Rafa Watch

[red g]

I wouldn't have rolled my eyes if you'd engaged with the thought behind my post in the first place rather than asking me if "I'm for real." Thanks for doing so second time around anyway.

OK, so not everyone thinks they were fooled. My train of thought is that we'd have been a hell of a lot higher than seventh if we'd had decent owners who backed the manager in his last two seasons and we hadn't had an interfering MD who was out of his depth handling the stuff that matters to us - the playing side of the club.

In short, if those things had been different then a change wouldn't have been necessary as we'd have been challenging.

So in that sense the people who called for a change either failed or chose not to see that the problem was not the manager but lay elsewhere.

People often think they're behaving rationally, even when they're not.

beggars beilief

[Glenn Hysen]

I was one of those who thought Rafa needed to go. The ownership situation and Purslow were the main pronlems. This is even more clear now. But the problem still remains that Rafa and the players had stopped functioning successfully together and I still think that a change of owners was not going to redeem that situation.

Exactly. I did not choose a side. I wanted Rafa out AND our previous owners AND Purslow.

[Neil Young]

Exactly. I did not choose a side. I wanted Rafa out AND our previous owners AND Purslow.

Even though he had us challenging in 2009 despite lack of transfer funds?

OK, that all adds up.

I'm afraid that by default you did choose a side. You chose Hodgson and another season outside the Champions League.

[Roboklopp]

Even though he had us challenging in 2009 despite lack of transfer funds?

OK, that all adds up.

I'm afraid that by default you did choose a side. You chose Hodgson and another season outside the Champions League.

Ta.

[Shaggy]

Even though he had us challenging in 2009 despite lack of transfer funds?

OK, that all adds up.

I'm afraid that by default you did choose a side. You chose Hodgson and another season outside the Champions League.

[RedReet]

Even though he had us challenging in 2009 despite lack of transfer funds?

OK, that all adds up.

I'm afraid that by default you did choose a side. You chose Hodgson and another season outside the Champions League.

But he held us back with his two defensive midfielders, his zonal marking and his resting of injured players. He also cracked up, didn't you know? Good riddance.

[Fredo]

Even though he had us challenging in 2009 despite lack of transfer funds?

OK, that all adds up.

I'm afraid that by default you did choose a side. You chose Hodgson and another season outside the Champions League.

Le muscat du dimanche ne les fait plus chanter

[badpiggy]

Even though he had us challenging in 2009 despite lack of transfer funds?

OK, that all adds up.

I'm afraid that by default you did choose a side. You chose Hodgson and another season outside the Champions League.

That's based on a flimsy prediction that the players would start playing for Rafa again just because there were new owners. It went wrong, it wasn't Rafa's fault but we have no idea what players would have left etc if Rafa had stayed. It's like any work situation - your boss is getting ****ed over by his boss but a combination of self-interest and unclear grey areas means that what you notice more is your boss's area ****ing up cos he's trying to fight too many battles. Just cos new big bosses come in doesn't mean that everyone is going to start busting a gut again. Instead, a clean sweep seems preferable. Doesn't make it right or fair or even that clever but people like a fresh start after turmoil.

[Glenn Hysen]

That's based on a flimsy prediction that the players would start playing for Rafa again just because there were new owners. It went wrong, it wasn't Rafa's fault but we have no idea what players would have left etc if Rafa had stayed. It's like any work situation - your boss is getting ****ed over by his boss but a combination of self-interest and unclear grey areas means that what you notice more is your boss's area ****ing up cos he's trying to fight too many battles. Just cos new big bosses come in doesn't mean that everyone is going to start busting a gut again. Instead, a clean sweep seems preferable. Doesn't make it right or fair or even that clever but people like a fresh start after turmoil.

Thank you.

[Glenn Hysen]

Even though he had us challenging in 2009 despite lack of transfer funds?

OK, that all adds up.

I'm afraid that by default you did choose a side. You chose Hodgson and another season outside the Champions League.

I never chose Hodgson. Purslow did (who I wanted out). Stop saying what I wanted or not wanted. I don't assume things about you do I?

As I and others have said. Rafa was a good manager but the players needed a fresh start. Had we gone for Kenny from the start of season it would have been all good.

[Neil Young]

That's based on a flimsy prediction that the players would start playing for Rafa again just because there were new owners. It went wrong, it wasn't Rafa's fault but we have no idea what players would have left etc if Rafa had stayed. It's like any work situation - your boss is getting ****ed over by his boss but a combination of self-interest and unclear grey areas means that what you notice more is your boss's area ****ing up cos he's trying to fight too many battles. Just cos new big bosses come in doesn't mean that everyone is going to start busting a gut again. Instead, a clean sweep seems preferable. Doesn't make it right or fair or even that clever but people like a fresh start after turmoil.

Flimsy? Well if my speculation is flimsy your version of events is positively ethereal.

That simply isn't what happened. It wasn't 'after. It wasn't a question of new owners coming in and replacing the manager. It was interference by the then MD and the old owners too. Blaming Rafa for finishing seventh allowed them to appoint Hodgson before NESV came in.

Maybe your suppositions hold true for a regular job but it isn't a regular organisation. The difference? Us. If the fans had been united in supporting the manager then maybe it would have given some players a kick up the arse and made them choose sides. It certainly would have made it harder to sack him.

[Neil Young]

Thank you.

What for? Managing to string together an argument with a degree of coherence beyond what you would have managed?

I never chose Hodgson. Purslow did (who I wanted out). Stop saying what I wanted or not wanted. I don't assume things about you do I?

As I and others have said. Rafa was a good manager but the players needed a fresh start. Had we gone for Kenny from the start of season it would have been all good.

I wasn't saying what you wanted, I was saying what you did. People who called for Benitez to be sacked aided Purslow and H&G. They then appointed Hodgson not Dalglish. So yeah, you contributed. Well done.

Please let me know if you need me to explain it to you in even simpler terms.

[CJ]

Flimsy? Well if my speculation is flimsy your version of events is positively ethereal.

That simply isn't what happened. It wasn't 'after. It wasn't a question of new owners coming in and replacing the manager. It was interference by the then MD and the old owners too. Blaming Rafa for finishing seventh allowed them to appoint Hodgson before NESV came in.

Maybe your suppositions hold true for a regular job but it isn't a regular organisation. The difference? Us. If the fans had been united in supporting the manager then maybe it would have given some players a kick up the arse and made them choose sides. It certainly would have made it harder to sack him.

and you criticise people for speculating in threads

[Neil Young]

That's pure speculation.

[Alex]

With each passing day now I feel it was more and more of a mistake to sack him. Kenny is doing a great job. But Rafa was trying to build something, and with the money and backing of the board could have done it, and done it for a long time.