Is purslow keeping

[merlboo]

Hodgson in a job ?

The lack of activity from the top is somewhat worrying

Has the former CEO who championed Roy , and who ultimately shoehorned him into the position of manager of Liverpool Football Club after bludgeoning Rafa holding up the inevitable ?

Does he not want his legacy to be hiring the worst manager in the Clubs decorated history

and to that end ,is he holding onto the Impossible Dream ?

That Hodgson will miraculously turn it around

[Shanks]

Not sure we need ANOTHER thread for this mate... but I suppose a new one was on the cards, given the mess..

On that note, are Stevie and Carra keeping Roy?...

Given the lack of noise coming out of the club, John W Henry is the only one keeping him here, imo..

[el matador]

believe me if deschamps was willing to leave marseille he would already be our manager now.

[JHP]

Hodgson in a job ?

The lack of activity from the top is somewhat worrying

Has the former CEO who championed Roy , and who ultimately shoehorned him into the position of manager of Liverpool Football Club after bludgeoning Rafa holding up the inevitable ?

Does he not want his legacy to be hiring the worst manager in the Clubs decorated history

and to that end ,is he holding onto the Impossible Dream ?

That Hodgson will miraculously turn it around

Do you honesty believe:
The owners are not actively looking to find a long term replacement
That Purslow has such sway over them that he could stop them replacing him

Or is it just another stirring of the SOS / Purslow animosity pot?

[CJ]

interesting that this is about Purslow.

you would almost think that sos have an agenda against him.

[Fredo]

interesting that this is about Purslow.

you would almost think that sos have an agenda against him.

I think he meant to say that he's still got a lot of influence at the club. You can see him still sitting in the Director's box and chatting to players. It can't be good can it?

[JHP]

I think he meant to say that he's still got a lot of influence at the club. You can see him still sitting in the Director's box and chatting to players. It can't be good can it?

Do you really think that Purslow would be trying to defend Hodgson if he wants to retain any credibility and influence on the LFC Board?

I think he'll be saying sadly, although being the manager of the year or whatever, it's not working out.

[Rich]

In this instance I don't think Purslow is keeping him in a job. However, I'd like Purslow to have zero influence as he's a disaster when it comes to making footballing decisions.

[CJ]

i suppose it depends how much influence he really has.

its interesting that sos are not annoyed at FSG for lack of activity. No its purslow still has influence and its bad.

At the time of the sale sos couldnt give any credit for involvement in that. To me the truth is he deserves credit for the involvement in the sale. However he also deserves no credit for the whole roy thing or how he supposedly went about getting rid of rafa.

if he was hugely influential then why isnt he CEO? i suppose he may have influence i dont know. To me its just sos who have hated him for ages looking to blame him for the reason roy isnt sacked.

[Fredo]

Do you really think that Purslow would be trying to defend Hodgson if he wants to retain any credibility and influence on the LFC Board?

I think he'll be saying sadly, although being the manager of the year or whatever, it's not working out.

I'm not saying he does it deliberately but he should take a back seat for a year or two, let things settle and improve, then go back again if he wants to attend matches. It's the sensible thing to do, he's not a great legacy of the last regime.

[Fredo]

i suppose it depends how much influence he really has.

its interesting that sos are not annoyed at FSG for lack of activity. No its purslow still has influence and its bad.

At the time of the sale sos couldnt give any credit for involvement in that. To me the truth is he deserves credit for the involvement in the sale. However he also deserves no credit for the whole roy thing or how he supposedly went about getting rid of rafa.

if he was hugely influential then why isnt he CEO? i suppose he may have influence i dont know. To me its just sos who have hated him for ages looking to blame him for the reason roy isnt sacked.

I don't think he was hugely influential at all. I'd say Broughton was a major influence, Purslow did '**** all' in his time when he was in sole power. His services not being retained after the change of ownership speaks volumes and for that alone he should be told to take a back seat.

[CJ]

i think having been Chief exec (or whatever his exact title was) and not being retained is in some way a back seat.

i dont like the bloke from what i have seen from him but as with most things in life he will have done some good and some bad. this refusal to acknowledge anything on the plus column does weaken your argument.

[Fredo]

I remember hearing Shankly say that he wasn't 'welcomed' after he quit the club. I'm not saying Purslow had the same level of influence nor I am saying that Shanks had any aspirations of damaging the club, but you kind of understand what I'm getting at. All the negative legacies of the old regime should be kicked out. Purslow is a fan, he should be allowed to come back whenever he wants, but not now.

[CJ]

yes i do, i probably even agree with you on that. I just dont think that the fact he is there means he has any influence (i can see he may i just dont know, if he does i would imagine a new CEO will certainly mean no influence for him) and certainly dont see that he is keeping roy in a job.

This is just sos who hate him.

[badpiggy]

If NESV/FSG are proper sports people - and their baseball success and fan-acclaim suggests they are - then it is hard to imagine that they have much time for Purslow's football "knowledge". Owners of teams generally use/hate the media so Roy's popularity with a certain "pro-England" set, Purslow included, is meaningless to them and therefore Purslow is more than likely viewed as "well played on being the minor partner in the takeover but what you fairly ****ed up the football side of things for us".

Just because they swilled champagne with him the night of the takeover doesn't mean they have any time for his opinions. At that level I'd imagine business to be fairly cut-throat i.e. we have a serious problem with the manager of Liverpool so who appointed him?