LFC approach Wigan for martinez

[TheHowieLama]

So Fanchester is silverlining and he is talking to himself?

[WhiskeyJar]

So Fanchester is silverlining and he is talking to himself?

 

Silverlining, xerxes, Momo...I cant tell.

 

Another name was mentioned too but I cant remember.

[TheHowieLama]

Silverlining, xerxes, Momo...I cant tell.

 

Another name was mentioned too but I cant remember.

 

All would be examples of the tried and true comic book adage - the alter ego is always better.

[elvis]

Well yes, that's a fair point. It's all really about Liverpool wanting to keep it quiet not Wigan, but if Whelan wants his compensation and as some are suggesting, quite fancies offloading Martinez anyway then they might have.

 

I suppose though, in the end, Whelan could hold all the cards. If you want to speak with my man, then I'll milk the situation for every penny... and boy has he!

 

But still, if a business is really concerned about privacy, you need an NDA, or you're open to this situation.

 

It's almost laughable how Whelan says "I shouldn't praise my man because I want to keep him, but he's the best ever!". It's like saying "I'm not a wife beater, I know when to stop hitting her"

 

I would go as far as to say the piss stained old fucker would have sacked Martinez anyway - Wigan were shite for months and all season long looked like relegation fodder to everyone.

 

I bet he wouldn't want another season hovering over the trap door , and will almost certainly put Bruce in charge who i think will keep them up next year . He might even bin Martinez still , if we don't hire him

[elvis]

It's not your place to lecture us on "the true face of Liverpool," and your newly acquired faux interest in the financial health of the league, is as bogus as your sincerity. So fuck off.

 

 

Not necessary at all , Daveu owns the forum as far as I know.

[WhiskeyJar]

Gone quite now has it not?

 

[Jairzinho]

Silverlining, xerxes, Momo...I cant tell.

 

Another name was mentioned too but I cant remember.

 

Its Xerxes' less interesting cousin.

[stringvest]

If Kenny had got anywhere near the top four (within a few points) and hadn't spent tens of millions on players who have, for the most part, produced nothing (Downing, Adam, Carroll, Henderson) he would still be here. Even if he hadn't won the CC or the FA Cup, but had a better transfer record and gotten towards the top four, he would be here.

 

They didn't trust him anymore, which is a call they're allowed to make. Sacking Kenny, though against the wishes of many of our fans (including me), cannot be said to be a terrible decision. There is definite logic behind it, as there was in support of him staying.

 

Its the hiring of an unproven, untested, unsuccessful nobody in Kenny's place which is a terrible decision. Martinez may come here and do incredibly well - in fact, I wouldn't be surprised. But the reason it is a terrible decision is because its a massive, massive gamble. And they really don't need to be making such a gamble right now, when there is a certain European Cup winning manager available who has a record of success at our club (that is, relative to their definition of success).

 

Who knows. Fear is the overriding feeling. Not because of the manager, but because I have a feeling we will have very very little to spend.

 

Well, you talk about trust, and it being a call that the owners are allowed to make. A valid point. Use the same criteria and you may be a little closer to understanding why they haven't gone for your man.

[Jairzinho]

Well, you talk about trust, and it being a call that the owners are allowed to make. A valid point. Use the same criteria and you may be a little closer to understanding why they haven't gone for your man.

 

I think its more likely they simply want a younger, less opinionated manager that is willing to work within a fairly rigid structure.

[piscinin]

I think its more likely they simply want a younger, less opinionated manager that is willing to work within a fairly rigid structure.

 

Last thing they want is someone with that single-mindedness that all winners seem to have.

 

Pay homage to the mighty nett spend spreadsheet. Bring your small club mentality along for the ride. Osmosis. Slow-death by lack of ambition.

[jsjazz]

Last thing they want is someone with that single-mindedness that all winners seem to have.

Pay homage to the mighty nett spend spreadsheet. Bring your small club mentality along for the ride. Osmosis. Slow-death by lack of ambition.

 

Good point. Look at the top managers e.g. Mourinho, Capello, Webger, Ferguson etc. All opinionated, full of self belief, and not exactly shrinking violets.

And FSG seemingly want someone who will be "media friendly" and compliant. I'm struggling to think of someone with these qualities who has been successful.

[kalasoma]

I just noticed the 'martinezma' tag. Thank you, whoever you are.

[FrenchEyeGlass]

Well, you talk about trust, and it being a call that the owners are allowed to make. A valid point. Use the same criteria and you may be a little closer to understanding why they haven't gone for your man.

 

That is very true, and its not a point that escapes me. He isn't "my man" by the way.

 

There are numerous other candidates who'd be better than Martinez. More qualified, more experienced, more capable. I wasn't limiting my point to Rafa.

 

Secondly, what is meant by 'trust'? Trust doesn't necessarily mean being great friends, or even agreeing. For me it should mean having faith in your manager's ability, his decisions and his philosophy. Surely these are more important. I don't see why you wouldn't have that with Rafa, or at least more so than you'd have it with Martinez.

 

The owners aren't going to 'get on' with everybody, nor are they going to agree with everybody. They know nothing about football. Thats why it makes sense to employ a manager who knows a lot, and has proven it. With Martinez we don't know how much he knows, and he certainly hasn't proven anything so far.

[FrenchEyeGlass]

Last thing they want is someone with that single-mindedness that all winners seem to have.

 

Pay homage to the mighty nett spend spreadsheet. Bring your small club mentality along for the ride. Osmosis. Slow-death by lack of ambition.

 

This is point i've tried to make in the last post.

 

Every winner is single minded and disagreeable.

 

The owner won't find success in hiring patsies or somebody "willing" to work in their (totally unfounded) structure.

 

A football club is lead by the manager. Not by its owners.

[Strontium]

Are you THAT blind you can't see the potential for that?

 

 

You've been here since January, you ought to know that's a rhetorical question.

[FanchesterCity]

If you're a winner, you're deemed 'determined, single minded, dogged" etc and they sound like brilliant traits.

 

But if you're a loser, similar attributes get labelled 'stubborn, inflexible, bloody minded'

 

That's what happened to Wenger this season. All the traits / labels thrown at him for their dire spell were suddenly transformed into his best attributes.

 

If someone like Van Gaal game in and did well - his kick ass attitude would be praised, but if it went wrong, he'd be labelled as starting a fight in an empty room.

 

But I do agree in general, since there's not many winners in the world who didn't have determination. There's a few 'nice guys' but still a steely side to them underneath the surface. Paisley anyone?

[piscinin]

This is point i've tried to make in the last post.

 

Every winner is single minded and disagreeable.

 

The owner won't find success in hiring patsies or somebody "willing" to work in their (totally unfounded) structure.

 

A football club is lead by the manager. Not by its owners.

 

Can you imagine if someone vowed to run through brick walls for the club.

 

It'd be all, "Oh no think of the mess. And the insurance. And the health and safety aspects. No, no, we can't be having that".

[FanchesterCity]

Can you imagine if someone vowed to run through brick walls for the club.

 

It'd be all, "Oh no think of the mess. And the insurance. And the health and safety aspects. No, no, we can't be having that".

 

The sorts of players that show a fight in them - like Suarez and to a lesser extent Bellamy, get a bad name these days. 'Too aggressive / mouthy' etc.

But that's why fans love them - cos they give a toss.

 

It's the clean cut owners of many clubs who shy away from that imagery - they want clubs to look perfect and have no character or eccentric players - to the detriment of the game I reckon.

[Randy Marsh]

It isn't in FSG's interest for the club to not be successful. Sacking Kenny shows that they will not tolerate underperformance in the league so this notion that they're consciously planning to just coast along through mediocrity is a bit off the mark for me.

 

Whether you agree with sacking Kenny or not, it does at least show that they won't tolerate under performance, and the bus load of staff from various levels who have also walked further confirms that. Thats why I'm willing to give them a chance whoever the appoint, and wait and see what the new man and the new strategy as a whole has to offer.

 

I've thought a lot about this over the past few days and I've come to the conclusion that as long as you trust that they want success as much as we as fans do, and why would they pay £300m for the club if they didn't, then we have to give them the benefit of the doubt at this point.

[piscinin]

The sorts of players that show a fight in them - like Suarez and to a lesser extent Bellamy, get a bad name these days. 'Too aggressive / mouthy' etc.

But that's why fans love them - cos they give a toss.

 

It's the clean cut owners of many clubs who shy away from that imagery - they want clubs to look perfect and have no character or eccentric players - to the detriment of the game I reckon.

 

Yeah for players, it must be a pain in the arse. They demand you turn it on when on the pitch and then turn it right back off again.

[piscinin]

It isn't in FSG's interest for the club to not be successful. Sacking Kenny shows that they will not tolerate underperformance in the league so this notion that they're consciously planning to just coast along through mediocrity is a bit off the mark for me.

 

Whether you agree with sacking Kenny or not, it does at least show that they won't tolerate under performance, and the bus load of staff from various levels who have also walked further confirms that. Thats why I'm willing to give them a chance whoever the appoint, and wait and see what the new man and the new strategy as a whole has to offer.

 

I've thought a lot about this over the past few days and I've come to the conclusion that as long as you trust that they want success as much as we as fans do, and why would they pay £300m for the club if they didn't, then we have to give them the benefit of the doubt at this point.

 

I've said it many times. Define success. From their perspective and then yours. They probably won't be the same thing.

 

They've already said and demonstrated as clear as day winning stuff is less important than enabling additional revenue streams and projecting the right corporate image. They sacked the guy who won stuff and said "sod the corporate image I'm going to protect my star because we won't win by undermining the group".

 

They keep spinning 'reducing the wage bill' as a good thing and no-one is pointing out that in the end that's much the same as 'paying for players who aren't worth as much'.

 

Everyone says you can't make money out of football clubs, so why assume that their goal is to make money out of us? They will use us to make money elsewhere in their interests. They will use us to market Lebron James, to launch their Bostonian buddies New Balance into the global football shirt market, they will use lfc.tv's audience to market Nascar, bastketball etc. None of that requires what we would call success all it requires is CL qualification. That is the ceiling for them. They aspire to arsenal.

[FanchesterCity]

Interesting article here Liverpool's owners battle boom and bust after Boston Red Sox stumble | David Conn | Football | The Guardian

 

Admittedly from late last year, when things didn't go to plan at Red Sox either.

 

Absolutely believe they want Liverpool to succeed. Like you say, they aren't paying for the fun of it, and Liverpool's success = FSG success.

[FanchesterCity]

I've said it many times. Define success. From their perspective and then yours. They probably won't be the same thing.

 

They've already said and demonstrated as clear as day winning stuff is less important than enabling additional revenue streams and projecting the right corporate image. They sacked the guy who won stuff and said "sod the corporate image I'm going to protect my star because we won't win by undermining the group".

 

They keep spinning 'reducing the wage bill' as a good thing and no-one is pointing out that in the end that's much the same as 'paying for players who aren't worth as much'.

 

Everyone says you can't make money out of football clubs, so why assume that their goal is to make money out of us? They will use us to make money elsewhere in their interests. They will use us to market Lebron James, to launch their Bostonian buddies New Balance into the global football shirt market, they will use lfc.tv's audience to market Nascar, bastketball etc. None of that requires what we would call success all it requires is CL qualification. That is the ceiling for them. They aspire to arsenal.

 

I think you make a telling point about not necessarily making money from Liverpool. Liverpool adds a huge brand to their portfolio, and significantly, it's one outside of America - which makes FSG 'global' instead of American.

 

But it's still important that the Liverpool name remains huge, and that it's widely recognised (which isn't necessarily winning things, but the two tend to go hand in hand).

Domestic cups are worth nothing to them, and CL is worth everything. Doing well in CL is their ideal outcome, providing the image of Liverpool is positive and not negative.

Liverpool have been shafted many many times by the FA, UEFA and the press and often portrayed as 'worst fans' etc. This part of Liverpool's (wrong) reputation has to be well and truly extinguished. I think that's why the whole Suarez affair was a nightmare for them.

 

But they've done some things right. They've bought one of the top 5 clubs in Europe with history / brand recognition.

The only downside to that (if any) is that it's harder to make Liverpool any more famous than they already are.

 

I think they'd just be happy to maintain Liverpool's status as CL stalwarts who consistently reach QF stages and can win it every so often. They'll make money purely from being associated with that alone rather than making money directly from the club per se.

[Captain]

I've said it many times. Define success. From their perspective and then yours. They probably won't be the same thing.

 

I think they probably are. And both contain CL football.

[FanchesterCity]

I think they probably are. And both contain CL football.

 

Except when it's a situation like Arsenal, where they're consistently in CL, but not winning it. That's 'success' for investors, but not for their fans.

 

Once you get a taste for being as successful as Liverpool have been, it gets harder and harder to quench that thirst.... I could be wrong, but I think a lot of fans would take CL now, but if they'd had 14 years of it and not won it, frustration would be creeping in!