Was this the turning point?

[Shanks]

Liverpool manager Benítez rejects contract offer

• Spaniard wants more control over Anfield transfer policy
• Warns Hicks and Gillett "fans are best judges I will ever have"

Rafael Benítez has rejected a new contract as Liverpool manager.

Rafael Benítez has thrown his long-term future at Liverpool into doubt by rejecting a new contract offered by the club's American owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

The Liverpool manager has refused to back down over his wish for any new deal to include greater authority over the club's transfer policy.

At present that is the domain of the chief executive, Rick Parry, and the Americans are content with the existing structure and unwilling to bow to Benítez's demands. The Spaniard responded this morning by announcing that he has turned down their offer.


Benítez said:

"The owners feel that the manager's decisions need to be subject to the chief executive but I know that I am subject to results and to our fans and they are the best judges I will ever have.

I have a lot of experience in football at different clubs and if you do not have a technical director and you are the manager you have to have control of the football decisions.
But always within the confines of a budget which is controlled by the owners and the club.


"In this scenario the manager knows the amount of money he has available to him and can decide how much he should spend on each player according to the needs of the team.

The only person who can decide the value of a player to his squad is the manager because he knows what elements are needed to improve the squad."


Despite Benítez's concerns, however, Hicks expects the situation to be resolved soon.

"Rafa's been frustrated for a long time about the length of time it takes for certain things to happen," he said.

"He's just trying to position himself to do the job better.

There are balances that need to be done in English football and we'll work through these.

We can fix this."


Earlier this week Benítez denied that he had a problem with Hicks and Gillett.

His announcement today illustrates that his problem lies with Parry.

Benítez claimed his agent had only received the contract document on Monday night.

That was the latest draft in a series of contract offers, however, and once again did not include any increased authority for Benítez over transfers.

The Liverpool manager also wanted more influence over the club's youth academy.


Benítez said:

"My relationship with the owners is better than people think.

I have regular contact with them and especially with Tom Hicks who has always been very supportive.

The talks between my agent and the advisers of the owners have been very positive and friendly and our differences are about my responsibilities."


He added:

"I believe the academy is a very important part of the future of the club.

The length of the contract was already agreed and this showed my long-term commitment to the club.

I know the academies of Ajax, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Milan and Valencia and they are producing players regularly.


"The way the system works there means the manager has an input into development and I think this could be the way forward here and we would hope that this would help us make better use of local talent."


The Liverpool manager is unhappy that, at present, he has to recommend who is bought and sold to Hicks, Gillett and Parry, who then decide the player's value, what the club can afford and divide the transfer budget accordingly.

Benítez had wanted to dispense with the existing chain of command and operate on his own terms, setting the valuation on players, providing the transfer budget allowed it.


The Spaniard's resolve was hardened by last summer's unsuccessful pursuit of Gareth Barry, the Aston Villa midfielder whom he envisaged as a replacement for Xabi Alonso.

Benítez missed out on Barry's signature when Liverpool's owners refused to meet Villa's £18m asking price.

Hicks and Gillett said that the Barry deal collapsed over the price and not because they lacked the necessary funds, having agreed a £20.3m deal for Tottenham's Robbie Keane, Benítez felt his judgment had been undermined.


The manager's stance has a precedent in his reign at Valencia, where he sought greater control over transfers from the director of football, Jesús García Pitarch, before leaving for Liverpool in 2004.


Personal terms and the length of the new deal at Anfield were agreed in early December.

The contract would have given Benítez a significant increase on his current £3.5m-a-year salary and tied him to Anfield until 2013.

Hicks and Gillett are united on the terms of the new deal and the offer is believed to be still on the table. Benítez has 18 months remaining on his existing contract.


"I have to say again that this is not about financial gain.

This is not a way to get more money," said Benítez.

"This is solely about being allowed to manage Liverpool Football Club to the best of my abilities as I see them.

I believe that this club has the potential to improve and I just want to be able to help this to happen.


"I will continue to do my job as manager and concentrate on the thing that our fans want me to focus on – winning trophies for them.

From the first day I came to the club I have only ever given 100% and I will continue to do this.

We have a very important game coming up against Everton on Monday night and now I just want to be able to concentrate only on this."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...lett-tom-hicks

IMO things haven't been the same since Parry left and Benitez took control.
Highway left The Academy and we are constantly sending players out on loan.

Ironically the last 12 months haven't been the best.

[dww]

Didn't Heighway leave years ago?

[dww]

FWIW I don't think this is the reason. I accept that Rafa taking more control of more things at a time when we needed a rebuilding phase might have been a minor problem but the real issue was that senior players within the squad left and we didn't have the funding to buy in ready made replacements.

[Shanks]

The point being that since Rafa rejected that contract and vowed to take full control, things haven't been the same.

For what reason Heighway left, I still don't see any changes..

[Woobus]

Alonso would have been sold for about 20 million if Parry had of still been in charge, hard to blame Rafa on this one when he hasnt even had any cash to spend since that article.

[Shanks]

Alonso would have been sold for about 20 million if Parry had of still been in charge, hard to blame Rafa on this one when he hasnt even had any cash to spend since that article.

He's going up against the owners in rejecting a contract.

Taking a world financial crisis into consideration, do you not think they have tried to make things a little more difficult, on top of this?

[Exiled_red]

The problem for me has been the lack of investment in the squad, we've only had the money raised through sales, and we had to replace a number of key players last season. Our performances have been affected by a large number of injures, the squad hadn't been strengthened in the summer and players struggling for confidence and not adapting to a slightly different system of play. Rafa's control of the academy and youth system has had no effect on the current situation IMO

[Shanks]

Rafa's control of the academy and youth system has had no effect on the current situation IMO

He's brought the players in and decided if they should go out on loan, or promoted to the first team.

Heighway at least has Fowler, Owen and Gerrard to his name.

[Exiled_red]

He's brought the players in and decided if they should go out on loan, or promoted to the first team.

True, but the youth players have had little or no impact on the current league position. The number coming through has hardly changed one way or another, I would imagine that the manager has a say in whether players or sent out on loan or not, and is ultimately the one who decides who moves from the youth team to the reserves/first team

Heighway at least has Fowler, Owen and Gerrard to his name.

It an unfair comparison to make even if Rafa is in charge of the youth set-up he isn't there doing the day to day running and player development that's what the coaches are there for, he just oversees everything.

Even if it were a fair comparison in terms of jobs Rafa hasn't been in charge for a year Heighway was there for years to bring those players through, and the last of them to come through was 10+ years ago. Ok we've had a couple of players come through and look promising (Warnock, Wright Mellor and Guthrie) but since the academy was set up in it's current form (c1998) it hasn't produced many players even close to the required quaility, something needed to be changed in the way the youth system works in relation to the first team

[TheElephantMan]

I feel that Rafa now has too much control, it's too much responsibility for one man. I believe that he has spread himself too thinly to deal with any of his responsibilities effectively.

The battles with the owners, the media and other managers allied to the lack of transfer funds and bad luck with injuries has left him with an almost impossible task. In the past he would have had more support to deflect some of the pressure away from him, but he must be feeling totally stressed out.

[little dave hedgehog]

it's pretty telling.

think of just the 90's as a decade for the youth team:

3 world class players in fowler, owen and gerrard.

4 if you count carra

5 if steve mcmanaman was a liverpool youth (not sure if he was)

then add in players like danny murphy, steven warnock--players that did a job here and moved on to other clubs where they have played regularly.


compare that to this decade.

insua.

(and it wasn't like he's from the area.)

probably won't see any benefits til the teens, but something clearly had to be done.

[Shanks]

It an unfair comparison to make even if Rafa is in charge of the youth set-up he isn't there doing the day to day running and player development that's what the coaches are there for, he just oversees everything.

That was what Rafa wanted control over though..
He's become more responsiible for a lot more things since Parry left and ironically, things appear to have gone from bad to worse, that's all I'm saying..

I'm not saying Parry should have stayed.

[cream]

it's pretty telling.

think of just the 90's as a decade for the youth team:

3 world class players in fowler, owen and gerrard.

4 if you count carra

5 if steve mcmanaman was a liverpool youth (not sure if he was)

then add in players like danny murphy, steven warnock--players that did a job here and moved on to other clubs where they have played regularly.


compare that to this decade.

insua.

(and it wasn't like he's from the area.)

probably won't see any benefits til the teens, but something clearly had to be done.

Thats pretty damning of the people who have been in charge of the youth system over the last 12 years or so. At least things have started to improve during the last 12 months.

[Exiled_red]

That was what Rafa wanted control over though..
He's become more responsiible for a lot more things since Parry left and ironically, things appear to have gone from bad to worse, that's all I'm saying..

I'm not saying Parry should have stayed.

As I understand it he wanted control over the the appointment of coaches and a say in what was done, he wanted the coaches to report to him rather than to Heighway. Rafa isn't persoanally overseeing the youth development he just wanted power to bring in his own people, and he brought the guy from Barcelona in. Who he felt he would get along with better, as the relationship between him and Heighway was poor and affecting the players coming through

[little dave hedgehog]

i'm saying, given the poor record since then, i'm glad some action has been taken. now we have kids like pacheco and dalle valle, martin kelly looks good. no scousers who are great shakes really, but the game has changed. it's about foreign kids being farmed locally.