rob

I'm afraid this is a case of us (the club and supporters) reaping what we sow. I can easily recall times, particularly here at TLW, during the reign of Houllier and Rafa, where supporters were frothing at the mouth about the amount of money 'wasted' on 'foreign shite'. Quickly followed by zealous demands to 'buy British', as these players knew the culture of English football and would better adapt to life in the Premier League. Some sensible supporters highlighted the point that this could easily lead us down the path to mid-table mediocrity; that foreign players are where the value is in a transfer market that is over-inflated for British players. Despite all of the other problems that have hindered our ability to win the league again (ownership, manager turnover, the rise of free-spending clubs like City and Chelsea), I would hazard a fairly (I think) reasonable guess that a significant contributing factor to our recent mediocrity has been the shift in focus toward buying overvalued British players. Even clubs like Everton, Newcastle, and Villa, that had been among the worst offenders on this score, have finally realized that the value (and, correspondingly, the opportunity to improve quickly) lies in foreign players from relatively unfancied clubs and leagues. Meanwhile, we've been left behind. Much poorer for it and without a lot of measurable success. I wonder if the 'buy British' and 'let's have a British manager' brigade has had the opportunity to ponder whether the state we're in and have been the last few years has been worth it.

He's NOT a Canadian businessmen. He's an American who used to own a Canadian hockey team (now safely back in Canadian hands).

Just so we avoid any unnecessary smearing: Gillett is not a Canadian. He owned the Montreal Canadiens (now back in Canadian hands), but he's an American.

Setting aside for the moment the issue of the amount, if any, Rafa has left to spend, let's consider what he has done with whatever limited resources he has: purchase of Glen Johnson for 17m (much of that exchanged for funds still owed to us) and Alberto Aquilani for upwards of 20m (some of that depending on incentives). Now, despite rarely posting I've been around here long enough to know that *many* posters on here have excoriated Rafa in the past for spending too much of what he does have available to spend (again, let's set aside how much that actually amounts to) on 'squad players'. Quite often the claim is that if Rafa would merely spend to give us the best 11 possible, we would be more competitive in the league. This year marks the first where Rafa has arguably done precisely what these critics have urged him to do. Instead of spreading the Johnson and Aquilani money on, say, a fourth choice CB, a squad player for central midfield, a squad player for the wing and a third choice striker with the funds available, he spent it all on quality. Johnson was arguably the pick of the crop for attacking full backs (incidentally, something many have been hounding Rafa to sign for some time). Aquilani, although injured, providing he delivers on what's promised, provides an attacking option in central midfield we've lacked since Gerrard moved behind Torres. (The only other midfielder we could have afforded at that price who supposedly wanted to come here, Gareth Barry, was eviscerated by many people on here for his insufficient prowess as an attacking midfielder.) So, on that score, Rafa did much of what his critics have long counseled him to do with the funds he has available. And, yet, here we are with large numbers of people questioning Rafa's approach in the transfer market. Claims that we/he should have 'strengthened the squad' abound. Moans that we have a quality first 11 but tremendous weakness in the back-up positions are unnervingly prevalent. To be honest, I can only sit back and wonder with complete and utter bemusement what some people would have the manager do. Because it seems to me he simply can't win with large sections of our support. Either he spends too much money on squad players and not enough on quality for the first 11 or he spends too much on luxury, premium quality players for the first 11 and not enough on squad players. Now, it's all fair enough if people want to blame those above Rafa (i.e. the owners) for not providing him with the funds to do both. But, obviously, if that's the argument then the blame needs to directed appropriately at them, not the manager. The fact of the matter is that Rafa has been consistently faced with insufficient funds to do both. Initially (indeed, arguably up until this season) he has tried to balance a top-quality signing (if any) with a host of squad players. As results indicate (at least in terms of winning the league), it hasn't worked. Therefore, Rafa tried a different approach this summer and tried to go exclusively for the most quality he could afford for the first team. Now, after one bloody league game, a surprisingly large section of our support seemingly wants to take a pop at him for it. As far as I'm concerned, it beggars belief.

Justice for the 96. We will always remember them.

Different era, lads. Where is Nottingham Forest these days? Norwich? Derby? Perhaps not the same as comparing us to the Mancs, but hopefully the point stands. We are no longer living in a time where football success can be developed as it once was. Those days are gone, sadly. If you can't simply buy the top players, then the cards are stacked against you - and it's a long, uphill climb to merely compete. The issue of whether Rafa could have done more with the money he has to spend, I don't dispute for a moment. He certainly could have. The problem is, at a club like Manchester United, flushed with cash, the manager can afford a lot of poor buys along the road to great buys. More importantly, he can compensate for poor buys quickly. At a club like ours, the margin for error is razor thin. If the manager buys poorly, then there's limited options to rectify the mistake(s). If you want to blame Rafa for the lack of a title, fair enough. But I think you must, in doing so, accept that your choice of replacement will have to be near perfect in the transfer market to compete with the Mancs. A case in point is Arsenal, when they did compete. In those seasons, Wenger had great success in the transfer market Arsenal were able to win the title. In those where his success was mixed, they haven't been close.

Funny it's come to this to motivate me to post. As you'll see from my join date, I've been a 'visiting' member (i.e. a non-contributor) at TLW since, well, the days when this website was in its relative infancy. I've never felt inclined to speak my piece, as I prefer to read/listen to others. Until now. I read the forums in the darkest of the Houllier days, and I have to agree with Snez1 - at least then there was some context (mainly with respect to the rapidly deteriorating prospects for the club when it came to results on the pitch) to appreciate the vitriol aimed at the manager. These days, there seems to be something more sinister informing a lot of the debate. Despite what Brownie is saying - and I'm not necessarily questioning his particular motivations - a lot of people on here DO look for any excuse to slate and belittle Rafa. That's just plain for me, a somewhat disengaged observer, to see. Yes, he has made many baffling decisions. Yes, he doesn't seem to be particularly adept (in the eyes of many supporters) when it comes to man-management. And, yes, this can rub a lot of people (especially some of our supporters) the wrong way. But facts are facts. We have won a European Cup, been runners-up, and have lost in the semi-finals of the Champions League; we have won an FA Cup; we have been to a League Cup final; and this season (in February, no less) we are in the thick of a challenge for number 19. These are indisputable results that we have achieved under Rafa. Could we have done even better? Maybe so. Perhaps we might have converted more draws to victories. But could we be doing a lot worse if we didn't have Rafa? I think this is something that often gets papered over. For all of the urgency to point out the manager's flaws, there seems (to me, at least) a lot less to acknowledge the strengths that he, in particular, has and has instilled in our club. For one, we are bloody tough to defeat. (In large part this explains our success in the Champions League). Of course, as the point is often made, 38 draws leaves you 'undefeated' but also does you little good in a title race. But too often the hyperbole trumps good sense when it comes to analyzing our conversion of draws to wins or even losses. Under Houllier and Evans, for example, we simply lost too many matches to keep up. Yes, two wins and three losses is better than five draws. But, then, two wins and four losses is worse than two wins and four draws, or even one win and five draws. And I think people forget all too easily how easy we were to beat over the course of the season in the Houllier and Evans days. Anyway, I digress. What I want to say, I suppose, is that I personally feel that the personal vendettas certain posters on TLW seem to have against the manager are startling in their boldness. Sure, not everyone is as bold as atk in nailing the colours to the mast, but the sentiments are not always that far off the mark. And that is what disturbs me the most about the general tenor of debate on here these days. Some people just can't wait to stick the boots in. It's sad, really. Especially when, whether you like how we got here or not, we are fighting for a title that has eluded us for far too long.