Purslow parts company with Liverpool FC

[TheResonator]

I don't know what this means. Framework? Decisions made a by manager that didn't exist?

 

Or is the reality that a club struggling to find a purchaser would look to bring in a stop gap manager who could be trusted to try to keep the club ticking over while the matter of prime importance was resolved. I believe that was the intention. I don't believe there was a long term strategy. How could there be? A new owner was about to walk through the door. When you spend hundreds of millions of pounds, you don't do that without having your own strategy for success.

 

It's all well and good fans insisting on an upgrade, but to ignore the context is just silly, imo.

 

By framework, I mean that if a club doesn't have a DOFS or a man at the top who is responsible for transfers (such as Moratti at Inter) it is for the manager to buy players.

 

You seem to be suggesting that in the absence of a manager it was okay for a man with no background in football to make judgement calls worth millions of pounds. That is lunacy.

 

Whether or not there was a long-term strategy the appointment of an interim manager ought to have included giving that manager discretion over transfers and a direction for the club. Otherwise we may have well have had a headcount freeze.

 

Done with this argument now anyway, it's become tedious.

[stringvest]

I must admit that way our two gold members are drowning here is making me laugh.

 

keep laughing, Captain.

[Carra_is_legend]

I'm sorry Graham, but I think you've lost grip on reality a bit here. I don't know how to break this to you, but Broughton also had to take part in making some decisions that were definitely outside his original remit, just to keep the club running. To deny it, and to cling on to the belief that Purslow was running the club just how he wanted to is just bizarre. The worldview and thought processes that have no doubt been behind some of the missives from SoS to NESV and the financial institutions.

 

Let's leave it there.

 

Pretty much. Broughton made some decisions. Purslow made some. Both didn't deserve to make those decisions for a top football club. They are football fans but had or have no pedigree on managing a football club on a day to day basis. Whether their decisions were crap or good, it depends on opinions.

 

But the most important thing is they were both put in a place to make those decisions when they didn't deserve it or capable of it. But, THAT is how our club was, just a few fucking months ago. How can anyone forget that? Forget Benitez, forget Joe fucking Cole. A few months ago the two most important men in our history, the two men we would have all shed blood to get rid of, were Gillett and Hicks. WE WERE A FUCKING JOKE.

 

The same people - Purslow and Brougton got RID of them. That is all that mattered a few months ago. Did we have a plan? Yes. Did we have a formula? Yes. Did we have the best people advising us? Yes. Did we have the best lawyers? Yes. Did we know what exactly we were doing? Yes. Did we fuck Gillett and Hicks up the backside? Yes. Did we do everything we can to get rid of them, from fans to the board? Yes.

 

Did we appoint the wrong manager in the summer? Yes. Did we have the wrong men overlooking the football matters? Yes.

 

Does it matter? Fucking no. I certainly can live with that with the long term love for the club in my mind.

[Menc]

If you’re overseeing a club that’s strapped for cash and has no manager in place, you don’t sign a player with a lot of question marks hanging over him on a +100k/week contract for 4 years. If Purslow was worried that the club would miss out on potential targets he shouldn’t have sacked a manager without having a new manager lined up, or at least an inkling of who he was going to appoint. Nor do you handicap future managers by shipping out players on year-long loan deals because you don’t like the look of them.

[Graham Smith]

Yep welcome to Liverpool Football Club Circa 2007-2010.

 

Just because it wasn't publicly announced doesn't mean he wasn't supposed to make those decisions. If he wasn't supposed to be doing what he was doing, why didn't someone sack him?

 

I agree with others this is going round in circles and you'll consider Purslow an 8 or 9 out of 10 when I see him as a 4. Opinions, it's what the game is about.

 

However, he wasn't sacked because there was no one in control - we were a rudderless ship and he filled the hole where there should have been proper management.

 

Broughton wasn't here at all, he was managing a sale from his offices in London and had zero day to day control.

[Graham Smith]

He did not have free reign. You're spouting nonsense.

 

See my post above.

 

Proof of a free rein?

 

Hodgson over Dalglish. Cole's contract. Carragher's contract. The player's list for shipping out. Hodgson's "ask Christian" comments.

 

The list goes on, how is that not as close to a free rein as you can get?

[Antynwa]

If someone had offered you what we have now.

 

For the sake of what we experienced with Hodgson.

 

I'd take it.

[JohnnyH]

If someone had offered you what we have now.

 

For the sake of what we experienced with Hodgson.

 

I'd take it.

 

Why on earth should we have to have one to have the other?

 

Broughton did a great job with RBS in selling LFC just before it went into administration.

 

Purslow? Yeah, whatever.

[Menc]

If someone had offered you what we have now.

 

For the sake of what we experienced with Hodgson.

 

I'd take it.

 

We all would. But what we have now, minus what we experienced with Hodgson, might have left us with a very real chance of champions league football next year, and without the upcoming headaches of scraping Poulsen, Konchesky and Joe Cole off the wage bill. I’d certainly take that.

[Durango]

He drew a very good salary out of the club, yet was one of the most incompetent employees in Liverpool history. His terrible decisions (Hodgson and Joe Cole in particular aren't even debatable. The Carragher contract extension and Benitez compensation are more debatable considering the timing and sums involved and Benitez proceeding to walk straight into a job with the European champions) cost the club a lot of money. Then there was the fact he was telling Hodgson who to buy and sell. Hodgson said how Purslow gave him a list of players to get rid of. And he was a proven liar, as shown with what happened with the Union. What a cracking fella!

 

So why is he treated as a demi-god on here by the likes of Ant and his followers? Yes he voted with Broughton, although as Graham pointed out what was his other options? Side with Gillett and Hicks and still show his face at Anfield? Plus, Ian Ayre voted with Broughton as well and he doesn't get the hero status from the Ant crowd that Purslow does.

 

What everyone seems to forget is that AYERS WAS APPOINTED BY HICKS AND GILLETT.

Broughton and Purslow where forced onto the Club by the banks as a condition of refinance.

 

Broughton and Purslow went on there merry way when NESV bought us,back to their City jobs.

Ayers had more to lose than Broughton and Purslow combined and voted against HIS EMPLOYERS,yet gets the least credit!!!

[Antynwa]

Look don't get me wrong I believe Purslow made some wrong decisions. He clearly did, look at the Hodgson decision.

 

But honestly. The same people who said the managerial situation was irrelevant during the ownership debacle, are now using it against Purslow.

 

The vast majority of people on here agreed that the ownership issue was the biggest issue at the football club, and it was that big issue which Purslow ultimately helped us with.

[Antynwa]

What everyone seems to forget is that AYERS WAS APPOINTED BY HICKS AND GILLETT.

Broughton and Purslow where forced onto the Club by the banks as a condition of refinance.

 

Broughton and Purslow went on there merry way when NESV bought us,back to their City jobs.

Ayers had more to lose than Broughton and Purslow combined and voted against HIS EMPLOYERS,yet gets the least credit!!!

 

He gets plenty of credit. It's just Purslow is the dividing figure.

[Durango]

Right, ok Dicko. Let's ignore the fact that we were on our arses, no money, trading downwards on players, lunatic owners, and the manager was dragging us into oblivion. A monkey in a tracksuit would have had a better chance of steadying the ship (and getting the club sold) than Benitez. And would probably have done a better job than Hodgson.

 

Why did Purslow sound out Mark Hughes and not Dalglish to replace Benitez?

[Durango]

Your second paragraph - a few corrections:

 

1. It was not Purslow's decision to get rid of Benitez. He may have wanted him to go, but he was not in a position to make the decision on his own.

 

 

Complete and utter bollocks,

 

the day Broughton came to the club he said "I will have NO INPUT ANY football natters I'm here to sell the club

[Coro]

 

But honestly. The same people who said the managerial situation was irrelevant during the ownership debacle, are now using it against Purslow.

 

:lol:

[stringvest]

Why did Purslow sound out Mark Hughes and not Dalglish to replace Benitez?

 

I have absolutely no idea. I have no idea why the club didn't recruit Kenny straight away. We'll have to wait for the memoirs for that. Just because I refuse to demonise Purslow doesn't mean I agree with everything he did or every decision he made. Nor do I think he's a saint or a legend. I really don't. I don't think he's a cunt or a cartoon baddie either.

[stringvest]

Complete and utter bollocks,

 

the day Broughton came to the club he said "I will have NO INPUT ANY football natters I'm here to sell the club

 

Yes he did - or words to that effect. Guess what? Circumstances changed. How much input Purslow, Broughton, Gillett, Hicks, Ayers or the ghost of Phil Easton had is, I'm afraid, a matter for conjecture. All I would bet money on is that Purslow was not the only person to make or sanction that decision.

[Durango]

Yes he did - or words to that effect. Guess what? Circumstances changed. How much input Purslow, Broughton, Gillett, Hicks, Ayers or the ghost of Phil Easton had is, I'm afraid, a matter for conjecture. All I would bet money on is that Purslow was not the only person to make or sanction that decision.

 

 

Sorry KK,no can do,

 

What would BA shareholders have said/done if Broughton pulled the same stroke on them as he did with Liverpool,circumstances DIDN'T change

[Captain]

I have absolutely no idea. I have no idea why the club didn't recruit Kenny straight away.

 

I do. As do most Liverpool supporters.

 

The process was extremely predictable.

[stringvest]

I do. As do most Liverpool supporters.

 

The process was extremely predictable.

 

please tell.

[stringvest]

Sorry KK,no can do,

 

What would BA shareholders have said/done if Broughton pulled the same stroke on them as he did with Liverpool,circumstances DIDN'T change

 

look CB, this argument getting us nowhere. Again. I've gotta get some sleep. Night night.

[Durango]

look CB, this argument getting us nowhere. Again. I've gotta get some sleep. Night night.

 

KK,what's with the CB,

care to enlighten me

[stringvest]

KK,what's with the CB,

care to enlighten me

 

First word is something you sit on.....

[Durango]

First word is something you sit on.....

 

Whhhhoooaar,

the gloves are off now KK