Rafa cancels two meetings with Broughton

[Malarkey]

Fuck off Rafa.

 

And take that cunt Owen Brown with you.

[goatboy59]

TheGame - Times Online - WBLG: Public battle is not the Liverpool way

 

Public battle is not the Liverpool way

 

Tony Barrett

 

For seasoned Anfield observers it was one of the most depressing sights seen at the ground for many years. As Alan Wiley, the referee, gave a final blast of his whistle to signal the end of Liverpool’s game against Chelsea on Sunday, a number of supporters in an executive box in the Centenary Stand unfurled a banner calling on Rafael Benitez to quit.

 

“Rafa Out – Not Good Enough And That’s A Fact” read the professionally produced placard, prompting angry scenes, with fans below banging on the windows of the executive box, demanding that the planned protest was halted immediately.

 

Over on the Kop, another dispiriting scene unfolded when the holder of a pro-Benitez banner was told by a group of dissenters gathered around him to down his flag. It was all a long way removed from the brand of unity with which Liverpool supporters are so often credited, particularly when faced with adversity.

 

That is what happens, though, when internal club politics spill out on to the stands. The shockwaves caused by a manager continually locking horns with the club’s hierarchy reverberate right through the fanbase, with people who should be united by a common cause being divided by dogma and forced into taking sides.

 

Some believe Benitez has been treated shabbily by Liverpool’s owners and that he has been competing this season with a hand tied behind his back. Others feel the ownership situation has provided a useful smokescreen for the Spaniard to cover his managerial shortcomings. Both positions have merit and both, in normal circumstances, would cause nothing more than common debate.

 

The problem is that with Benitez and the Liverpool board in direct opposition, the manager’s job in question and the future of the club in doubt, the stakes have been raised and reasoned argument is being replaced by outright conflict

 

Benitez and the Liverpool hierarchy have a responsibility to put the club first. They can carry on accusing one another – one day the manager outlines his frustrations at having not met Martin Broughton, the new chairman, the next a leak intimates that Benitez has actually snubbed two opportunities to meet Broughton – bearing their teeth and preparing for battle, or they can revert to an amicable stance and resolve the situation at the negotiating table. That would be the much fabled – but, sadly, seldom seen of late – Liverpool way of doing things.

 

Benitez has always spoke of how he embraces the traditions of the club and holds their supporters in such high regard. This is his chance to live up to his beliefs by putting the club first to save the fans from becoming even more polarised. The same principle must apply to Christian Purslow, himself a Liverpool supporter, and the other members of the Liverpool board who have a responsibility to do what is right by the club.

 

Benitez’s agent has claimed that his client does not wish to depart. If that is the case, the manager must accept the spending restrictions and move forward with a renewed desire to improve his squad as best he possibly can.

 

Should he feel that his requested assurances will not materialise and that that means the club’s ambitions are different to his, both sides must work out a way of parting company on the best possible terms, with their dignity intact and the possibility removed of the club’s reputation being damaged even more.

 

Six years ago, Gerard Houllier left Anfield having bid it an emotional and stage-managed goodbye after being relieved of his managerial duties by mutual consent. The way his departure was carefully orchestrated by him and the club won the admiration of all who witnessed it.

 

There were no accusations and counter-accusations, no signs of the schisms that had played a part in Houllier’s departure and no retributions afterwards. If ever a managerial term came to an end in the most elegant way possible, it was that one.

 

If a parting is inevitable for Benitez and Liverpool, that is the standard that all involved must aspire to. It is still not too late for their differences to be settled in private and, for the good of Liverpool and the fans, that is exactly what must happen.

 

 

Requested, not demanded.

 

I apologise.

[Torvald Utne]

Again, well done...you've quoted the words of Tony Barrett not Rafa Benitez, small mistake I know but could be seen as misleading :whistle:

[goatboy59]

Floundering now.

[Dan Vito Corleone]

Looks to me like this has highlighted an enormous contradiction in his testimony.

[King Emlyn]

Fuck me sideways, I agree with Spy Bee.

 

I'm going for a lie down...

Fair play to the lad, he's been bang on form of late.

[Red Nick]

Any assurance that Broughton might give are worthless and Rafa knows that as well.

 

If Mourinho's dad buys LFC doesnt matter what assurances have been given new owners wont respect or honour any existing agreements that are not in the best interest of LFC.

 

Its pretty clear its just Spin from Rafa, he knows the score and he knows assruances would be meaningless.

[ali]

Benitez's rift with boardroom grows wider

 

By Ian Herbert

 

Wednesday, 5 May 2010

 

The profound sense of dislocation between manager and boardroom at Liverpool was laid bare once again yesterday with suggestions from within Anfield that Rafael Benitez had twice failed to make appointments with the club's new executive chairman Martin Broughton.

 

On a day when Wigan Athletic manager Roberto Martinez expressed puzzlement at a situation that may see his compatriot Benitez join Juventus within the next week, Anfield sources responded to the manager's seemingly innocuous declaration of intent to see Broughton "sooner rather than later" by suggesting that the manager had not taken his opportunities.

 

The reasons for the meetings failing to materialise relate to fixture commitments: one meeting planned for 20 April – which Benitez had mentioned at a press conference the night before – clashed with the early train departure needed for the overland trip to Atletico Madrid. The second had been planned for 24 hours before Sunday's Chelsea match, but the manager decided he had to lift his side after their Europa League elimination.

 

The fact that Benitez's mere declaration of intent to meet Broughton appears to have been called into question magnifies the strained relationships within Anfield, which are understood to be the primary factor driving the manager towards the exit.

 

Among the issues at the top of Benitez's list for discussion with Broughton, if and when he gets his meeting, is his own relationship with the club's managing director, Christian Purslow. Benitez is expected to ask Broughton why he was not informed two weeks ago when the club made contact with Real Madrid to discuss the possibility of signing Rafael van der Vaart. That was an issue of annoyance and frustration for the manager and evidence, as he sees it, that some at Anfield are attempting to make him persona non grata.

 

Benitez's other prime concern is the level of spending he will be permitted this summer, with the Spaniard seeking an assurance that any income from player sales will be ploughed back into the transfer budget.

 

Perhaps crucial to whether Benitez will stay is his own willingness to give ground and tolerate others, though his history of battles with the senior management of clubs he has managed suggests this is by no means certain. Benitez's caustic relationship with Purslow's predecessor, Rick Parry, followed a difficult time with Jesus Pitarch, sporting director at his previous club, Valencia. Benitez criticised Pitarch's signings and was indignant about Parry's failure to sign players he wanted. But the idea of another club being approached about a new acquisition without Benitez having any knowledge certainly takes him into troubling new territory.

 

Martinez said yesterday that "the whole situation doesn't really make sense" and recalled that Valencia only appreciated Benitez after he had gone, having allowed him to depart for Merseyside six years ago.

 

"I think Rafa is one of those managers everyone values when he has left," Martinez said. "He was at Valencia, won the league there and when he left most people felt it was time for him to move on and yet they look and now they would like to have Rafa back."

 

Benitez's rift with boardroom grows wider - Premier League, Football - The Independent

[The Special One]

Surely it's in no-ones interest to get rid of him now. The new owners (if there ever will be any) might want Rafa and the players seem to be behind him. Sacking him now means immediate expense for the new owners and a period of uncertainty whilst we get a new bloke on board.

 

Wrong.

[Herp McDerp]

The reasons for the meetings failing to materialise relate to fixture commitments: one meeting planned for 20 April – which Benitez had mentioned at a press conference the night before – clashed with the early train departure needed for the overland trip to Atletico Madrid. The second had been planned for 24 hours before Sunday's Chelsea match, but the manager decided he had to lift his side after their Europa League elimination.

What a cunt.

[goatboy59]

Ha ha ha ha!

 

From The Times

April 29, 2010

Rafael Benítez left in dark over future

Tony Barrett

 

Rafael Benítez claimed last night that no one at Liverpool has attempted to talk him into remaining at Anfield in spite of mounting interest from Juventus.

 

Speculation about Benítez’s future has heightened in recent weeks because of the increasing likelihood of Liverpool losing their status as a top-four club and the intensification of Juventus’s very public efforts to convince the Spaniard that he should quit the Barclays Premier League for Serie A.

 

But the Liverpool manager is still waiting to meet Martin Broughton, the club’s new chairman, almost a fortnight after he was appointed.

 

 

 

 

Benitez's rift with boardroom grows wider

 

By Ian Herbert

 

Wednesday, 5 May 2010

 

The reasons for the meetings failing to materialise relate to fixture commitments: one meeting planned for 20 April – which Benitez had mentioned at a press conference the night before – clashed with the early train departure needed for the overland trip to Atletico Madrid. The second had been planned for 24 hours before Sunday's Chelsea match, but the manager decided he had to lift his side after their Europa League elimination.

 

 

So he himself cancels a meeting because of fixtures then tells one of his most trusted journalists that he's been "left in the dark", then he cancels the next meeting days later?

 

 

I'd say it was unbelievable, but it's not.

[stringvest]

You're either preaching to the converted, or to those who will not listen mate. I don't think anyone is going to change their mind now. Evidence is incidental, and can be dismissed as agenda.

[Red Phoenix]

Apologies because it's from the mirror, but I thought it was pretty interesting :

 

"It emerged in Italy last night that Juventus officials now want to change the role they originally offered Benitez, from that of a traditional English-style manager, to a more Italian-based coach working with a director of football."

 

 

 

If there's any truth in that at all it might explain some of the recent goings on, but again, it's the mirror...

[piscinin]

You're either preaching to the converted, or to those who will not listen mate. I don't think anyone is going to change their mind now. Evidence is incidental, and can be dismissed as agenda.

 

Or maybe there is an actual agenda.

 

Guillem Balague Football Website | If Rafa leaves, it is unfair to judge him as a failure

 

I would also like to clear something up regarding Monday`s article about Rafa Benitez published in The Daily Mirror. You can read the original draft of my Daily Mirror opinion column here and as you can see, I suggested in the original that I believe “if Rafa leaves now he would unfairly be considered a failure.”

 

Unfortunately, an editorial mistake in the Daily Mirror meant that the word `unfairly` was omitted from the final printed copy. I would like to emphasise my position here: I believe that if Rafa Benitez were to leave Liverpool football club, it would be unfair for his time at Anfield to be considered a failure.

 

Why anyone would take anything in the footballing press @ face value is beyond me. Especially those who know it so well, work in it, or have undertaken the recommended course in "rigorous intellectual self-defense".

[piscinin]

Apologies because it's from the mirror, but I thought it was pretty interesting :

 

"It emerged in Italy last night that Juventus officials now want to change the role they originally offered Benitez, from that of a traditional English-style manager, to a more Italian-based coach working with a director of football."

 

 

 

If there's any truth in that at all it might explain some of the recent goings on, but again, it's the mirror...

 

The italian press are now trying to bullshit there way out of the lies they published weeks ago. There was always going to be a director of football. There were interviews with him and everything. I guess we can file this under the same heading as the lawyers who are no doubt still in the air en route to Liverpool and the backroom staff that they have already begun hiring etc etc.

[goatboy59]

You're either preaching to the converted, or to those who will not listen mate. I don't think anyone is going to change their mind now. Evidence is incidental, and can be dismissed as agenda.

 

Nothing to me, it's shit off a duck's arse.

 

But even if an ally like Tony B goes even slightly 'off message' he gets flung in with

 

I think they all get together in a room and brainstorm on a quote....

 

"OK Guys, give me 10 different interpretations of the following quote..."blah, blah, blah" ....GO!"

 

It's a disgwace.

[piscinin]

Nothing to me, it's shit off a duck's arse.

 

But even if an ally like Tony B goes even slightly 'off message' he gets flung in with

 

 

 

It's a disgwace.

 

I'll bet Tony B is getting very different editorial direction today than when he was at the Echo. Don't you think?

 

I've noticed thematic differences between stuff that goes in the paper vs. that micro-blog section. Both from him and Kay.

[Red Phoenix]

The italian press are now trying to bullshit there way out of the lies they published weeks ago. There was always going to be a director of football. There were interviews with him and everything. I guess we can file this under the same heading as the lawyers who are no doubt still in the air en route to Liverpool and the backroom staff that they have already begun hiring etc etc.

 

So Rafa was going to leave here to work at Juve with a director of football? It never gets any less strange.

[piscinin]

So Rafa was going to leave here to work at Juve with a director of football? It never gets any less strange.

 

He's at the only club that would let him have free rein. Wherever he goes will be a step down. It's why he doesn't want to go. Why trade all this power *snicker* to become a coach of twice a day training sessions?

[aws]

Have I missed something about these requested assurances? Don't we want the manager (any manager) to put pressure on the owners to give assurances that we won't have a negative transfer budget again this summer?

 

It's clear from Barrett's piece above that the assurances relate to transfer budget.

[dave u]

Martinez said yesterday that "the whole situation doesn't really make sense" and recalled that Valencia only appreciated Benitez after he had gone, having allowed him to depart for Merseyside six years ago.

 

"I think Rafa is one of those managers everyone values when he has left," Martinez said. "He was at Valencia, won the league there and when he left most people felt it was time for him to move on and yet they look and now they would like to have Rafa back."

 

"I do not talk about Wigan. He should talk about his own club."

[Kennys_spell]

So Rafa was going to leave here to work at Juve with a director of football? It never gets any less strange.

 

Only if you believe everything you read in the Newspapers.

[goatboy59]

Have I missed something about these requested assurances? Don't we want the manager (any manager) to put pressure on the owners to give assurances that we won't have a negative transfer budget again this summer?

 

It's clear from Barrett's piece above that the assurances relate to transfer budget.

 

I think it depends on whether it's the manager of Liverpool or the manager of Juventus.

[Red Phoenix]

Only if you believe everything you read in the Newspapers.

 

I guess not then..

[Dougie Do'ins]

Only if you believe everything you read in the Newspapers.

Did you believe the newspapers when they quoted Rafa as saying, "nobody has given me assurances about my job"

 

Another question for you and for Piscinin.

 

When Rafa gave his quotes about not being able to to talk to Broughton.

 

Did he give you the impression that this was simply because other matters got in the way, and the first two meetings had to be cancelled. That there was nothing sinister going on and, it was just a clash of times and dates ?

 

Or Did Rafa's quotes give you the impression that he'd be attempting to talk with Broughton but, he was being ignored and, something underhand was going on ?