Would you sack Hodgson?

[barnes10]

NET spend, yes. He still spent around 40 million on bringing Aquilani, Johnson and Kyrgiakos to the club. Money which should have been spent differently with the benefit of hindsight.

And as far as paying the Aquilani fee in installments - as I understand it, the majority of deals work this way now anyway. I seem to remember reading that we only paid 4 million up front for Alonso. So Im sure we could have found a striker where we could have structured the payments to suit us a bit better.

PeteBest - your argument about spending is totally bewildering. Please explain your rational.

aqua was 5 mill outlay. johnson was part funded by crouch and i believe we owe them some money for johnson right? so i dont think we spent more than 5 mill on him either. stelios was 2 mill and i've no idea of the profle of those payments. could be all up front, could be 500k. so our outlay could have been as low as 10 mill initially and owing the rest couldnt it.

installments or not. it simply depends on how much the selling club want up front and can we meet that.

if villa cost 20 mill up front with the rest over his contract then we still cant get him can we.

so if we only had 10 mill available up front, then we've got 3 decent players in that a tactical switch can cover torres's injuries.

basic risk management. he needed 'options' not big gambles.

[barnes10]

A striker. Kevin Philips would have helped our season FFS. If you want to claim the lack of a striker was offset by rafa's buys last summer, fair enough. He could have bought a striker, a RB and forty CM with the money spent last year. He didn't and it was a factor in us coming 7th and Rafa losing his job.

rafa clearly opted for those players he did as they'd give him more tactical options from the squad.

the injuries we had to key players meant that gerrard, aqua, torres all missed significant parts of the season. what's the chance that they'd all be out for so long? thats what scuppered him. one of those 3 in the team fully fit for the whole season would have made a huge difference.

[barnes10]

also I totally agree with the sentiments that this is a hugely disrespectful and classless thread.

[SB]

Well I will just wait until I say I told you so. All jokes apart I hope the guy does not fail, as it would mean a lot of joy for reds fans if he succeeds. I know he has not had a chance or picked his first team yet or even played a match, but I just feel there is an underlying reason why we got Hodgson, For me it is to asset strip but have a manager who can get the best out of little talent and he is without doubt the man for that, but as far as managing stars and getting us back up into 4th (at least) not confident he can do it.

I'm not over the moon about his signing either mate but I will support Roy 100% right now. That's all I ask of anyone else on here.

[Guest]

I'm not over the moon about his signing either mate but I will support Roy 100% right now. That's all I ask of anyone else on here.

Does that mean that you support the decisions of the owners?

[SB]

Does that mean that you support the decisions of the owners?

In a word no. I said I'll support Roy as our manager.

[kris90210]

aqua was 5 mill outlay. johnson was part funded by crouch and i believe we owe them some money for johnson right? so i dont think we spent more than 5 mill on him either. stelios was 2 mill and i've no idea of the profle of those payments. could be all up front, could be 500k. so our outlay could have been as low as 10 mill initially and owing the rest couldnt it.

installments or not. it simply depends on how much the selling club want up front and can we meet that.

if villa cost 20 mill up front with the rest over his contract then we still cant get him can we.

so if we only had 10 mill available up front, then we've got 3 decent players in that a tactical switch can cover torres's injuries.

basic risk management. he needed 'options' not big gambles.

So are you saying that we could not have found a striker where we could have paid in installments? Aquilani and Johnson were literally the only 2 players we could have bought? We could have found a striker that allowed us to structure payments.

The question marks are over the priority of his purchases. You talk about risk managment and yet we did not address our biggest weakness 2 years running - Torres getting injured.

And the 3 players we got patently did not cover Torres' injuries in any way, shape or form, as last seasons finishing position shows.

[Vermilion]

So are you saying that we could not have found a striker where we could have paid in installments? Aquilani and Johnson were literally the only 2 players we could have bought? We could have found a striker that allowed us to structure payments.

The question marks are over the priority of his purchases. You talk about risk managment and yet we did not address our biggest weakness 2 years running - Torres getting injured.

And the 3 players we got patently did not cover Torres' injuries in any way, shape or form, as last seasons finishing position shows.

No, the reason for last season was'nt a lack of cover for Torres alone, it was the loss of form of many of the players, this lack of cover for Torres thing is just a red herring, used to have a go at Rafa.

Even without buying a striker, all things being equal, we should have finished higher, i don't belive another striker would have made a big difference last season, too many players were just crap, that was the main reason for last seasons dismal showing, and this belief that one more striker would have made everything ok is plain wrong. imo.

[RichC]

I'm not over the moon about his signing either mate but I will support Roy 100% right now. That's all I ask of anyone else on here.

well said ! Roy is now in charge and he is our manager - he deserves 100% loyalty from all the fans - we don't support players or managers we support LFC and everyone associated with them (bar the boardroom wank stains!)

[RichC]

Does that mean that you support the decisions of the owners?

Can I ask - will you support Roy Hodgson as our manager ?

[Guest]

well said ! Roy is now in charge and he is our manager - he deserves 100% loyalty from all the fans - we don't support players or managers we support LFC and everyone associated with them (bar the boardroom wank stains!)

Then you're defacto supporting the board because they made the decision to sack Rafa and appoint a puppet.

[Guest]

Can I ask - will you support Roy Hodgson as our manager ?

I'll see what he brings and how he deals with the board first. I don't expect him to be a long term appointment in any case.

[Chrono]

Then you're defacto supporting the board because they made the decision to sack Rafa and appoint a puppet.

Yes, he's a puppet and has been his entire career. Give me strength!

[RichC]

Then you're defacto supporting the board because they made the decision to sack Rafa and appoint a puppet.

I support LFC - of course they appointed Roy same as they got rid of Rafa (I don't agree with the way they did it but it's happened and we've got to get on with it)

Simple fact is Rafa is no longer the manager of LFC Roy is - we've got to get on with it and get behind him - he sure as hell isn't going to get all that much support from the board so us, the fans need to give him all we can!

[Guest]

Yes, he's a puppet and has been his entire career. Give me strength!

Why would you '100% back' someone who's been appointed by people who are serving the interests of the owners? You've got to love the sheep mentality of certain Liverpool supporters.