Hodgson to leave under new owners ?

[ctkeepercoach]

I don't think it matters how long he's been in the job really, because I think he knew we needed a striker from the day he came here.

 

I understand the argument that performances will only be good in patches because he is still implementing his own style on the squad and the players haven't had much time to adapt yet, but not getting a forward was just a massive mistake in my opinion.

 

It proved to be one of many things that led to our downfall las season so I was hoping people at the club would've learnt from it and rectified it in the summer, but evidently not.

 

That arguement is such fucking bullshit... These players are full-time, milliionaire professional footballers who don't have any other responsibility than to learn how to play this system and make it work. That should be sorted out within 3 weeks. BTW, the arsenal game wasn't bad was it? Its only after they started learning this shit style that we got ripped for 3 at City, outplayed by WBA, Birmingham, Sunderland (thank fuck for the shit ref in that one), Northampton and Blackpool.... We didn't create one decent shot at United from the run of play... Not one.

 

I'm tired of hearing this from everyone about Roy 'Needing time' (not a shot at you just seeing it all over tonight)... its football. these guys have been playing since they can walk. The football we are playing is dire. Players are being told to play out of position when suitable replacements exist. No youth in the team to introduce some hunger, the best defender in the team being told to hoof it from left back, the best attacking player at the moment being told not to go forward... it doesn't take a genius to see this is anti-football and its not gonna work. At this point, I can't see us taking anything from the Derby... we may get run off the pitch by an Everton team that don't have our depth or quality, but will attack you and take the game to you and that gives them a distinct advantage...

[ctkeepercoach]

Well I think it's totally unfair to have different rules for different people under the same circumstances.

 

Its not the same circumstance any longer... When the new owners take charge, the edict changes from survive to succeed. Roy's the proper man for neither in my opinion but he's the man of the moment...

 

Someone said earlier that the right time is the best time, no matter when or how long he's been in charge. I fully agree with that.

[derrickt]

As Brownie said it depends how the next few months go.

 

If we improve then I wouldn't have a problem with Hodgson spending some money in January, it would be nice to see the manager backed for a change and allowed to implement his plans with sufficient investment.

 

If we don't improve enough I would be in favour of replacing him.

 

Most clubs don't do much business in January in any event.

 

If negative football is one of the reasons fans/players/ex-players want Rafa to go, why replace him with a more negative one? Will Roy change his approach? The answer is No, that man said that himself. If you were to let me choose between this 2 negative managers, i would take Rafa anytime.

I am sure Roy is not top of many fans wish-list to be the manager to take us forward before/after his appointment.

 

So it come down to how Roy get appointed? To potential owner who know nuts about English football that we have just appointed a League Manager of the year, make it more saleable on paper?

 

If that's the case, why dont we just let Roy go now and bring Kenny in? Give kenny a chance and at the same time find a better manager. If Kenny succeed, well done, if not we'll have find better replacement by then.

[hamstrung]

Well finsh better than 7th this year

 

Roy's off you reckon?

[goatboy59]

I don't know why people are getting a snot on with Coyle and Holloway.

 

If Kenny did get it he could no worse than take one or the other under his wing.

 

Wouldn't happen in mid-season, of course. Well, maybe Coyle!

[billypilgrimnz]

Please no

 

Whilst he is better than Hodgson and will motivate the players he is right out of the Houllier, Rafa and Hodgson school of shit football

 

Yep, something a bit different would be nice for a change.

[spider-neil]

I think it's almost pointless discussing the style of football when discussing a new manager as the board will look at the potential manager's CV and base their decision on what that manager has achieved rather than how that manager achieved it. also in that regard, if (rather when) roy is removed it will be based on results rather than how those results were achieved.

 

that said, I do want a more attack minded manager in charge.

[zico]

We are LFC and we need an attack minded manager who plays exciting football.....

 

Giving Kenny the full time job would buy the new owners a lot of Goodwill....

 

Nothing good comes out of keeping Hodgson, best case scenario is a team that is hard to beat that will compete for a UEFA cup position next season, but playing shit "as boring as watching paint dry" type football... (If he can turn it around that is, and that's a big if!)

 

We need to ask ourselves what kind of football we want to see!!

 

Playing deep, lumping the ball forward from the back and defending at least one point is Roy's way, and he ain't gonna change....

 

All of the people on here that wants to give him more time, can you honestly say that you are happy to see us play that brand of football, and that you are happy to give Roy any transfer kitty to buy more players that are suitable for this kind of football rather than actual talented skillfull footballers?

[TheHitman]

I think what is most needed if we do have a new ownership is a strong management structure.

 

By this we really need an independent person someone who has a proven track record of transfers and knows the market globally, a director of football like the man at Sevilla Ramon Rodriguez Verdejo to compliment the manager. It could be another person from a club who has excelled in such a role there are many see Porto, Villareal etc.

 

Also if there is a change in management you do not see such an upheaval in personal.

[derrickt]

I think it's almost pointless discussing the style of football when discussing a new manager as the board will look at the potential manager's CV and base their decision on what that manager has achieved rather than how that manager achieved it. also in that regard, if (rather when) roy is removed it will be based on results rather than how those results were achieved.

 

that said, I do want a more attack minded manager in charge.

 

So can i predict that the same media/fans will start bashing the manager each week for our negativity? Blaming anything when things went wrong regardless of right or wrong? The same that happen to the previous manager?

[lifetime fan]

I think it's almost pointless discussing the style of football when discussing a new manager as the board will look at the potential manager's CV and base their decision on what that manager has achieved rather than how that manager achieved it. also in that regard, if (rather when) roy is removed it will be based on results rather than how those results were achieved.

 

that said, I do want a more attack minded manager in charge.

 

I disagree.

 

You can't guarantee winning anything playing either defensive or attacking football.

 

At least have something enjoyable to watch trying.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

As Brownie said it depends how the next few months go.

 

If we improve then I wouldn't have a problem with Hodgson spending some money in January, it would be nice to see the manager backed for a change and allowed to implement his plans with sufficient investment.

 

If we don't improve enough I would be in favour of replacing him.

 

Most clubs don't do much business in January in any event.

 

This is very true, however we need to, and we need to do it well. And I don't trust Roy to spend the money on the correct type of players. Poulsen has raised so many alarm bells of concern on what type of player he is looking for. Merieles is the flip side thougfh, however how much if that is down to Roy who knows when you compare it to the Poulsen transfer.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

I don't know why people are getting a snot on with Coyle and Holloway.

 

If Kenny did get it he could no worse than take one or the other under his wing.

 

Wouldn't happen in mid-season, of course. Well, maybe Coyle!

 

Can't disagree with that at all. Both get their teams to play football. That is the major crux of the issue at the moment, playing actual football.

[Jules Winnfield]

Bring in Terry Francona.

[Juan Galonso]

Just a mention that our previous two managers early signings were some good ones mixed with a couple of duds. For GH for your Didi Hamann you had a Jean Michele Ferri and for Rafa you had your Xabi Alonso but also your Josemi as well.

 

Bit unfair on Roy to say he wouldn't be capable of spending money on the right players just because of Poulsen. Meireles looks a really good player even though Roy isn't using him correctly, yet. If he starts him on the right in the derby then he deserves all the flack coming his way.

[aiyic]

Although I'd love Kenny to be given the job over anyone, I think some are bigging him up with the incorrect misty-eyed notion that he's known for attack minded football. I want him because of his understanding of the Liverpool way, and all that is required to make that happen.

 

The way he handles press with a very unique blend of respectful disdain - in most cases, he'd just take his eyes off the floor and give the journo a look of wtf.

 

Kenny's Blackburn and Newcastle teams were not like the his Liverpool sides, although they weren't Benitezesque, they were pragmatic teams; maybe even functional.

 

I think some members aren't old enough to remember, but the most recent example was when Dalglish took over from Keegan - two months in and you could see that they weren't gung-ho any longer.

 

The Hodgson appointment as I see it now, is actually a master-stroke - the board knew all along that any new manager was going to suffer. And we as fans have to take a step back to see the big picture.

 

Knowing that there wasn't going to be any real transfer budget, and aligned with the huge lack of club direction from upstairs, a marquee appointment wasn't going to solve the ills of the club.

 

We have to remember that the players know more than us about what is going on, so how can anyone expect players to put passion and fight into their game when they don't get anything positive from the board - not that I blame the board, they had their hands full with all the planning of the coup.

 

Hodgson hasn't made any more mistakes than one would expect any new manager to make, it's only that those familiarity issues that he has to deal with are amplified by the players fight sucked out of them.

 

So, the moral of this, is that if Dalglish had been appointed, he would have faced the very same problems that Hodgson is getting it in the neck for now, thus taking the gloss off the appointment.

Edited October 11, 2010 by aiyic

[spider-neil]

I disagree.

 

You can't guarantee winning anything playing either defensive or attacking football.

 

At least have something enjoyable to watch trying.

 

I'm not talking about the fans, or the media, I'm talking about the BOARD.

the board wont take on board the style of play they will only look at the results of the present manager and the results/silverware of the manager they will want to emply.

[ctkeepercoach]

On the pitch? I do not think so. Do you seriously believe that we'd replace him with Hodgson if the reasoning was that simple?

 

My pie in the sky theory is this:

 

Benitez had lost the team and needed to go so he was outed... He HAD however masked to some great degree how bad things actually are by keeping the team in the title chase in 2009 and in the European places in 2010 (its my theory, I'm entitled to the rosey glasses on last year... its kept me sane while the team sucks...).

 

In order to show just how bad things are, they appoint Hodgson, which is tantamount to throwing games (without the points deduction, automatic relegation etc...) and the value stays down so Tommy and Georgie can't sell for their desired price and the board has the chance to pressurize RBS to call everything in Friday. With the price down, the buyers come along, and poof, we now have shiny new owners who will sack Roy and bring in someone competent to get the team winning again.....

 

Just my theory and its kept me sane throughout all this...

[diego]

Those who talk about "a decline" under Rafa are obviously so deep into their petty propaganda that they think the rest of us will overlook the fact that the team got better every year, under Rafa , and for two years was rated by the FIFA as No. 1 Even in his final season - despite the shocking early form of Carragher and the season long sulk of Gerrard who was saving himself for the World Cup, the long periods of injury for Torres and the serious injuries to 12 others, the team was still within two points of 4th place with two games to go.

 

As for Rafa's negativism - which seems to be one of those props the anti-Rafa loonies use all the time - we were consistently near the top of goal scorers under Rafa - and once were actually top - not to mention shots on goal. The season before last we strung together victories where we scored a minimum of 3 goals a game and several times scored 4 - against, for example, Man Utd and Real Madrid. Under Rafa we broke LFC's record for goals for.

 

Those who talk about Rafa and Hodgson in the same breath as "negative" managers are displaying their ignorance. Hodgson won only three times away from home in the last two seasons at Fulham.

[RedSoxFan]

My pie in the sky theory is this:

 

Benitez had lost the team and needed to go so he was outed... He HAD however masked to some great degree how bad things actually are by keeping the team in the title chase in 2009 and in the European places in 2010 (its my theory, I'm entitled to the rosey glasses on last year... its kept me sane while the team sucks...).

 

In order to show just how bad things are, they appoint Hodgson, which is tantamount to throwing games (without the points deduction, automatic relegation etc...) and the value stays down so Tommy and Georgie can't sell for their desired price and the board has the chance to pressurize RBS to call everything in Friday. With the price down, the buyers come along, and poof, we now have shiny new owners who will sack Roy and bring in someone competent to get the team winning again.....

 

Just my theory and its kept me sane throughout all this...

 

Riiiiggggghhht.

 

So, they intentionally put a bad manager in place. Why don't they put Robbie Fowler, David James et al back on the field while they're at it, if this is their actual goal? Heck, isn't Ian Rush available?

[ctkeepercoach]

Hodgson wasn't my first choice but I was fully prepared to give him a shot when he came in and not judge him on anything other than what he did with us. On that score the signs are not good but what has happened previously means fuck all to me.

 

Too many people want him to fail.

 

There are those among us who don't care for the Rafa vs Roy bit at all that are sick of watching Nando get kicked to high heaven fighting for long balls with no support who have become rapidly tired of watching this team. Roy is 15 games into managing this squad and he is beating his players over the head with a boorish, conservative, antiquated style that is plain for all too see.

 

The results in europe have been ok, but only because he's put much of the first team out there against championship level sided or lower until the group...

 

The teams in the league that have beaten us shouldn't be able to shine our boots and they've bossed us at Anfield and that's not acceptable... Blackpool's players were taking souvenier pictures of Anfield before the game for pity's sake. And the man who has orchestrated all this should be given more time?!?!?!?! AND money to spend?!?!?!

 

Its beyond time. The circumstance with new ownership gives everyone an out to save face. And it will avoid the precedent of the knee jerk reaction because everyone can point to a board in strife, ownership change and see how this is the exception to the typical rule and tradition at Liverpool.

[Il Fenomeno]

The decline under Benitez was only going to get worse. Players were going to leave. That's the context you're forgetting here.

He had to go.

 

The board had a duty to evaluate if replacing Benitez with the next manager would be worth Benitez' pay off, plus compensation to bring the next manager in, if any.

 

They also had a duty to ensure that they hired the best possible manager available.

 

Out of the managers who wanted the job (Benitez, Hodgson, Pelligrini & Dalglish) Hodgson is the worst BY FAR and he was also the most expensive option.

 

No, the decline under Benitez wasn't going to get worse, that's pure speculation.

 

Maybe players would've left, but the ones who were going to leave don't fit into Roy's tactics, so what's the point having them? The board have also failed in identifying a manager who would be able to get the most out of the playing staff.

 

The board have failed, Hodgson has failed. It's time now for Purslow to swallow his pride, admit he was wrong and sack Roy.

[lifetime fan]

I'm not talking about the fans, or the media, I'm talking about the BOARD.

the board wont take on board the style of play they will only look at the results of the present manager and the results/silverware of the manager they will want to emply.

 

The board are wrong then in my opinion.

 

Look at the positive press and idiots who spend their money on Arsenl when they've won fuck in ages because they play football the 'right way'.

[spider-neil]

The board are wrong then in my opinion.

 

Look at the positive press and idiots who spend their money on Arsenl when they've won fuck in ages because they play football the 'right way'.

 

you've lost me. are you saying it right or wrong to purely focus on results?

[dennis tooth]

Although I'd love Kenny to be given the job over anyone, I think some are bigging him up with the incorrect misty-eyed notion that he's known for attack minded football. I want him because of his understanding of the Liverpool way, and all that is required to make that happen.

 

The way he handles press with a very unique blend of respectful disdain - in most cases, he'd just take his eyes off the floor and give the journo a look of wtf.

 

Kenny's Blackburn and Newcastle teams were not like the his Liverpool sides, although they weren't Benitezesque, they were pragmatic teams; maybe even functional.

 

I think some members aren't old enough to remember, but the most recent example was when Dalglish took over from Keegan - two months in and you could see that they weren't gung-ho any longer.

 

The Hodgson appointment as I see it now, is actually a master-stroke - the board knew all along that any new manager was going to suffer. And we as fans have to take a step back to see the big picture.

 

Knowing that there wasn't going to be any real transfer budget, and aligned with the huge lack of club direction from upstairs, a marquee appointment wasn't going to solve the ills of the club.

 

We have to remember that the players know more than us about what is going on, so how can anyone expect players to put passion and fight into their game when they don't get anything positive from the board - not that I blame the board, they had their hands full with all the planning of the coup.

 

Hodgson hasn't made any more mistakes than one would expect any new manager to make, it's only that those familiarity issues that he has to deal with are amplified by the players fight sucked out of them.

 

So, the moral of this, is that if Dalglish had been appointed, he would have faced the very same problems that Hodgson is getting it in the neck for now, thus taking the gloss off the appointment.

 

Son, son, what are you talking about, it was all some sort of masterplan was it?

 

Spacker.