Purslow parts company with Liverpool FC

[Trucker Paddy]

 

I don't agree that the two journos you name done the most to get rid of them. Not at all. I'd have the likes of Reade and a few more certainly well ahead of Bascombe. I think once Rafa was moved on, then some were able to concentrate their anger a bit better

 

You say Benitez is still doing it now, yet there is virtually nothing coming out anymore, except for the odd little snippet against the former manager, by.....well. I think most of us know. Benitez been interviewed by the BBC is now the new "Leak".

 

There is plenty of fans spreading nonsense from all sides which is taken as former managers or CEOs briefing the press, and I think until these people, more then anyone else, just shut up, we are destined to never move on. Maybe they need to stop listening to former managers or former CEOs and their agendas

 

EDIT - I probably should add that the reason I believe the "unnamed source crap" is because it was going on all the time. The names weren't need as it was painfully obvious who it was that was dragging our name through the mudd.

 

Johnny do you really believe Rafa isn't the source for Fannings fortnightly bashing?

In the previous 12 months which is what I said in my initial post it was Bascombe who revealed the Rhone group intrest and him and Maddock that knew Haung was a fraud, both of them ran the story about Mill Financial and there plans

SOS stiched up the 2 of them, for no reason other than they didn't like Benitez

[Fat Head]

People can have a pop all they like at purslow. Like paddy says he saved the club and stood up to the people who tried to kill it. But lets get one thing straight purslow is hated because he sacked rafa yet it was a unanimous decision by the board. Broughton was on that flag along with purslow hicks and gillett. Yet ian ayre was not. I wonder why?

Didn't you say that the new owners had a big job at the club lined up for Purslow? What happened to that?

[Graham Smith]

SOS stiched up the 2 of them, for no reason other than they didn't like Benitez

 

I can't let this cack go unchallenged.

 

No one got stictched up and "SOS" whatever that means, yet again, held no candle for Benitez.

 

Yet again, what is the evidence for this nonsense?

 

What SOS did do was suss Purslow from the start and despite getting pilloried over the meetings with him and trying to doorstep him to find out exactly who was running the show many saw it as rude to the man and none of the supporters' business.

 

The whole point of trying to hold him to account was to expose the vaccuum he stepped into that allowed him (not Broughton) to dispose of one manager without having a better one lined up and then oversee one of the worst six month's in this Club's history.

 

And let's not overstate his "saving" the Club. Once you get to the point that you see that Hicks and Gillett are finished and the Club is looking at administration it isn't hard to play a part in dealing with the limited, credible offers that were around and then take legal advice that says "Go on, sell, they won't be able to stop you".

 

Especially when the personal risk to you is zero.

[Antynwa]

If Purslow was sacked before Broughton arrived the club wouldn't have been sold.

 

Discuss.

[William_Ulsterman]

Any excuse to post this

 

BOMBAY-TV / Mark / Subtitle movie

 

brilliant

[Graham Smith]

If Purslow was sacked before Broughton arrived the club wouldn't have been sold.

 

Discuss.

 

Simple answer is the Club would still have been sold.

 

We were looking at administration, there were some credible buyers and from all accounts NESV were clearly the most credible and so we were sold.

 

It wasn't rocket science.

[Antynwa]

Simple answer is the Club would still have been sold.

 

We were looking at administration, there were some credible buyers and from all accounts NESV were clearly the most credible and so we were sold.

 

It wasn't rocket science.

 

No we weren't, because Hicks was close to getting finance with Blackstone (maybe Trucker Paddy can clear this one up)

 

If it wasn't for the help of CB we would be none the wiser.

 

Make no mistake, Hicks was looking for finance, and was finding finance. We may or may not have gone into administration but I wouldn't have put it past Hicks to find finance

[JohnnyH]

johnny you say bascombe done fuck all. Well let me tell you it was him who gave kopfaithful all the information on the blackstone gso group that and that alone stopped hicks from refinancing. Because if the emails were not sent then blackstone would have gave hicks the money. That is a fact yet tony barrett wanted to credit kenny fucking haung for stopping blakstone. They are the fucking facts.

 

I didn't say that at all Al.

 

I said that I didn't accept that Bascombe did the most to get rid of H&G.

 

I'm not going to get into the whole thing about Bascombe saying we should "give them time". We all make mistakes. And once Rafa was gone Bascombe certainly put all his efforts against the owners. I just don't agree that he did the most. Lots of journos deserve huge credit for constantly keeping the focus on. Even a certain journo who is despised on here was, at one point, the only one, along with Brian Reade, to be writing regular pieces slamming the ownership while others were saying very little. This was a few years ago before it became

 

But again, I don't for one second think Bascome did fuck all, and all reports are that over the final months he pushed very hard to get them out and helped out otehrs (like kopfaithfull) a hell of a lot.

[Graham Smith]

No we weren't, because Hicks was close to getting finance with Blackstone (maybe Trucker Paddy can clear this one up)

 

If it wasn't for the help of CB we would be none the wiser.

 

Make no mistake, Hicks was looking for finance, and was finding finance. We may or may not have gone into administration but I wouldn't have put it past Hicks to find finance

 

Thought you were asking about Purslow not being around?

[Trumo]

If Purslow was sacked before Broughton arrived the club wouldn't have been sold.

 

Discuss.

 

Simple answer is the Club would still have been sold.

 

We were looking at administration, there were some credible buyers and from all accounts NESV were clearly the most credible and so we were sold.

 

It wasn't rocket science.

 

While I can see the point you're both trying to make, it comes down to the make-up of the boardroom. If Purslow wasn't there, the owners would have appointed a lackey in his place before agreeing to install Broughton as Chairman on the advice of RBS. The 3-2 vote result would have gone the other way (for the NESV bid) and we would likely have been sold to some hedge fund and be in the same boat debt-wise. The owners wouldn't have needed to attempt to change the make-up of the boardroom so Broughton would not have been in a position to act as decisively as he did.

[Redexile]

To say that people hate Purslow just because he was involved in sacking Benitez is nonsense. Granted, I thought it was foolish that a board of directors with no background in football were making decisions on the manager, but I didn't hate him for that. I hated him for the constant lies about net spend, signing players over the manager's head(Joe Cole on 120k a week is working out really well), making suggestions as to who the manager ought to sell, appointing a manager based on media hype, and generally acting well above his remit to the significant detriment of the club.

 

There is one act and one act alone that gives the Purslow tale a redemptive twist, and that was when he voted against the owners. But even that was in his own best interests.

Apart from that, there is absolutely no reason to have liked Purslow and he ought to have been pilloried and chastised for his role in the club up until that point. There is actually, in contradiction to what you say, only one reason why people supported Purslow: because he sacked Benitez. If people think that was a good decision it's a matter of opinion. But apart from that and voting against the owners - which, again, was in his own best interests - he did the square root of fuck all for the club. Far more harm than good.

 

Very glad to see the back of him. Epitome of the 'sleazy businessman' prototype.

 

Explain why so? I mean if he had voted with H&G they would have had control of the club surely he would have cut himself a nice fat position at the club?

[Antynwa]

Thought you were asking about Purslow not being around?

 

We are and you retorted that we'd still be under new owners. Which may not be the case.

[Graham Smith]

While I can see the point you're both trying to make, it comes down to the make-up of the boardroom. If Purslow wasn't there, the owners would have appointed a lackey in his place before agreeing to install Broughton as Chairman on the advice of RBS. The 3-2 vote result would have gone the other way (for the NESV bid) and we would likely have been sold to some hedge fund and be in the same boat debt-wise. The owners wouldn't have needed to attempt to change the make-up of the boardroom so Broughton would not have been in a position to act as decisively as he did.

 

They could not have done as Broughton's original terms of appointment stopped them from appointing to the Board in order to stop that exact circumstance.

 

That was a key element of the case - remember H&G tried to sack the Board.

[JohnnyH]

Johnny do you really believe Rafa isn't the source for Fannings fortnightly bashing?

In the previous 12 months which is what I said in my initial post it was Bascombe who revealed the Rhone group intrest and him and Maddock that knew Haung was a fraud, both of them ran the story about Mill Financial and there plans

SOS stiched up the 2 of them, for no reason other than they didn't like Benitez

 

There's more then just Fanning out there writing. What about all the rumours against the former manager? Do we ignore them and just concentrate on this perceived club ending vendetta by Fanning? Jesus, the last one I heard was fanning was making sure he turned Dalglish against carra? Fucking nonsense.

 

And Fannings articles are been blown way out of proportion to what is in them. I'm not backing Fanning here as I really couldn't give a toss about him, or pretty much any journo for that matter, but I read his last piece, didn't really think much of it, and then when I saw everyone else all going mad, had to re-read it to see what the big issue was. He doesn't rate Carra and so people will hate him from the outset for that. However, he does seem to have made some accusations that carra wanted Rafa out (I think it's fair to assume he did) and there is now a rumour that Carra is to take him to court. So we'll see what happens now.

 

But, as I said, there was a hell of a lot more then Fanning out there shit stirring.

[Graham Smith]

We are and you retorted that we'd still be under new owners. Which may not be the case.

 

The question of Purslow being on or off the Board and Blackstone aren't related.

[Antynwa]

What I'm trying to say is. If some fans, and Rafa got their way and Purslow left. Then what?

 

I don't think we'd be in this position. I think the only reason why Broughton took this job because he felt the Yanks where there for the taking.

[JohnnyH]

If Purslow was sacked before Broughton arrived the club wouldn't have been sold.

 

Discuss.

 

There is no discussion. It wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference.

[Antynwa]

The question of Purslow being on or off the Board and Blackstone aren't related.

 

I was following on from that in defence of CB, and pointing out that administration wasn't always a forgone conclusion.

 

With a board constructed in favour of Hicks finance would be much easier to come across.

[TheResonator]

Explain why so? I mean if he had voted with H&G they would have had control of the club surely he would have cut himself a nice fat position at the club?

 

A debt-addled club with inevitably toxic business prospects. He would be famed as the 'fan' who helped to oversee the decline of one of Britain's greatest sporting institutions. He might have a position in the short term, but his long term reputation would be muck.

 

What looks better: images of Purslow shot through tinted car windows, leaving Anfield with fans rioting around him, or the iconic image of him pumping his fist outside the courts having helped to save Liverpool from administration?

 

Our best interests and his best interests coincided, that's all. He voted for us on the day but it was not a selfless act, nor was it an act of sacrifice. His gesture was good for the club but it was as good for Christian. That is why I don't feel that it absolves him of any of his previous conduct at the club.

[JohnnyH]

What I'm trying to say is. If some fans, and Rafa got their way and Purslow left. Then what?

 

I don't think we'd be in this position. I think the only reason why Broughton took this job because he felt the Yanks where there for the taking.

 

Why wouldn't we have been in that position? Explain what you mean.

[Trumo]

They could not have done as Broughton's original terms of appointment stopped them from appointing to the Board in order to stop that exact circumstance.

 

That was a key element of the case - remember H&G tried to sack the Board.

 

I'm talking about them making that move BEFORE Broughton even came on board, since that is what Ant's question was in the first place. Sure he would still have asked for power over boardroom changes, but since 3 (Hicks, Gillett and the already-installed lackey such as Lori McCutcheon) of the board members would have been voting from the tumours' viewpoint, Broughton would never have needed to exercise his right because the owners already had no reason to change the board. Remember, before Broughton came in, it was Purslow and Ayre against the tumours. If Purslow is gone and replaced before Broughton comes in, it's already 3-1 before Broughton even casts a vote.

[Antynwa]

There is no discussion. It wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference.

 

It depends of course if a Hicks man was put in place, which would have been 99.9% the case.

 

It would have made a difference Johnny, without the vote, there would be no sale. For better or worse things would be different to what they are today.

[Graham Smith]

What I'm trying to say is. If some fans, and Rafa got their way and Purslow left. Then what?

 

I don't think we'd be in this position. I think the only reason why Broughton took this job because he felt the Yanks where there for the taking.

 

That doesn't stack up.

 

Broughton got appointed through RBS pressure and Hicks and Gillett (presumably reluctantly) agreeing to the terms of his appointment. The terms of his appointment put Broughton in virtual complete control of the bigger picture.

 

From that point administration, refinancing or sale were the only options. Broughton appointed Barcap and they trawled the world for buyers - some credible, some not.

 

RBS were putting pressure on for a sale or administration and the Owners were seeking refinancing.

 

Purslow will have played a part in this and where he should get credit was voting against a refinance. But frankly that would have been a no brainer and been the longest suicide note in history if he had voted with the Owners against Broughton and Ayre.

 

Once refinancing had gone as an option then it was a matter of picking the best and most credible buyer. He had his doubts about NESV (and I don't blame him for that) but ultimately they were the best game in town.

[Antynwa]

Why wouldn't we have been in that position? Explain what you mean.

 

Before Broughton was brought in the Americans had full control of the board and the club.

 

Hicks and George could have sacked anyone they liked and replaced anyone they liked. If Christian Purslow had left the club before Broughton, then it's entirely feasible that Broughton wouldn't be here and they would still have control, or they would have had a much greater say in the eventual owners of the club.

[Redexile]

A debt-addled club with inevitably toxic business prospects. He would be famed as the 'fan' who helped to oversee the decline of one of Britain's greatest sporting institutions. He might have a position in the short term, but his long term reputation would be muck.

 

What looks better: images of Purslow shot through tinted car windows, leaving Anfield with fans rioting around him, or the iconic image of him pumping his fist outside the courts having helped to save Liverpool from administration?

 

Our best interests and his best interests coincided, that's all. He voted for us on the day but it was not a selfless act, nor was it an act of sacrifice. His gesture was good for the club but it was as good for Christian. That is why I don't feel that it absolves him of any of his previous conduct at the club.

Thanks , what I am battling to understand here ( and maybe I am wrong) is that apparently Purslow is good friends with the King and yet ,if I'm to believe some posters on here, he is the type of person that Kenny would surely not count amongst his friends?