Pack your bags Roy

[Craig_H]

And ?...so what if they did...the takeover has happened...Roy is in charge.

I would much rather the takeover had gone a head with Rafa still in charge, where he would be working with a board that was actually helping him rather than hindering him.

The point is, some people may have thought the takeover would have happened sooner, and we would therefore have been able to attract a proper manager to have replaced rafa, rather than getting roy.

[Vermilion]

The point is, some people may have thought the takeover would have happened sooner, and we would therefore have been able to attract a proper manager to have replaced rafa, rather than getting roy.

As i say, we had a proper manager, it was the board and the running of the club that was wrong. imo.

But no...some people wanted Maureen...and actually convinced themselves we'd get him...and convinced others too that we could do better..when in fact it was'nt the manager..it was the running of the club.

[Craig_H]

Still missing the point mate.

The people who felt that rafa needed to go, probably only did so due to the belief that we could've got a replacement in who was fit to manage LFC - because they thought the ownership may have been sorted by then, enabling us to attract someone of such ilk - as opposed to hodgson.

As for the argument of 'well some of us didnt feel he had to go because he is so good' etc - well then i point you to the Serie A argument which, in this context, is certainly relevant.

[Vermilion]

Still missing the point mate.

The people who felt that rafa needed to go, probably only did so due to the belief that we could've got a replacement in who was fit to manage LFC - because they thought the ownership may have been sorted by then, enabling us to attract someone of such ilk - as opposed to hodgson.

As for the argument of 'well some of us didnt feel he had to go because he is so good' etc - well then i point you to the Serie A argument which, in this context, is certainly relevant.

There it is in nutshell. The grass is always greener eh.

Oh, and these mangers you speak of that are of "such ilk"..apart from Maureen or Hiddink,...who else is there that you could say with confidence is more "fit" to manage lfc.

[Craig_H]

There it is in nutshell. The grass is always greener eh.

Now you're being silly, if you're suggesting that there's NOBODY who could be a better manager than Rafa.

Might i remind you that, greener or not, that rafa took us to our lowest league finish for the best part of 20 years, and that now, in his new job, he's struggling to stay in the CL places.

I'm very fond of rafa and i'd take him back tomorrow, on the chance that, with good backing, he would take us to the top - but it is exactly that - a 'chance'. It's by no means guaranteed, and rafa is by no means undoubtedly the best manager you can get.

[Vermilion]

Now you're being silly, if you're suggesting that there's NOBODY who could be a better manager than Rafa.

Might i remind you that, greener or not, that rafa took us to our lowest league finish for the best part of 20 years, and that now, in his new job, he's struggling to stay in the CL places.

I'm very fond of rafa and i'd take him back tomorrow, on the chance that, with good backing, he would take us to the top - but it is exactly that - a 'chance'. It's by no means guaranteed, and rafa is by no means undoubtedly the best manager you can get.

As it is with ANY manger.

It's really very simple, the problem was'nt Rafa, the problem was the club and how it was run imo.

That's why imo it was imperative that he stayed till after the deadline for the loans, to see what happened on that date and whether we did infact, as turned out..got new ownership.

[Rowan]

i have a text that just says "wayyyyyaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyeeeee" to prove it.

and I have one that starts 'Dear Geordie Tory *******'

[Craig_H]

As it is with ANY manger.

It's really very simple, the problem was'nt Rafa, the problem was the club and how it was run imo.

That's why imo it was imperative that he stayed till after the deadline for the loans, to see what happened on that date and whether we did infact, as turned out..got new ownership.

I wasnt saying that is 'isnt' with any manager. But another manager wouldnt have already had a shot at it and taken us to our lowest finish since the 90s. As i said, i'd love to take rafa back, but at the same time, i'm not going to gloss over the mistakes or pretend they didnt happen.

The point which i keep drawing out in bright letters, is that the people who wanted rafa out, didnt want him out because they thought roy would be better - well, i didnt anyway, i perhaps shouldnt speak for everyone.

The idea was that we would get a top class replacement - based on the theory that the takeover would have been done.

[little dave hedgehog]

and I have one that starts 'Dear Geordie Tory *******'

you looked that up for the exact wording, didn't you

[Vermilion]

I wasnt saying that is 'isnt' with any manager.

The point which i keep drawing out in bright letters, is that the people who wanted rafa out, didnt want him out because they thought roy would be better - well, i didnt anyway, i perhaps shouldnt speak for everyone.

The idea was that we would get a top class replacement - based on the theory that the takeover would have been done.

I understand your point, i just don't get why you'd think Maureen or Hiddink would come running because of a takeover, it would take ages before any established top manager would come here imo, they would want to see things had changed, it just was'nt imo realistic.

That's THE POINT, it was based in dreams and hopes, as some mentioned at the time i'm sure.

[Red11]

Still missing the point mate.

The people who felt that rafa needed to go, probably only did so due to the belief that we could've got a replacement in who was fit to manage LFC - because they thought the ownership may have been sorted by then, enabling us to attract someone of such ilk - as opposed to hodgson.

As for the argument of 'well some of us didnt feel he had to go because he is so good' etc - well then i point you to the Serie A argument which, in this context, is certainly relevant.

Craig, i think you're a very intelligent poster, but in this case you're being deliberately obtuse.

Rafe was here until the end of last season. It was a bad season. The majority of fans conceded it was his first bad season in almost his entire tenure up to that point. The Dukes were also still here at that point and most (not all) fans would rather have kept Rafa over the Virus Bothers in a straight contest. On that basis it never made sense to sack a very good manager without a replacement of equal or better stature being available while the Virus Brothers were STILL in charge. It was plain that no such manager would work with us while THEY were here. Rafa should have been given another season.

However with the deadline and probable ousting of Virus, new owners could have kept or ditched Rafa, depending on results, personality etc. It's the same choice they now face with Roy. It was fairly obvious imho (and most of the fans i speak too) that any manager change was always going to be a massive downgrade. Because the ownership had not changed at that point.

[RichC]

I wasnt saying that is 'isnt' with any manager. But another manager wouldnt have already had a shot at it and taken us to our lowest finish since the 90s. As i said, i'd love to take rafa back, but at the same time, i'm not going to gloss over the mistakes or pretend they didnt happen.

The point which i keep drawing out in bright letters, is that the people who wanted rafa out, didnt want him out because they thought roy would be better - well, i didnt anyway, i perhaps shouldnt speak for everyone.

The idea was that we would get a top class replacement - based on the theory that the takeover would have been done.

bit in bold sums it up for me.

obviously given a choice between rafa and roy it's a no brainer but you have to also ask the question why players didn't come out and stick up for rafa at the end of his tenure - not saying in anyway it was right but there are always two sides to a story.

[Vermilion]

[/B]

bit in bold sums it up for me.

obviously given a choice between rafa and roy it's a no brainer but you have to also ask the question why players didn't come out and stick up for rafa at the end of his tenure - not saying in anyway it was right but there are always two sides to a story.

As it does for me, but in a different way, it's what i've been trying to say...i've never said people wanted Rafa gone because they thought Roy would be better, that's daft...and is just muddying the debate, nobody has ever said that anyone weanted Roy instead, but the real point is..why ? Why did you think we'd get a better manger than Rafa at the time we got rid ?

So far the only explanation is oh we hoped a takeover would attract Maureen or Hiddink, so then..the logical thing to do would be to wait for the takeover, seems the senisble thing to do..no?

[Red11]

As it does for me, but in a different way, it's what i've been trying to say...i've never said people wanted Rafa gone because they thought Roy would be better, that's daft...and is just muddying the debate, nobody has ever said that anyone weanted Roy instead, but the real point is..why ? Why did you think we'd get a better manger than Rafa at the time we got rid ?

So far the only explanation is oh we hoped a takeover would attract Maureen or Hiddink, so then..the logical thing to do would be to wait for the takeover, seems the senisble thing to do..no?

this ^

[Craig_H]

I understand your point, i just don't get why you'd think Maureen or Hiddink would come running because of a takeover, it would take ages before any established top manager would come here imo, they would want to see things had changed, it just was'nt imo realistic.

That's THE POINT, it was based in dreams and hopes, as some mentioned at the time i'm sure.

I dont see any reason why a top manager wouldnt want to come into a massive club, with good backing and the greatest opportunity in football that could elevate them to god-like status (if they could bring us number 19). That is what a new manager would be looking at, under new owners.

Craig, i think you're a very intelligent poster, but in this case you're being deliberately obtuse.

Rafe was here until the end of last season. It was a bad season. The majority of fans conceded it was his first bad season in almost his entire tenure up to that point. The Dukes were also still here at that point and most (not all) fans would rather have kept Rafa over the Virus Bothers in a straight contest. On that basis it never made sense to sack a very good manager without a replacement of equal or better stature being available while the Virus Brothers were STILL in charge. It was plain that no such manager would work with us while THEY were here. Rafa should have been given another season.

However with the deadline and probable ousting of Virus, new owners could have kept or ditched Rafa, depending on results, personality etc. It's the same choice they now face with Roy. It was fairly obvious imho (and most of the fans i speak too) that any manager change was always going to be a massive downgrade. Because the ownership had not changed at that point.

I'm not being deliberately anything, except honest.

The basis of this debate is about people who perhaps wanted rafa out, and the fact that this was on the proviso that we'd have new owners, and be able to get a top manager in, as opposed to roy.

It's not really about whether or not wanting him out was 'right' or 'wrong'.