Cowboy-boot messiahs show their hand

[Dhav]

I think there is something a little unfair in that - it is clear that Abramovich has recruited well in Grant and before him Arneson which allowed him to change his manager with relatively little disruption and get his team playing the sort of football he wanted.

There are definitely similarities in the situations but I think drawing direct parallels is unhelpful.

Basically we know nothing and will all probably pick our reaction based on our natural inclination to pessimism or optimism and pre-existing views of Rafa and our new owners.

I also think it is too simplistic to say that G&H want Rafa involved in transfers. I think it more likely they want the footballing and financial sides of these transactions to be handled separately which is far from unreasonable IMO. In the summer we basically got all of the targets which Rafa wanted and were actually available as far as anyone can see. There has been no indication that they want to insert a director of football who dictates player recruitment in a footballing sense.

It is obvious that there are/have been serious problems but how anyone can believe they have a genuine insight into how long term the consequences of this is beats me.

Very fair points, perhaps Rafa has exceeded his responsibilities, or at least the ones the owners have in mind for him, but it is clear to me that of all the people at the club, Rafa is the one best placed to judge players' values both incoming and outgoing, and we all know what Parry's record is like with transfers and negotiations - look at Vidic and Gerrard as two examples.

[Dhav]

I'll think you'll find mate that most people don't respond to tabloid bull****. It would end up being a full time job for some people.

Tabloids don't sell papers by printing the boring truth. They sensationalise, exaggerate and generalise and by doing this they can either be eventually proven right or give themselves an out when they are totally off the mark. Don't get sucked in.

Look at the amount of times they print "You read it here first" articles referring to claims they made weeks or months earlier that turn out to be true.

If you take enough shots you will probably eventually score a goal. That's the theory they work on.

Yes, but the owners on Sunday saw fit to respond to the NOTW article that the decision had been made to sack Rafa - my problem is that they could have come out with a far less ambiguous statement to kill the speculation. The one they released served to increase the speculation 10 fold. Was this deliberate or just a huge miscalculation? on Sunday only NOTW were running the story. By Monday every paper was running it. Draw your own conclusions

[Kilteragh]

Yes, but the owners on Sunday saw fit to respond to the NOTW article that the decision had been made to sack Rafa - my problem is that they could have come out with a far less ambiguous statement to kill the speculation. The one they released served to increase the speculation 10 fold. Was this deliberate or just a huge miscalculation? on Sunday only NOTW were running the story. By Monday every paper was running it. Draw your own conclusions

No conclusions to draw because I don't have the facts. That is the point. Everybody is drawing conclusions based on **** all.

Obviously Rafa and the owners have had a serious disagreement. Happens every day in business and then people get on with things. This is what will happen IMHO. This is not a conclusion but just a gut feeling. I could well be wrong but I don't think there is anything to worry about. The papers are palying on peoples' insecurities.

[dww]

Very fair points, perhaps Rafa has exceeded his responsibilities, or at least the ones the owners have in mind for him, but it is clear to me that of all the people at the club, Rafa is the one best placed to judge players' values both incoming and outgoing, and we all know what Parry's record is like with transfers and negotiations - look at Vidic and Gerrard as two examples.

I think that the ideal is a situation like Dein and Wenger were at Arsenal with the financial and footballing sides have a good working relationship.

Parry has undoubtedly been involved in some duff deals but then he did get Agger, Alonso, Torres and Benayoun for very decent values in concert with Rafa. I have no idea how much each was involved and I definitely think Parry's record before Rafa arrived brings his transfer negotiating skills into question but I would require more inside knowledge before I condemned him.

I agree that the best judge of the market value of a player is the manager but the person who can best judge the impact of the various fees, wages etc on the club in the long term is likely to be a financial specialist. I also frankly don't want Rafa giving a **** about the intricacies of say tax law. At the minute it seems that we have a problem in that we haven't got a structure which allows good communication between Rafa and the money men and that could be a problem in the long term.

[Dhav]

No conclusions to draw because I don't have the facts. That is the point. Everybody is drawing conclusions based on **** all.

Obviously Rafa and the owners have had a serious disagreement. Happens every day in business and then people get on with things. This is what will happen IMHO. This is not a conclusion but just a gut feeling. I could well be wrong but I don't think there is anything to worry about. The papers are palying on peoples' insecurities.

No doubt that is the case. But the club has done nothing to dampen the speculation, and in fact if you believe people like Balague they have actually sought to encourage it. What I don't understand is why, if they were going to respond to the speculation as they did with that statement released on Sunday, why release one that was so ambiguous that it would inevitably serve only to increase the speculation? As I've said before, either we have idiots running the club who didn't release that statement would increase the speculation, or it was a deliberate ploy.

[AFII]

Well, the only thing we know for a fact is that Rafa wanted Kaladze but wasn't allowed to sign him.

Benitez confirmed in an interview with Spanish media organisation Larquero that the source of the dispute was him wanting to acquire "two free players, and another player at a really good price after selling another player" – Milan's Georgian defender Kakha Kaladze.

http://sport.independent.co.uk/footb...cle3209809.ece

We don't know for a fact why he wasn't allowed to sign him.

[Sir Bob]

I think there is something a little unfair in that - it is clear that Abramovich has recruited well in Grant and before him Arneson which allowed him to change his manager with relatively little disruption and get his team playing the sort of football he wanted.

There are definitely similarities in the situations but I think drawing direct parallels is unhelpful.

Basically we know nothing and will all probably pick our reaction based on our natural inclination to pessimism or optimism and pre-existing views of Rafa and our new owners.

I also think it is too simplistic to say that G&H don't want Rafa involved in transfers. I think it more likely they want the footballing and financial sides of these transactions to be handled separately which is far from unreasonable IMO. In the summer we basically got all of the targets which Rafa wanted and were actually available as far as anyone can see. There has been no indication that they want to insert a director of football who dictates player recruitment in a footballing sense.

It is obvious that there are/have been serious problems but how anyone can believe they have a genuine insight into how long term the consequences of this is beats me.

I think its fair to say that Wenger & Ferguson have pretty much total control of footballing matters at their clubs. I'm sure they don't get everthing they want but they get most of it.

i've no problem with Parry/G&H conducting the financial side of transfers but the final say nust rest with Rafa. If he says player x is worth £20m then thats what we should pay. Theres no point having a manager if he's not allowed full control. It seems that H&G must have doubts about Rafa's judgement if they are saying for eg Masher isn't worth £17m or you can't have the 2 Bosmans you want. If thats the case its game over.

As for the long term consequences, nobody can predict them. But on the whole clubs that are unsettled off the pitch end up unsettled on it. Maybe a new manager would come in and lead us to no.19. On the other hand maybe a new manager would be booted out after 2 years and we start the whole process again.

successful clubs are nearly always stable off the pitch and at the moment we are far from that. The pressure last night on the players was immense. not only did we need to win for footballing reasons, we needed to for Rafa, to send a message out to G&H. That added pressure can't help the players one bit.

[Kilteragh]

No doubt that is the case. But the club has done nothing to dampen the speculation, and in fact if you believe people like Balague they have actually sought to encourage it. What I don't understand is why, if they were going to respond to the speculation as they did with that statement released on Sunday, why release one that was so ambiguous that it would inevitable serve only to increase the speculation? As I've said before, either we have idiots running the club who didn't release that statement would increase the speculation, or it was a deliberate ploy.

It actually set my mind at ease. If you remember before the statement came out the tabloid take was that Rafa was a day or two from the sack. Then the statement said they were going to meet Rafa on 16/12. Killed that speculation for me stone dead and most people on here were pretty relieved.

Then the doubters started and hey-ho the snowball of bull**** was revived.

[Sir Bob]

Well, the only thing we know for a fact is that Rafa wanted Kaladze but wasn't allowed to sign him.



http://sport.independent.co.uk/footb...cle3209809.ece

We don't know for a fact why he wasn't allowed to sign him.

No but it certainly looks that way, The Echo thought so the other night. Now if G&H are dictating transfer policy, Rafa's wasting his time.

At Valencia he wanted a lamp shade and was bought a table. Well at LFC it appears G&H won't even let him buy the light bulb never mind the fukcing lamp

[dww]

No doubt that is the case. But the club has done nothing to dampen the speculation, and in fact if you believe people like Balague they have actually sought to encourage it. What I don't understand is why, if they were going to respond to the speculation as they did with that statement released on Sunday, why release one that was so ambiguous that it would inevitably serve only to increase the speculation? As I've said before, either we have idiots running the club who didn't release that statement would increase the speculation, or it was a deliberate ploy.

The thing I would be interested to know is who this source is - I'm not sure it is clear cut whether Parry and Hicks and Gillet are all on the same side and quite who the statements and leaks come from or how representative they are.

I think that the reason for such an ambiguous statement is clearly in part a message to Rafa. The question is whether it also reflects either a knowledgeable press man preventing the dreaded vote of confidence (which doesn't dampen suspicion but if things get worse does make owners look like ****s) or simply the fact that Rafas future was/is hanging in the balance or even that the decision to sack him has already been made.

[Dhav]

It actually set my mind at ease. If you remember before the statement came out the tabloid take was that Rafa was a day or two from the sack. Then the statement said they were going to meet Rafa on 16/12. Killed that speculation for me stone dead and most people on here were pretty relieved.

Then the doubters started and hey-ho the snowball of bull**** was revived.

Well the papers took it either way. One paper I remember reading said it meant Rafa was safe, the rest went with his job being on the line.

All the statement did for me was confirm that no decision re sacking Rafa would be made until 16 Dec. It did not assure me that Rafa's job would be safe beyond that date. The statement said something to the effect of "the requirements of the team will be assessed on 16 Dec". Does that mean they will also consider a possible requirement for the team that the manager needs to be changed?

[Sir Bob]

It actually set my mind at ease. If you remember before the statement came out the tabloid take was that Rafa was a day or two from the sack. Then the statement said they were going to meet Rafa on 16/12. Killed that speculation for me stone dead and most people on here were pretty relieved.

Then the doubters started and hey-ho the snowball of bull**** was revived.

Right so all this is just the tabloids blowing it all out of proportion is it.
Rafa's press conference, him wearing the tracksuit, not being allowed 2 bosman t'fers, 2000 fans marching, The Kop singing for their hero for 90 mins, all that over a minor tiff which the red tops have exploited to the limit because we all know they have an ante LFC agenda.:whatever:

i mean Dec 16th isn't too late to sort out Jan t'fers is it, in fact why not leave it to mid Jan, that'll still leave 2 weeks to sort them out.

I really think people need to cotton on to just how serious a mess we are in behind the scenes and the effect this will have on the pitch as it continues to be played out.

[Dhav]

The thing I would be interested to know is who this source is - I'm not sure it is clear cut whether Parry and Hicks and Gillet are all on the same side and quite who the statements and leaks come from or how representative they are.

I think that the reason for such an ambiguous statement is clearly in part a message to Rafa. The question is whether it also reflects either a knowledgeable press man preventing the dreaded vote of confidence (which doesn't dampen suspicion but if things get worse does make owners look like ****s) or simply the fact that Rafas future was/is hanging in the balance or even that the decision to sack him has already been made.

Well if the intended effect was to put a rocket up Rafa's backside it's backfired as all that statement and the mounting speculation has achieved is rallied the fans in support of Rafa and made it much more difficult for the owners to sack him.

[dww]

I think its fair to say that Wenger & Ferguson have pretty much total control of footballing matters at their clubs. I'm sure they don't get everthing they want but they get most of it.

i've no problem with Parry/G&H conducting the financial side of transfers but the final say nust rest with Rafa. If he says player x is worth £20m then thats what we should pay. Theres no point having a manager if he's not allowed full control. It seems that H&G must have doubts about Rafa's judgement if they are saying for eg Masher isn't worth £17m or you can't have the 2 Bosmans you want. If thats the case its game over.

As for the long term consequences, nobody can predict them. But on the whole clubs that are unsettled off the pitch end up unsettled on it. Maybe a new manager would come in and lead us to no.19. On the other hand maybe a new manager would be booted out after 2 years and we start the whole process again.

successful clubs are nearly always stable off the pitch and at the moment we are far from that. The pressure last night on the players was immense. not only did we need to win for footballing reasons, we needed to for Rafa, to send a message out to G&H. That added pressure can't help the players one bit.

The final say has to be shared IMO. If we don't have £20m to spend in the package required for a particular transfer we can't do the deal. I think Rafa has to identify targets and have final say as to any compromises that may need to be made within the available budget.

I think that it is safe to say that Arsenal constrained spending for a few years to pay for the stadium. They were in a better position to do so at the time as Wenger had been there for a long time. In order to improve the team and get a stadium we will have to make compromises.

For me the issue is the nature of their refusal to accept Rafas deals. Just because a player is on a bosman doesn't mean that wages + signing on fee aren't considerable. If they want to wait until a certain date for a sensible reason like they can't plan finances long term until they sort the debt refinancing that seems reasonable to me. Also if Rafa has done a deal which looks good but when technical considerations like tax etc. are accounted for may not they need to review that.

In the Mascher case the final ownership of the asset is unclear and I wouldn't want to spend £17m and potentially never have a saleable asset.

I would say though that the point about stability is key but i is not necessarily just the owners responsibility. Rafa has to accept the constraints of his job - he has been allowed to reshape all areas of the football operation and all/most of his top summer targets were delivered - so he has to accept the financial policies of the club and accept that other people may be better placed to handle certain things.

[dww]

Well if the intended effect was to put a rocket up Rafa's backside it's backfired as all that statement and the mounting speculation has achieved is rallied the fans in support of Rafa and made it much more difficult for the owners to sack him.

I'm not sure that it has completely backfired. Look at Rafa's recent statements - all much more conciliatory. It is certainly true that it has united the fans - maybe thats what they intended and they are simply much more intelligent than any of us believed