fredbob

Ive always wondered what goes on in the negotiation process and how it takes so much time with one player, what more is there to say than "how much do you want for that player?"

You're not Bob Murray are you, he knew all about accounts. No I'm not. I think even Bob Murray would give up trying to explain the clubs finances to you though. he doesn't have to explain anything other than the success his club had when he ran it. Your talking about accounts, and I'm giving you a very successful accountant. If you think you know better than him how to run a football club........then again, you still back this DOF bollocks don't you , so you're detached from reality in both directions. Yes, that's exactly how it works, he was an accountant and since his club didn't get up to much that explains all you need to know. Just keep on borrowing a spending while avoiding answering all questions about where the moneys coming from is the way eh, Stevie. And I'm the one supposed to be detached from reality. so yo think that because Bob Murray did a good job for his club do you, matthew lad ? I suppose you do have an extra motivation here, other than being unable to admit your DOF bollocks has been shown up for what it is, and this is that your man Mike will be responsible for us playing in your local area of Bristol soon. Care to tell us when Arsenal and Liverpool are going bust, and why their supporters are so unhappy these days Arsenal are in very real danger of struglling financially, I imaigine they're in a posiiton to spend should the worse happen becasue they have been managed financially and not spent huge amounts. Liverpool on the other hand are a team waiting to collapse.

Yep - all signings should be concluded if 24 hours, the precedent has been set.

I always wanted Veloso, thought he'd be a brilliant signing and just what we needed and Carrick type midfielder but for some reason i cant help but think this will be a Viana Mk II if it comes off, not sure if he's physically up to it. could be a Viana moment in 2 senses as maybe just maybe we should be looking at Moutihno instead.

...and then can't afford anyone else ourselves. How did we pay for Nolan?

We'll get what we want, its thenature of the window - ive not seen them being linked with any other keepers this window so they've got theremind set on Given and we're using thewindow as it should be - drawing it out till they offer more. We're basically in a win win situaiotn here, we either get what we're after or keep shay withthe possilbity of "proving our worth" or sellinghim in the summer.

More tarnished than him faking injury so he didn't have to play against City? He didnt fake injury did he? I thought that was the "officila" line that clubs give.

Think he's had his day here, I do feel bad for some of the crap he's had to put up with but this is too much, his attitude has stunk and i can handle atitude if you step up to the plate week after week but he hasnt, (not entirely his fault), I happen to think he's got massive potential, genuinely think he could be one of the better players in the premiership. He just desperately needs someone to put there arm round him. 22 years old and has played under 6 managers, thats a ridiculous stat.

Yet you were happy to claim that there was an improvement in the squad in Ashley's first season because we finished 1 place higher than the year before (with the same points and worse goal difference) even though Roeder was supposedly a terrible manager and we had an injury list for the first half of that season we're only just matching now. We'll get nowhere near those 43 points this season and it's not all down to Kinnear. Is it Kinnear's fault we've conceded 39 goals so far even in a season where Given has been fit and back up to form? I agree you cannot account for the injury list we have now, the difference is in 06-07 the injuries meant the difference between a possible European place and lower mid table. Now it means the difference between lower mid table and possible relegation. Do you honestly still believe this is the best squad we've had for years? I dont see the point in ever having to answer to you - you always get so close yet so far. As for the 1 place higher stat equating to prrof of imprved squad, honestly, i dont rememeber that, i may of used it to claim a hollow victory against those who say its all doom and gloom but not as a measurement of squad improvement. I would point to the imporvement. I dont know about everyone else, but i look at the 11 places on the field and compare them with what we had previously and qute frankly if you dont see the improvements then you're watchin the wrong sport. We were all speculating that this squad with Keegan in charge could get us into the top 8, so the only variable to this and the current situation is ridiculous injuries and a terrible manager, moan and bitch all you want but the fundamental point stands, the first team has team ahs definitely improved, we're struggling becasue of things that are unnaccountable for, unless you thinmk the club should of signed 6 CM and 8 strikers who were all good enough for the first team. Open yours eyes. You mention Roeder and his team, well make the comparisions yourself, see if you think that squad was better or not.

Just considering the strength of the squad: GK- Given, Harper, Krul, Forster: very strong FB- Beye, Enrique: One player for each position, hardly a strong squad and was also something Keegan constantly mentioned in the summer CB- Collocini, Taylor, Bassong, Cacapa, Edgar: Several players but Taylor and Bassong are both still young, sale of Faye seems ridiculous now although I do accept that it was Keegan who fell out with him CM- Butt, Barton, Guthrie, Geremi: Butt has been fading for few seasons now and obviously needs replacing, Barton was in prison at start of season, Guthrie was a good addition, Geremi requires no comment Wingers- Jonas, Duff, N'Zogbia: 3 players for two postions, one of whom is constantly injured, sale of Milner was ridiculous Strikers- Owen, Martins, Viduka, Shola, Carrol, Xisco- Looks good on paper but in reality the experienced 4 of the 6 are more at home in the physioroom than on the pitch I accept that Kinnear is completely clueless and that a talented manager with this squad might have done a lot better. However, to say Wise has done a good job is giving him far more credit than he deserves. I realise that the squad is by no means perfect - it isnt there are glaring weaknesses like LB and the centre of midfield, but if you actually look at our starting 11 its actually quite good. I really dont know how many teams could cope with losing 3 centre midfielders andmore importantly 4 strikers. Its just something you cant account for, thats why Im only really willing to criticse the "transfer team" for not having back ups for the FB posiiton, althouh i do realise that the quality of the CM needs addressing but not neccsearily the depth. If you take hindsight into account and look to see what was required from the club to cover the probelems we're facing today, they would of had to of had 6 CM on the books, and 8 strikers to cover the current injury crisis - that to me is an impossilbe ask, however FB cover isnt. That why i maintian that actually they havent dont a bad job.

People need to realise that thee strengthof the squad isnt the issue here, its the man in charge that is, Wise has done his job and in my opinion has done it well, we've added qulaity to the team but i defy most people who'd claim that any other team in the premiership wouldnt struggle with the injuries we're having, theres obvious exceptions, like Man U and Chelseas but we are in no position to be comparing ourselves with them. Imagine in Wigan had the same amount of injuries as us. The only single issue that can be atrributed to our current slump is the man incharge, thats the key to this whole thing.

This is THE biggest decision in the clubs history, I really really hope they get it right, Id love to go back when we had Keegan and thigs seemed so rosy, not had that feeling in 6 years. Praying someone sees the light, the problem isnt the ingredients, its the chef.

The question that haunts me is where we would be if Ashley had the balls to stick to the plan and gave Terim the job instead of trying to sell. I look at how comfortable West Ham are with no money, a s*** squad, and an unproven manager, and I shed a tear. I didnt relaise Terim was the plan, my guess is that Poyet was the number 1 choice, better than Kinnear. Its a shame that the fans didnt protest, Im not sure he'd put the club up for sale if they hadnt of protested so vehemently. West Ham is a prime example of what we should be doing, said it 3 months ago, ill say it again. My opinion, and i dont care who this pisses off is that those who protested are a big part of the problem we face now. I agree but there were never, ever not going to be protests when a club legend like Kevin Keegan walks out, ostensibly due to the interference of the "Cockney Mafia." Keegan's fault for leaving us in the shit. Ashley's fault for appointing him in the first place, and then caving at the first sign of trouble. Why the fuck is everyone at the top of this club so weak minded. I have no idea - i genuinely think this place is cursed, all i know is that one good appointment will turn this around. This whole thing is a paradox - we're so far behind and in so much shit yet so close to getting it all right. Unforntunately i dont think Ashley and Wise have it in them to go for the right man opting to play it too safe and too easy, we'll go for another small timer i think.

The question that haunts me is where we would be if Ashley had the balls to stick to the plan and gave Terim the job instead of trying to sell. I look at how comfortable West Ham are with no money, a shit squad, and an unproven manager, and I shed a tear. I didnt relaise Terim was the plan, my guess is that Poyet was the number 1 choice, better than Kinnear. Its a shame that the fans didnt protest, Im not sure he'd put the club up for sale if they hadnt of protested so vehemently. West Ham is a prime example of what we should be doing, said it 3 months ago, ill say it again. My opinion, and i dont care who this pisses off is that those who protested are a big part of the problem we face now.

I wonder who we would of gone after Keegan left. Theres no way in a million years that Joe was anywhere near the top of the list when Keegan left.

Thanks for the info on him, you would have better off telling this lot you are under 12 to put them off. Im pretty confident that would encourage them.

Do you honestly think adopting Ashley's methods (hiring an inexperienced DoF over the manager, net £0 transfers, allowing the star striker's contract to run down to get him off the wages, trying to sell the club, bringing in a manager unable to find a job anywhere else) back in 2001 would have got us into the CL? Is hindsight only ok to use when it's about Ashley then? Hindsight is used when you agree (or disagree) with actions at the time but subsequent events prove them to be wrong (or correct). In this case I agreed with the decision to push forward then and it proved successful, so it's not using hindsight on my part. Besides, Ozzie is the hindsight king. He'll love it. Remember the financial and on field situation at the time: The debt (£66m) was larger than the turnover (£55m) which relative to turnover is more than the "debt" now The club was making loses (£15.5 in 2000, £8.9m in 2001) which relative to turnover are equivalent to the loses now The club had finished 13, 13, 11, 11 in the previous years which is worse than our last 4 years. As I asked in another thread, should we have Cut back on signings and not brought in Bellamy & Robert Sold the likes of Dyer for a good profit Let injury prone Shearer's contract run down so he could leave on a free and we could get his high wages off the bill (after all, we had a ready made replacement coming through from the youth team). Got someone like Vinnie Jones in to buy and sell players over Robson's head. If it pissed off Robson and he left, should we have replaced him with someone like Dave Basset. Can I assume that the people commending Ashley for his prudence and vision for the club now would agree that we should have taken a similar approach back in 2001? Ozzie asked if Shepherd was going to get us back in the CL. Well in a similar position back in 2001, by being speculative, we DID get back into the CL. At the moment I can only see Ashley's way of handling the situation taking the club in one direction, and that's down. The difference between then and now is that the club had a guaranteed rise in income coming it's way in the future. You mention the loss from the accounts in 2000 but the club was paying for a stadium that hadn't generated any extra money yet as the 1999/2000 season SJP was still at 36,000, they knew the money brought in through the gates would rise the following season so it wasn't a problem. Same goes for the year after when a new Sky deal was announced in the summer of 2001 rising from £670m to £1.1b which meant another guaranteed rise in our income, you can afford to go out and spend when you know you've got money coming your way like most clubs did in the Summer of 2007 because of the guaranteed money from the new tv deal. There is no guaranteed boost in income coming our way now, the extra revenue from the tv deal that we were hoping would allow us to go out and bring more players in is already gone before we see it because of bad management of our finances by Shepherd and until we can turn that around then we will continue to be skint. Also worth mentioning that the club was in a position to borrow. Not the same now, it also wasnt paying holloywood wages at the time so hadmore manoevourablilty in the transfer market.

Veloso would be a big big signing, i heard Scolari ciritcised him saying his attitude is wrong but he is a talented player. Would hope that the club are eyeing up Mouthino as well.

I'd be more curious to know which clubs run at a loss WITH debt. Half the PL?? How many have owners who guarantee the debt? Just saying you can't have your cake and eat it. Buying and selling players, hiring managers is a lottery. Look at the state Spurs are in and Liverpool will be in if they don't qual CL this season. Thats the point, Liverpool will be in pretty much the same place as we are in now if they dont quaify. If that were to happen, they would go 2 ways, they will gamble like we did and pump more money in (if possilbe) or they'll sell players, id hazard a guess and say they'd sell. What happened in 2004 to us, will be pretty much the saem situation that Liverpool would be in should they fail to qualify. The decisoin to appoint Souness is the key to this whole arguement, the decision toback him heavily compunds that decison as it backfired spectacularly. If a manager with merit was appointed and the gamble was the same, you'd still get your morons ciriticisng the appoinment and backing but the sensible ones will see the merits of the decison. their current manager will certainly demand they buy, and their supporters would back him up Providing he's hasnt been sacked for not qualifying... he's been on the brink for the last 2 years for not winning the league, and I'm sure you'll take notice of that. I dont think him not winning the league has anything to do with him "being on the brink", you're probably right about the fans wanting them to gamble - still wouldnt make the decision a correct one. What do you think the fans would do if they sacked Rafa for failing to qualifiy then replaced him with Souness? I haven't got a clue, maybe they will try replacing him with Roy Evans ? You havent got a clue? I think you do but you dont want to admit it sonny, jimbob. Well, yes, but the real question is if they will suffer the disgrace of "going backwards", or if they have a divine right to stay where they are forever. Do you think any scousers would then trace their demise down to signing Torres, Keane, Kuyt and Masherano, and say it shouldn't have been done ? I dont see anyone saying the demise was down to signing Robert, Bellamy or Shearer, I see the majority of the people saying it was down to appointing Souness, backing him with so much money compunded that decision. you can't criticise the decision, and the buys and sales he made, when you agreed with it all and backed it all right up the end. Not saying you did, I don't know if you did or not [did you say the other day that you did ?] but plenty of people DID, such as mandiarse for one. The bigger picture being that they didn't purposely appoint a manager they knew would fuck up, he was THEIR choice, and they backed their choice. Shame soopa Mike didn't back his own appointment in the same way ? Oops, I forgot. You agreed with soopa mike that we shouldn't spend ie waste, any money, didn't you. You mean to say you cant support a decision even though you disagree with it? Thats eseentially what you're saying, I didnt agree with the decision to sack SBR but i supported the decision becasue as a fan thats what i do. I disagreed with the appointments of Roeder, Souness and even remember arguing with you amongst others about the appointment of Allardyce but at the end of the day i supported each and every appointment. Your're right, i have no intention of trying to prove that Shepherd et al decidied to purposely appoint a bad manager, all i can do is highlight the dmetrimental affect it had on the club, which is what im doing. Someone has to be accountable for the decision to appointmnet a bad manager. so you don't see that a numpty who says something like "souness is doing the right thing getting rid of the cancer like Alex ferguson did", or "mike ashley is doing the right thing by appointing a DOF (to undermine the manager)" and agreeing with these decisions, is different to saying you think it is a mistake but you hope it works out because you support the club ? Of course you have the hindsight queens like mandiarse who has agreed with at least 3 of the last boards appointments on this very message board (and probably 4 but he's too modest to admit it), and their actions while they were the manager, but now denies it Actually i do see your point, if they supported the decsion and agreed with the decision then they should be in no posiiton to cirticise that decision, thats a fair point. if you rely on very basic reasoning, if however you see the benefit of evaluting evidence you can criticise absolutely anything at all. i've already said this but what the hell....shepherd agreed with his decision didnt he? does that mean that he cant now be self critical as that would go against NE5's golden rule? Of course he can be self critical, becaue he'd be admitting the mistake in his judgment, i think what NE5 is alluding to is the fact that alot of people arent admitting their mistakes in their initial judgments and making the cirticsisms themselves as though they never agreed with the judgement in the first place. If you agreed with someones decision whole heartedly and that decision backfired, is it fair to cirticise the person who made that decision without admitting your own shortcomings in the situaiotn? Seems pretty hypocrticial to me.

I'd be more curious to know which clubs run at a loss WITH debt. Half the PL?? How many have owners who guarantee the debt? Just saying you can't have your cake and eat it. Buying and selling players, hiring managers is a lottery. Look at the state Spurs are in and Liverpool will be in if they don't qual CL this season. Thats the point, Liverpool will be in pretty much the same place as we are in now if they dont quaify. If that were to happen, they would go 2 ways, they will gamble like we did and pump more money in (if possilbe) or they'll sell players, id hazard a guess and say they'd sell. What happened in 2004 to us, will be pretty much the saem situation that Liverpool would be in should they fail to qualify. The decisoin to appoint Souness is the key to this whole arguement, the decision toback him heavily compunds that decison as it backfired spectacularly. If a manager with merit was appointed and the gamble was the same, you'd still get your morons ciriticisng the appoinment and backing but the sensible ones will see the merits of the decison. their current manager will certainly demand they buy, and their supporters would back him up Providing he's hasnt been sacked for not qualifying... he's been on the brink for the last 2 years for not winning the league, and I'm sure you'll take notice of that. I dont think him not winning the league has anything to do with him "being on the brink", you're probably right about the fans wanting them to gamble - still wouldnt make the decision a correct one. What do you think the fans would do if they sacked Rafa for failing to qualifiy then replaced him with Souness? I haven't got a clue, maybe they will try replacing him with Roy Evans ? You havent got a clue? I think you do but you dont want to admit it sonny, jimbob. Well, yes, but the real question is if they will suffer the disgrace of "going backwards", or if they have a divine right to stay where they are forever. Do you think any scousers would then trace their demise down to signing Torres, Keane, Kuyt and Masherano, and say it shouldn't have been done ? I dont see anyone saying the demise was down to signing Robert, Bellamy or Shearer, I see the majority of the people saying it was down to appointing Souness, backing him with so much money compunded that decision. you can't criticise the decision, and the buys and sales he made, when you agreed with it all and backed it all right up the end. Not saying you did, I don't know if you did or not [did you say the other day that you did ?] but plenty of people DID, such as mandiarse for one. The bigger picture being that they didn't purposely appoint a manager they knew would fuck up, he was THEIR choice, and they backed their choice. Shame soopa Mike didn't back his own appointment in the same way ? Oops, I forgot. You agreed with soopa mike that we shouldn't spend ie waste, any money, didn't you. You mean to say you cant support a decision even though you disagree with it? Thats eseentially what you're saying, I didnt agree with the decision to sack SBR but i supported the decision becasue as a fan thats what i do. I disagreed with the appointments of Roeder, Souness and even remember arguing with you amongst others about the appointment of Allardyce but at the end of the day i supported each and every appointment. Your're right, i have no intention of trying to prove that Shepherd et al decidied to purposely appoint a bad manager, all i can do is highlight the dmetrimental affect it had on the club, which is what im doing. Someone has to be accountable for the decision to appointmnet a bad manager. so you don't see that a numpty who says something like "souness is doing the right thing getting rid of the cancer like Alex ferguson did", or "mike ashley is doing the right thing by appointing a DOF (to undermine the manager)" and agreeing with these decisions, is different to saying you think it is a mistake but you hope it works out because you support the club ? Of course you have the hindsight queens like mandiarse who has agreed with at least 3 of the last boards appointments on this very message board (and probably 4 but he's too modest to admit it), and their actions while they were the manager, but now denies it Actually i do see your point, if they supported the decsion and agreed with the decision then they should be in no posiiton to cirticise that decision, thats a fair point, but thats a personal thing and nothing to do with the big issue. For what its worth i agree with the DOF sysytem, it has its merits. sorry to say that I don't, in fact I think its probably the biggest pile of bollocks ever, and always did. Question for you is why have Arsene Wenger said he wouldn't entertain and Alex Ferguson certainly not entertain the idea of telling him who to buy and sell A slightly different scenario, is does anybody on here, think that Dennis Wise is effectively our manager, if he is the person running the judgement in the transfer market ? I'm sure the Ashley backers, all the way to relegation and insisting we are better off under soopa mike, will say this isnt the case, when it clearly appears to be. Good businessman, this mike Ashley. Still, we're all in the business as football supporters of supporting a club that makes a profit. It might even win goal of the month if we are lucky Your first question opens up a whole spectrum of issues, for example - is it fair to compare Fergie and Wenger with Keegan? I could be wrong but coaches of some of the major clubs in Europe hae little say on transfers, do there opinions count? Wenger and Fergie have built there huge reputations without the system, they're perfectly entteled to have opposing opnions, antoher issue which is massively contentious is the suggestion that Keegan had no say on the transfers full stop, i think theres enough evidence to suggest he did have full say, an argument for another day perhaps. The other things you r are discouting is the fact that the "old school" system works best with the best candidtates, if you dont have the best candidates it wont work well. Antoher thing is if a club gets relagated using the "old school" system, is that down to the system like it would be if we were to go down?

I'd be more curious to know which clubs run at a loss WITH debt. Half the PL?? How many have owners who guarantee the debt? Just saying you can't have your cake and eat it. Buying and selling players, hiring managers is a lottery. Look at the state Spurs are in and Liverpool will be in if they don't qual CL this season. Thats the point, Liverpool will be in pretty much the same place as we are in now if they dont quaify. If that were to happen, they would go 2 ways, they will gamble like we did and pump more money in (if possilbe) or they'll sell players, id hazard a guess and say they'd sell. What happened in 2004 to us, will be pretty much the saem situation that Liverpool would be in should they fail to qualify. The decisoin to appoint Souness is the key to this whole arguement, the decision toback him heavily compunds that decison as it backfired spectacularly. If a manager with merit was appointed and the gamble was the same, you'd still get your morons ciriticisng the appoinment and backing but the sensible ones will see the merits of the decison. their current manager will certainly demand they buy, and their supporters would back him up Providing he's hasnt been sacked for not qualifying... he's been on the brink for the last 2 years for not winning the league, and I'm sure you'll take notice of that. I dont think him not winning the league has anything to do with him "being on the brink", you're probably right about the fans wanting them to gamble - still wouldnt make the decision a correct one. What do you think the fans would do if they sacked Rafa for failing to qualifiy then replaced him with Souness? I haven't got a clue, maybe they will try replacing him with Roy Evans ? You havent got a clue? I think you do but you dont want to admit it sonny, jimbob. Well, yes, but the real question is if they will suffer the disgrace of "going backwards", or if they have a divine right to stay where they are forever. Do you think any scousers would then trace their demise down to signing Torres, Keane, Kuyt and Masherano, and say it shouldn't have been done ? I dont see anyone saying the demise was down to signing Robert, Bellamy or Shearer, I see the majority of the people saying it was down to appointing Souness, backing him with so much money compunded that decision. you can't criticise the decision, and the buys and sales he made, when you agreed with it all and backed it all right up the end. Not saying you did, I don't know if you did or not [did you say the other day that you did ?] but plenty of people DID, such as mandiarse for one. The bigger picture being that they didn't purposely appoint a manager they knew would f*** up, he was THEIR choice, and they backed their choice. Shame soopa Mike didn't back his own appointment in the same way ? Oops, I forgot. You agreed with soopa mike that we shouldn't spend ie waste, any money, didn't you. You mean to say you cant support a decision even though you disagree with it? Thats eseentially what you're saying, I didnt agree with the decision to sack SBR but i supported the decision becasue as a fan thats what i do. I disagreed with the appointments of Roeder, Souness and even remember arguing with you amongst others about the appointment of Allardyce but at the end of the day i supported each and every appointment. Your're right, i have no intention of trying to prove that Shepherd et al decidied to purposely appoint a bad manager, all i can do is highlight the dmetrimental affect it had on the club, which is what im doing. Someone has to be accountable for the decision to appointmnet a bad manager. so you don't see that a numpty who says something like "souness is doing the right thing getting rid of the cancer like Alex ferguson did", or "mike ashley is doing the right thing by appointing a DOF (to undermine the manager)" and agreeing with these decisions, is different to saying you think it is a mistake but you hope it works out because you support the club ? Of course you have the hindsight queens like mandiarse who has agreed with at least 3 of the last boards appointments on this very message board (and probably 4 but he's too modest to admit it), and their actions while they were the manager, but now denies it Actually i do see your point, if they supported the decsion and agreed with the decision then they should be in no posiiton to cirticise that decision, thats a fair point, but thats a personal thing and nothing to do with the big issue. For what its worth i agree with the DOF sysytem, it has its merits. Without of shadow of doubt it does we just had the wrong people in place. Or did we have the wrong manager in place? You should never have a manager when you have DOF a coach is all you need. But I don't think our system was like any other ever seen in football before so when people talk about DOF system are they talking about DOF system or our ED(F)/VP(PR)/TC-O thing we had going on. Dont Wise et al effectively do the DOF role? You're right about not having a "manager" but then a coach shouldnt have power to say who he does and doesnt want, his role should speicifaclly be coaching which is where i think its required a higher level of cooperation between the "DOF" and the "manager" so that they could corodinate signings for the team.

I guess thats why they got Wise involved. Aye probably. I've got another suggestion, just let the god damn manager be the manager, using whichever funds he has at his disposal the way he see's fit. What if the manager is unable to spend the money in the manner that the club dictates due to tight finances? We've come full circle. We wont agree, you beleive Keegan was capable of sticking to the policcy - i dont.

I'd be more curious to know which clubs run at a loss WITH debt. Half the PL?? How many have owners who guarantee the debt? Just saying you can't have your cake and eat it. Buying and selling players, hiring managers is a lottery. Look at the state Spurs are in and Liverpool will be in if they don't qual CL this season. Thats the point, Liverpool will be in pretty much the same place as we are in now if they dont quaify. If that were to happen, they would go 2 ways, they will gamble like we did and pump more money in (if possilbe) or they'll sell players, id hazard a guess and say they'd sell. What happened in 2004 to us, will be pretty much the saem situation that Liverpool would be in should they fail to qualify. The decisoin to appoint Souness is the key to this whole arguement, the decision toback him heavily compunds that decison as it backfired spectacularly. If a manager with merit was appointed and the gamble was the same, you'd still get your morons ciriticisng the appoinment and backing but the sensible ones will see the merits of the decison. their current manager will certainly demand they buy, and their supporters would back him up Providing he's hasnt been sacked for not qualifying... he's been on the brink for the last 2 years for not winning the league, and I'm sure you'll take notice of that. I dont think him not winning the league has anything to do with him "being on the brink", you're probably right about the fans wanting them to gamble - still wouldnt make the decision a correct one. What do you think the fans would do if they sacked Rafa for failing to qualifiy then replaced him with Souness? I haven't got a clue, maybe they will try replacing him with Roy Evans ? You havent got a clue? I think you do but you dont want to admit it sonny, jimbob. Well, yes, but the real question is if they will suffer the disgrace of "going backwards", or if they have a divine right to stay where they are forever. Do you think any scousers would then trace their demise down to signing Torres, Keane, Kuyt and Masherano, and say it shouldn't have been done ? I dont see anyone saying the demise was down to signing Robert, Bellamy or Shearer, I see the majority of the people saying it was down to appointing Souness, backing him with so much money compunded that decision. you can't criticise the decision, and the buys and sales he made, when you agreed with it all and backed it all right up the end. Not saying you did, I don't know if you did or not [did you say the other day that you did ?] but plenty of people DID, such as mandiarse for one. The bigger picture being that they didn't purposely appoint a manager they knew would f*** up, he was THEIR choice, and they backed their choice. Shame soopa Mike didn't back his own appointment in the same way ? Oops, I forgot. You agreed with soopa mike that we shouldn't spend ie waste, any money, didn't you. You mean to say you cant support a decision even though you disagree with it? Thats eseentially what you're saying, I didnt agree with the decision to sack SBR but i supported the decision becasue as a fan thats what i do. I disagreed with the appointments of Roeder, Souness and even remember arguing with you amongst others about the appointment of Allardyce but at the end of the day i supported each and every appointment. Your're right, i have no intention of trying to prove that Shepherd et al decidied to purposely appoint a bad manager, all i can do is highlight the dmetrimental affect it had on the club, which is what im doing. Someone has to be accountable for the decision to appointmnet a bad manager. so you don't see that a numpty who says something like "souness is doing the right thing getting rid of the cancer like Alex ferguson did", or "mike ashley is doing the right thing by appointing a DOF (to undermine the manager)" and agreeing with these decisions, is different to saying you think it is a mistake but you hope it works out because you support the club ? Of course you have the hindsight queens like mandiarse who has agreed with at least 3 of the last boards appointments on this very message board (and probably 4 but he's too modest to admit it), and their actions while they were the manager, but now denies it Actually i do see your point, if they supported the decsion and agreed with the decision then they should be in no posiiton to cirticise that decision, thats a fair point, but thats a personal thing and nothing to do with the big issue. For what its worth i agree with the DOF sysytem, it has its merits. Without of shadow of doubt it does we just had the wrong people in place. Or did we have the wrong manager in place?

I guess thats why they got Wise involved.

I'd be more curious to know which clubs run at a loss WITH debt. Half the PL?? How many have owners who guarantee the debt? Just saying you can't have your cake and eat it. Buying and selling players, hiring managers is a lottery. Look at the state Spurs are in and Liverpool will be in if they don't qual CL this season. Thats the point, Liverpool will be in pretty much the same place as we are in now if they dont quaify. If that were to happen, they would go 2 ways, they will gamble like we did and pump more money in (if possilbe) or they'll sell players, id hazard a guess and say they'd sell. What happened in 2004 to us, will be pretty much the saem situation that Liverpool would be in should they fail to qualify. The decisoin to appoint Souness is the key to this whole arguement, the decision toback him heavily compunds that decison as it backfired spectacularly. If a manager with merit was appointed and the gamble was the same, you'd still get your morons ciriticisng the appoinment and backing but the sensible ones will see the merits of the decison. their current manager will certainly demand they buy, and their supporters would back him up Providing he's hasnt been sacked for not qualifying... he's been on the brink for the last 2 years for not winning the league, and I'm sure you'll take notice of that. I dont think him not winning the league has anything to do with him "being on the brink", you're probably right about the fans wanting them to gamble - still wouldnt make the decision a correct one. What do you think the fans would do if they sacked Rafa for failing to qualifiy then replaced him with Souness? I haven't got a clue, maybe they will try replacing him with Roy Evans ? You havent got a clue? I think you do but you dont want to admit it sonny, jimbob. Well, yes, but the real question is if they will suffer the disgrace of "going backwards", or if they have a divine right to stay where they are forever. Do you think any scousers would then trace their demise down to signing Torres, Keane, Kuyt and Masherano, and say it shouldn't have been done ? I dont see anyone saying the demise was down to signing Robert, Bellamy or Shearer, I see the majority of the people saying it was down to appointing Souness, backing him with so much money compunded that decision. you can't criticise the decision, and the buys and sales he made, when you agreed with it all and backed it all right up the end. Not saying you did, I don't know if you did or not [did you say the other day that you did ?] but plenty of people DID, such as mandiarse for one. The bigger picture being that they didn't purposely appoint a manager they knew would fuck up, he was THEIR choice, and they backed their choice. Shame soopa Mike didn't back his own appointment in the same way ? Oops, I forgot. You agreed with soopa mike that we shouldn't spend ie waste, any money, didn't you. You mean to say you cant support a decision even though you disagree with it? Thats eseentially what you're saying, I didnt agree with the decision to sack SBR but i supported the decision becasue as a fan thats what i do. I disagreed with the appointments of Roeder, Souness and even remember arguing with you amongst others about the appointment of Allardyce but at the end of the day i supported each and every appointment. Your're right, i have no intention of trying to prove that Shepherd et al decidied to purposely appoint a bad manager, all i can do is highlight the dmetrimental affect it had on the club, which is what im doing. Someone has to be accountable for the decision to appointmnet a bad manager. so you don't see that a numpty who says something like "souness is doing the right thing getting rid of the cancer like Alex ferguson did", or "mike ashley is doing the right thing by appointing a DOF (to undermine the manager)" and agreeing with these decisions, is different to saying you think it is a mistake but you hope it works out because you support the club ? Of course you have the hindsight queens like mandiarse who has agreed with at least 3 of the last boards appointments on this very message board (and probably 4 but he's too modest to admit it), and their actions while they were the manager, but now denies it Actually i do see your point, if they supported the decsion and agreed with the decision then they should be in no posiiton to cirticise that decision, thats a fair point, but thats a personal thing and nothing to do with the big issue. For what its worth i agree with the DOF sysytem, it has its merits.