Would you sack Hodgson?

[red g]

Not at all I just can't see myself supporting a club which is being owned by a pair of ****wits and a bunch of two faced servants serving their interests. There are moral grounds and principles that I would never trade for anything. It's my prerogative who I want to support or not and it shows that I care deeply for my club. Glory isn't the 'be all and end all' - this club is much more than that.

ahhh so you are jumping ship

when the going gets tough, the fredo gets going !!!


what steps are you doing as you care so deeply for the club? taking your Rafa scarf and ****ing off to inter? arriverderci !!!

I personally think those fans who are sticking with the club at its hour of need are the ones who care deeply.

[red g]

The only way to show that you care is to oppose whatever this pair of ****wits decide to do. It would be surrendering to their wishes to accept their decisions. That's a simple and rational stance that I've adopted lately.

But if they kept rafa you would not have made this stance?

[Guest]

ahhh so you are jumping ship

when the going gets tough, the fredo gets going !!!


what steps are you doing as you care so deeply for the club? taking your Rafa scarf and ****ing off to inter? arriverderci !!!

I personally think those fans who are sticking with the club at its hour of need are the ones who care deeply.

You were the one moaning all season last term, so spare me with your cretinous assumption that I'm jumping ship.

[Guest]

But if they kept rafa you would not have made this stance?

They didn't.

[red g]

You were the one moaning all season last term, so spare me with your cretinous assumption that I'm jumping ship.

only after 10 games when we were out of title race

[EwarWoo]

You were the one moaning all season last term, so spare me with your cretinous assumption that I'm jumping ship.

It's not an assumption...

I just can't see myself supporting a club which is being owned by a pair of ****wits and a bunch of two faced servants serving their interests.

You said yourself, you can't see yourself supporting us anymore.....

[red g]

They didn't.

hypothetically speaking.....if Rafa was in a job still you would be supporting the yanks though.

[barnes10]

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.

ok we're not far off so i'll try again ;-)

no im not saying we couldnt have found a striker on installments, but i am saying that the players we bought offered more in terms of attacking threat to the team as a whole than the players they replaced. so the players we bought enabled us, as a team, to attack by playing further up the field centrally and overlapping down the right. aqua is more offensive than alonso, johnson than arbeloa. fook even soto scored as many as sami...

but name me a suitable replacement for torres that would definitely be better than kuyt/babel/ngog and available for installments. in fact dont as you can't possibly answer accurately and it doesnt really matter. the point is, rafa chose to give himself more attacking options with the ones he bought and not pin his hopes on one striker, vulnerable to injury as any other single player. You're basically saying he should have done the latter which, when we have other tactical options to back torres up, is poor risk management.

a key difference is also that rafa knows exactly which players were viable purchases and which werent. so we'll never know if he blundered will we. villa may have been available on installments we could afford or he may not. he may not have wanted to leave with the WC so close. who knows. there's too much involved in individual deals than fee + wages a la champ manager so we'll never know really will we.

either way, saying rafa 'spent 40 mill and chose not to buy a striker and therefore wasnt fit to keep his job' is oversimplistic at best

[Guest]

Whatever, the club will live on whether PeteBest jumps ship or not. Moral of the matter is that I'm not futile and I stick to my guns. I'll give Hodgson credit in due time if he deserves it, I'm big enough to hold my hands up if there is a need to.

[elrichio86]

But if they kept rafa you would not have made this stance?

They didn't.

You've not answered the question there.

[Guest]

hypothetically speaking.....if Rafa was in a job still you would be supporting the yanks though.

Rafa was the only link left to the ethos I value. Hodgson may well restore them, we'll see. He'll get my backing when he's earned the right, in my view. There are too many grey areas at the moment for me to blindly give him my support. To me he's just a small time manager seeing his name in the limelight, he's got his all to do.

[Guest]

You've not answered the question there.

Yes I've answered it. They didn't - meaning I could have given them the benefit of the doubt because their judgement (in my view) was the right one. Is that difficult to understand?

[red g]

ok we're not far off so i'll try again ;-)

no im not saying we couldnt have found a striker on installments, but i am saying that the players we bought offered more in terms of attacking threat to the team as a whole than the players they replaced. so the players we bought enabled us, as a team, to attack by playing further up the field centrally and overlapping down the right. aqua is more offensive than alonso, johnson than arbeloa. fook even soto scored as many as sami...

but name me a suitable replacement for torres that would definitely be better than kuyt/babel/ngog and available for installments. in fact dont as you can't possibly answer accurately and it doesnt really matter. the point is, rafa chose to give himself more attacking options with the ones he bought and not pin his hopes on one striker, vulnerable to injury as any other single player. You're basically saying he should have done the latter which, when we have other tactical options to back torres up, is poor risk management.

a key difference is also that rafa knows exactly which players were viable purchases and which werent - based on financials alone. so we'll never know if he blundered will we. villa may have been available on installments we could afford or he may not. he may not have wanted to leave with the WC so close. who knows. there's too much involved in individual deals than fee + wages a la champ manager so we'll never know really will we.

either way, saying rafa 'spent 40 mill and chose not to buy a striker and therefore wasnt fit to keep his job is oversimplistic at best'

without oversimplifying it Rafa did **** up, while i take the above into consideration it was a wrong move by Rafa. I am also pretty sure Rafa believed in Lucas/masher axis and also believed in Ngog being good enough as back up.

Lets face it......he is hardly one to keep quiet and if he wasnt allowed to buy a striker pretty sure he would have come out and told the world this is the reason why we will be so poor in that season.

[Dessy]

Whatever, the club will live on whether PeteBest jumps ship or not. Moral of the matter is that I'm not futile and I stick to my guns. I'll give Hodgson credit in due time if he deserves it, I'm big enough to hold my hands up if there is a need to.

[barnes10]

without oversimplifying it Rafa did **** up, while i take the above into consideration it was a wrong move by Rafa. I am also pretty sure Rafa believed in Lucas/masher axis and also believed in Ngog being good enough as back up.

Lets face it......he is hardly one to keep quiet and if he wasnt allowed to buy a striker pretty sure he would have come out and told the world this is the reason why we will be so poor in that season.

I believe lucas and masher are good enough with 4 of gerrard, torres, kuyt, aqua, babel, riera, benni, ngog in front of them and a solid defence + johnson flying down the right.

Equally, I believe ngog is good enough with 5 of those behind him and a solid defence + johnson flying down the right.

and i still believe that.

carragher, gerrard, torres, riera & benni all contributed less than any rational person would have planned for. You saying rafa should have expected this many of his key players to be under par?

the nett result is more goals conceeded and less scored isnt it. whether that affects confidence or not, it means wins to draws and draws to losses. this is the reason we didnt finish 4th. not the simple choice to sign 1 backup striker.