Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Will Purslow keep his job under the new regime?


myrlas
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 379
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So RAWK are blaming purslow on mascherano going, mike jefferies wad blaming him on Juventus average start to season today, the fact if the matter is the "China to buy Liverpool crowd" were out of the mix totally when Rafa left and set out to discredit him on everything, the hodgson appointment big fuck up, apart from that he's done his job

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worst Chief Exec in our history and thats a fact

 

We were second when he joined and 19th when he left

 

That's a way too simplistic way of viewing it. For instance, if we didn't have to service the debt and had spent that or some of it on transfers I doubt we'd be 19th. That said, he removed a good manager and replaced him with mediocrity at large expense to the club and my sanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how you've misspelled his name in the title, but not in the body.

 

I expected their own people to be put into place... I'm curious to see if Ayre keeps his job, though.

 

Ayre will defo stay on especially with his experience of the Asia markets and TW has already mentioned the global revenues especially in Asia..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course he would - but it doesn't take an intricate knowledge of, well, anything, to see that a man with no background in football shouldn't be put in charge of something as important as player transfers; let alone to the extent that Roy's press conferences would indicate.

 

We are already, in my opinion, seeing the fallout of this. It was reported by numerous sources that Cole came to us rather than others partly because he wanted to play through the middle, in spite of wanting - provisionally - to stay in London. Lo and behold, we have yet to see him in a wide position. We also signed Meireles, who obviously needs to be getting games week on week. Then we have to fit Gerrard into our midfield (who is wasted out wide) and a defensive midfielder.

 

The result has been that Meireles is playing central-right, Cole is playing central-left, Gerrard central adv., and Poulsen/Lucas defensively. We have no width. What you have to ask yourself is how the fuck did we end up with such a poorly put together set-up, in which most of the players don't seem to have any idea what they're doing? Did Hodgson ever deploy such a narrow formation at Fulham?

 

Conversely, in the games we did well in (predominantly pre-season and Europa league qualifiers, funnily enough, deploying our ressies) we used wingers to get at the opposition with pace and got a lot of joy down the flanks through Amoo, Eccelstone et al.

 

What I'm driving at is that the signings we've made these summer are all imperatively being played but they are nothing like a balanced team, unless you think Hodgson set out to pursue Raul M to play as a right-midfielder and to set up every game without width. It would not surprise me at all if Purslow guaranteed Cole he could play through the middle without thinking Gerrard wouldn't like it (not to mention he was a marquee/media signing, much like Hodgson), and signed Raul again off the back of the acclaim he garnered at the world cup. The only signings which were necessitated and which I would unquestionably attribute to Hodgson were Poulsen and Konchesky - which says fuck all for the quality of his input, to be fair.

 

This is, in itself, all conjecture -- but does it not strike you as odd that, with how poor we've been, Hodgson hasn't once stuck Cole out on the left, and has always given him license to roam? That Gerrard, instead of Cole, hasn't been stuck out on the wing? That Raul Meireles was bought as a right-midfielder? We're dreadfully unbalanced.

 

This might all be attributable to Hodgson, and there's no evidence as such to support it, but there were enough times when he said 'ask Christian about transfers' to make me wonder why he had such great influence on our transfer policy when he has no background in football? And the imbalance present in our setup - and the lack of any attempt to rectify it - makes me wonder whether what we're seeing could seriously have been Hodgson's vision.

 

Take it or leave it, I'm not presenting this at fact. If you want you can disregard all of my speculation above and just take this to be my argument:

 

Someone with no background in football or sports businesses should not have a significant input on contract parameters or transfer targets. That's about the size of it anyway, and I don't think you need to know a great deal about the intricacies of a position to form that judgement. It's common sense.

 

no - I agree with your general point, but I don't believe Purslow discussed the position in which Cole would play in the team. I don't believe he's been making those sort of decisions with Hodgson, and I don't believe he made them when Benitez was here either.

 

I do understand and share the frustrations with Hodgson's mindboggling team selections and setups - I just can't buy that this is anything to do with Purslow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Purslow played a significant part in holding the line against the owners towards the end, there is no doubt about that. Strengthened by RBS getting a backbone he was able to be part of a Board that did not bow to the legal threats made against it and personally against him. That needs to be recognised.

 

Despite trying to represent a view that didn't deify Purslow, but certainly didn't pillory him (and despite the abuse heaped on the Union without any evidence of the famed "campaigns") it looks like he still can't help but try to re-write history:

 

Christian said today: "I came to LFC to lead the Club through a sale process to get the best overall deal including, vitally, the removal of the debt....."

 

He announced himself when he arrived that he was here to secure investment (there was no sale process then remember) and the sale process when it was commenced was ultimately handed primarily to Broughton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worst Chief Exec in our history and thats a fact

 

We were second when he joined and 19th when he left

 

I like you Red Nick. You generally make me chuckle. I imagine you to be a bit of a maverick.

 

However. The above is without doubt the most insanely ridiculous post I have ever read on here. Ever. Without doubt.

 

I feel the need to rep for you for such insanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm.

 

Owners meet the fans.

 

Rafa attacks Purslow in the press.

 

Purslow resigns.

 

All in the space of three days.

 

I'm not saying anything, but if it's white and it's bottled up, it must be milk. No?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...