manager while

 

1. he's on a winning streak;or

 

2. it's the middle of the season and you might struggle to find a quality replacement;or

 

3. you don't want to pay him compensation so would prefer to make life uncomfortable so he walks;or

 

4. you're trying to raise a huge slug of debt in a difficult finance market and don't want it to look that the club is in turmoil; or

 

5. you're trying to sell your half of the club at a profit (see 4 above)

 

etc. etc.

 

Maybe they're not going to sack him at all. Who really knows apart from them?

 

1) Irrespective of results I believe the story said.

2) It was brought forward and irrespective of results.

3) He won't

4) Too late I think.

5) (See 4 above)

[aws]

1) Irrespective of results I believe the story said.

2) It was brought forward and irrespective of results.

3) He won't

4) Too late I think.

5) (See 4 above)

 

Maybe they just changed their minds. Maybe Basco saved Rafa's job for him.

 

If it hadn't been for that pesky Basco, they would have got away with it.

[TheDrowningMan]

It's interesting though, if they have been planning to get rid of him at the end of the season no matter what, they'd almost certainly be looking to disrupt the squad and ensure we fail to win the title or CL this year. There's no other way they could get around it.

 

If last week's protest made something of a splash, imagine one after Rafa had been dismissed despite winning one of the big two trophies this season.

[Cardie]

Maybe they just changed their minds. Maybe Basco saved Rafa's job for him.

 

If it hadn't been for that pesky Basco, they would have got away with it.

 

Super Bascombe.

 

I'm sure he'd love that angle.

[Hermes]

Because it's stupid to sack a manager while

 

1. he's on a winning streak;or

 

2. it's the middle of the season and you might struggle to find a quality replacement;or

 

3. you don't want to pay him compensation so would prefer to make life uncomfortable so he walks;or

 

4. you're trying to raise a huge slug of debt in a difficult finance market and don't want it to look that the club is in turmoil; or

 

5. you're trying to sell your half of the club at a profit (see 4 above)

 

etc. etc.

 

Maybe they're not going to sack him at all. Who really knows apart from them?

 

So you tell a manager he's going to be sacked but leave him in the job?

 

Bascombe said the decision had been made, not that they were considering it.

[aws]

So you tell a manager he's going to be sacked but leave him in the job?

 

Bascombe said the decision had been made, not that they were considering it.

 

Decisions can be unmade. Happens all the time.

[Captain]

Dave has confirmed that both sides were happy to see the story out. Perhaps, instead of people calling him a traitor, they should be lauding him for maybe helping to save Rafa's job.

 

Dave has also confirmed Bascombe published his story because he was certain it was true.

[MLB]

I trusted him when he was writing for the Echo. Now? Not quite so much, simply because there has already been doubt about how much of his articles are from him and how much is from editors, sub-editors etc.

[rebel23]

presumably we'll get another installment from Bascombe this week, probably like the Mascherano story (he wont sign on the 11th November, he will sign on the 18th November and Rafa has agreed a deal)

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Maybe they just changed their minds. Maybe Basco saved Rafa's job for him.

 

If it hadn't been for that pesky Basco, they would have got away with it.

 

Maybe what cb has wrote is true thats not my problem with the article.He would have as much chance changing there minds as the fans have zero.One thing you can be sure of is if they have to decided to sack him then he's gone.

[dave u]

presumably we'll get another installment from Bascombe this week, probably like the Mascherano story (he wont sign on the 11th November, he will sign on the 18th November and Rafa has agreed a deal)

 

He's the only one who's had any reliable info on that story. He had an exclusive interview with Mascherano where he said he wanted it done in 3 weeks but wouldn't join another English club.

 

Then he spoke to Rafa and found out that a deal had since been negotiated for £17m over 5 years.

 

He got the story bang on.

[WeAreTheBest]

 

Then he spoke to Rafa and found out that a deal had since been negotiated for £17m over 5 years.

 

 

Which the Yanks and Parry better not fuck up. I'm expecting he'll only be a Liverpool player till Moscow though then thats it.

[King Emlyn]

I reckon the story is 100% true, Hicks is just waiting for the right time to swing the axe, if we had failed to qualify the other night he'd be history by now. I think Hicks hates Benitez.

[Hermes]

Did he?

 

I seem to recall he said they had "formulated a plan" after Athens, but don't remember him saying there was a timescale on it. I've not got a copy of the article to hand though so I could be wrong, I'm just going off memory.

 

He said in his interview on Talksport that they were planning to sack Rafa in the summer but the sacking had now been brought forward. This is a direct cut and past from the written article:

 

 

Liverpool's American owners were already preparing to ditch the Spanish boss (left) after tiring of the constant behind-the-scenes bickering but this week's developments have sealed his fate.

 

It's now a matter of when not if the Spanish boss leaves Anfield and that's expected to be sooner rather than later.