The Football Committee

[Gym Beglin]

Which means we can take even longer when it comes to pissing about when trying to sign players.

 

Which is why we're getting this together now, so we can prepare for targets both in January AND the Summer.

[TheHowieLama]

It is a big mistake to see this as a media invention.

 

The structure of how players and bought or sold, and whther that works, is key to the future of our club.

 

Bearing in mined the fact that our new scouting team haven't even started yet no-one is talking about success, or failure.

 

 

Missed it by that much.

[xerxes]

I've got news for you. It has. It's naive to think that Liverpool managers have been able to buy whoever the hell they like. From Shankly's day. The dynamics may have been different under each regime, but it has always existed in some form.

I agree, but it was within the context of a clued up board and Company Secretary, and established Boot Room.

 

The club has not been this exposed in over half a century, pre Shankly.

[stringvest]

what Brendan said in June

 

Thanks to Anubis on the MF. It would appear that Rodgers understands the importance of having a team of people with football knowledge to provide input to decisions on new recruits and strategy. If the infrastructure doesn't exist, build it. All successful managers rely on it. Those who try to run a football club as a dictatorship are eventually exposed as the fools that they are.

[Guest San Don]

This way of a committee has really affected Barcelona and Man City.

 

Really? Mancini doesnt seem to agree with you. He was banging on about marwood (no committee there) not being active in the transfer market.

 

Bacelona are on a different level. Benitez wasnt found of the committe style either.

[Guest San Don]

I've got news for you. It has. It's naive to think that Liverpool managers have been able to buy whoever the hell they like. From Shankly's day. The dynamics may have been different under each regime, but it has always existed in some form.

 

Sorry you've missed my other postings on this. Im well aware the club has vetoed some transfers in the past. Probably the highest profile one being gasgoine who wanted to play with Beardsley at Liverpool.

 

The club knocked it back beause we couldnt match or better spurs bid. That, is a completely different scenario as I alluded to. If the club hasnt got the cash to finance a deal, fair enough but, someone other than the manager saying no to a transfer because they dont think there is any value or resale in the player is completely different and new to LFC.

[TheHowieLama]

Value for fee paid and whether or not a player would have resale value are two different and unconnected things - most can see this and understand that there a number of factors involved (wages and type of player come to mind) in any transfer from any period. The manager at LFC has never worked with a free hand - financially or otherwise.

[stringvest]

Sorry you've missed my other postings on this. Im well aware the club has vetoed some transfers in the past. Probably the highest profile one being gasgoine who wanted to play with Beardsley at Liverpool.

 

The club knocked it back beause we couldnt match or better spurs bid. That, is a completely different scenario as I alluded to. If the club hasnt got the cash to finance a deal, fair enough but, someone other than the manager saying no to a transfer because they dont think there is any value or resale in the player is completely different and new to LFC.

 

Couldn't or wouldn't? Where there's a will there's a way. The board has always taken a view on the value of a player - including any potential sell-on value. It beggars belief that they would do otherwise. Have a read of the link in my post above. See what Rodgers said in June. I think people are choosing to believe the (potentially misrepresented) picture in the Telegraph while ignoring the plan that Rodgers set out in June. Let's see what the make up of this team is first.

[xerxes]

If the infrastructure doesn't exist, build it. All successful managers rely on it. Those who try to run a football club as a dictatorship are eventually exposed as the fools that they are.

 

I agree that it’s no good moaning about a lack of footballing infrastructure, we need to do something about it. Whether this is the right formula, I am not confident, but it is better than nothing.

 

I am not so sure about your dictatorships comment. The most successful regimes are invariably dictatorial whether led at Chairman, or, manager level. When you have the right man it works fine, less so when you haven’t.

[TheHowieLama]

Of course we could have - the board ponied up near 30% more for Rush to come back - the decision was made based on value.

Boggles the mind how some folks bang on about the old days but seem to have forgotten the reality. 1990 Kenny couldn't get any money for a transfer - then came 10 years where we spent more in wages and transfers than pretty much all of England and didn't produce.

Edited September 9, 2012 by TheHowieLama

[Zippy]

Sorry you've missed my other postings on this. Im well aware the club has vetoed some transfers in the past. Probably the highest profile one being gasgoine who wanted to play with Beardsley at Liverpool.

 

The club knocked it back beause we couldnt match or better spurs bid. That, is a completely different scenario as I alluded to. If the club hasnt got the cash to finance a deal, fair enough but, someone other than the manager saying no to a transfer because they dont think there is any value or resale in the player is completely different and new to LFC.

 

Could be wrong but pretty sure that the board stopped Roy Evans buying Sheringham for exactly that reason.

[stringvest]

I agree that it’s no good moaning about a lack of footballing infrastructure, we need to do something about it. Whether this is the right formula, I am not confident, but it is better than nothing.

 

I am not so sure about your dictatorships comment. The most successful regimes are invariably dictatorial whether led at Chairman, or, manager level. When you have the right man it works fine, less so when you haven’t.

 

As much as he'd like to think he is, Ferguson is not a dictator. He has trusted football people around him to counsel him. He has owners who will stand up to him. And he has an exec who liaises between him and the owners on budgetary and commercial matters.

 

Who would you regard as successful dictatorial regimes? Chelsea? Arsenal?

[silverlining]

Because knowledge is power, I suppose.

 

Brendan has, say, 20 close contacts he can speak to about the pro's of signing a player (attitude, home life, social life), and if he gets six other well-connected people around a table then each one of them also has 20 contacts, then that's a great database when it comes to discussing the merits and aptitude of his targets.

 

One of them could know something vital about a player that we may otherwise have missed, like we didn't know Henderson and Downing were cowardly shithouses, for example, or Adam had questionable refuelling habits.

 

Buying a player will always come with risk, but this group is designed to eliminate as many risks from buying a player as its possible to have. You can already tell Rodgers likes his players to be consummate professionals, that's why he targeted the players he has already worked with, because he can trust them.

He's kind of recreating the bootroom.

 

Jesus Fuck.

 

Your drivel is sometimes unutterably painful.

[xerxes]

As much as he'd like to think he is, Ferguson is not a dictator. He has trusted football people around him to counsel him. He has owners who will stand up to him. And he has an exec who liaises between him and the owners on budgetary and commercial matters.

 

Who would you regard as successful dictatorial regimes? Chelsea? Arsenal?

Ferguson I agree is a tricky one.

 

In some respects he is undoubtedly dictatorial, but I also agree that he is a very smooth boardroom operator and very good at selecting, and accepting, talent to work alongside him. The dividing line between being a dictator and commanding dictatorial powers because you are usually right is an uncertain one. Ditto for Wenger.

 

Successful dictatorial regimes? Abrahamovic. Walker’s Blackburn, the Italian and Spanish Presidentes

[FanchesterCity]

Ferguson I agree is a tricky one.

 

In some respects he is undoubtedly dictatorial, but I also agree that he is a very smooth boardroom operator and very good at selecting, and accepting, talent to work alongside him. The dividing line between being a dictator and commanding dictatorial powers because you are usually right is an uncertain one. Ditto for Wenger.

 

Successful dictatorial regimes? Abrahamovic. Walker’s Blackburn, the Italian and Spanish Presidentes

 

Hitler's track record was largely successful too.

In fact, the majority of dictators are, in order to have been deemed a dictator at all.

A sticky end usually becomes them in time, but that's true of non dictatorial regimes too.

[TheHowieLama]

 

Successful dictatorial regimes? Abrahamovic. Walker’s Blackburn, the Italian and Spanish Presidentes

 

I would agree with LaPorta - not so sure about Perez (at best he is 50/50).

Juventus, which one? Berlusconi, which time? Moratti has had a nice run. Of course since there is a built in check/balance system it is really the farthest thing from dictatorial.

 

As for Roman - I think if the mailman had the ability to burn close to 3/4 of a billion in losses over a ten year period he could do as well. You could probably argue they should have won more during that time and he prevented it.

[Tommy Lawrence]

Ferguson I agree is a tricky one.

 

In some respects he is undoubtedly dictatorial, but I also agree that he is a very smooth boardroom operator and very good at selecting, and accepting, talent to work alongside him. The dividing line between being a dictator and commanding dictatorial powers because you are usually right is an uncertain one. Ditto for Wenger.

 

Successful dictatorial regimes? Abrahamovic. Walker’s Blackburn, the Italian and Spanish Presidentes

 

Jack Walker would be the first to admit that he knew fuck all about football.

 

But John Williams did.

[stringvest]

As for Roman - I think if the mailman had the ability to burn close to 3/4 of a billion in losses over a ten year period he could do as well. You could probably argue they should have won more during that time and he prevented it.

 

yep. You could argue that while Mourinho was there, they had two dictators, neither listening to each other. Then Roman bought a megaphone and a very expensive Ukranian, and that was that.

[TheHowieLama]

a very expensive Ukranian, and that was that.

 

Bad mistake there - nothing against expensive Ukranians but probably better by the hour.

[Unrighteous]

I reckon the Dempsey thing came down to them not wanting to sign any players over 26ish, I bet.

[moof]

Camels are more useful than horses anyway.

[sir roger]

Camels are more useful than horses anyway.

 

Bet's down today, Moof ?

[WaltonRed]

Lance, thats fair enough but they should of coughed up money for him to buy someone younger then, they dont grow on trees do they

[Chip Butty]

[WaltonRed]

I hope we dont release the details this week of all weeks

 

I reckon Cryuff is nailed on to be the new figure head

 

I'm baffled and bemused by all this and I predict it'll end in tears