in the past six months, the Red Sox have gone on a spending spree on free agents, some of whom were high-profile players locked up with pricey, long-term contracts.
The Red Sox gave 31-year-old Hanley Ramirez a four-year, $88 million deal and 28-year-old Pablo Sandoval a five-year, $95 million deal as their two biggest signings of the offseason.
Additionally, Boston made two big commitments to Cuban prospects, giving 27-year-old Rusney Castillo a seven-year, $72.5 million contract, and 19-year-old Yoan Moncada a $31.5 million bonus, which is still pending a physical.
Those four deals alone make up $287 million in signings, along with other smaller free agent moves.
FSG were conspicuous by their absence on Saturday and Aaron Cutler asks if their no-show raises deeper questions about Liverpool’s ownership.
Saying goodbye was never going to be easy so Liverpool’s owners chose not to do so at all. An emotionally charged Anfield was packed to the rafters on Saturday evening as fans descended en masse to pay tribute to their favourite son.
But while thousands of supporters bartered for tickets, many succumbing to exorbitant fees simply to secure one final glimpse, those in charge of the football club remained unmoved; safely cocooned in their Boston local 3,000 miles away.
The latest of multiple shows of disinterest, you have to question whether John Henry and his team of merry men even tuned in to this a monumental occasion. Five years the custodians of a sporting institution they are yet to grasp the Liverpool Way, an alarming point.
The ownership issue has long been a provocative one. The cancerous reign of Tom Hicks and George Gillett set Liverpool back years, our fall from grace brutal and not easily remedied.
In ousting their fellow countrymen and seizing power FSG were always likely to be met with caution. Finely tuned rhetoric was unlikely to wash with supporters previously hoodwinked. Once bitten, twice shy.
Nevertheless for ridding us of Tom and Jerry and instigating an epic swindle, goodwill was initially extended. That credit is about to expire.
For John Henry has visited Anfield just once in two years. Between them the ownership group have taken in less than ten home games.
Some may jump to their defence here and argue they have various business interests, the majority of which are based stateside. Nevertheless, their own reticence should at least be placated with the presence of someone on the ground; a board member relaying messages direct and making decisions on behalf of the trustees (Ed note: Michael Gordon appears to have increasing influence and was part of the letter from the owners on the official site signed ‘John, Tom and Mike‘).
Liverpool FC is too big and too precious to be consigned to a portfolio of business ventures. If the rich history that initially enticed Henry and co is to be built upon it cannot be deemed a mere afterthought, third in line behind the Red Sox and the New England Sports Network. It needs day-to-day management, a figurehead who does more than tweet comedic quips.
Fenway have championed the moneyball approach which, though admirable, is never likely to pay footballing dividends. Sure, profit margins may improve and balance sheets will inspire internal pats on the back but frugality is unlikely to breed trophies.
The sad fact of the matter is that in 2015 there are no footballing shortcuts. If a low cost fast track to the Promised Land existed it would have been unearthed long before Fenway rode into town proclaiming themselves visionaries whilst introducing Mighty Red.
You can only cheat the system for so long before you are found out and relegated to the status of also-rans. Liverpool are on that sharp decline.
Granted, Financial Fair Play can prove restrictive but make no mistake it was Liverpool’s policies as opposed to their spending power that so derailed this season. An obsession with buying youth and adhering to pay structures has left us in a state of flux.
Alexis Sanchez is lamented as the one that got away but rather than damn his wife’s taste for London hotspots should we not be asking why he slipped through our fingers? Could we not have demanded his inclusion in the Luis Suarez transfer? Could we not have blown Arsenal out of the water – outbidding them both with the size of our offer and the pay packet provided? Someone other than Ian Ayre may have changed that course of history.
Gerrard’s leaving exposes a squad shorn of any experience, in its place a team of kindergartens developing apace but still years away from their peak. When dips in form occur there is now no voice of reason, no calming influence, no totem. But then that is not reflected upon spreadsheets.
Brendan Rodgers’ calls for experience are loaded with want. He realised long ago you ‘win nothing with kids’, at least not without Luis Suarez. The Northern Irishman knows all too well he is expendable and the likely fall guy if and when this grand masterplan unravels.
FSG were conspicuous by their absence on Saturday and Aaron Cutler asks if their no-show raises deeper questions about Liverpool’s ownership.
Saying goodbye was never going to be easy so Liverpool’s owners chose not to do so at all. An emotionally charged Anfield was packed to the rafters on Saturday evening as fans descended en masse to pay tribute to their favourite son.
But while thousands of supporters bartered for tickets, many succumbing to exorbitant fees simply to secure one final glimpse, those in charge of the football club remained unmoved; safely cocooned in their Boston local 3,000 miles away.
The latest of multiple shows of disinterest, you have to question whether John Henry and his team of merry men even tuned in to this a monumental occasion. Five years the custodians of a sporting institution they are yet to grasp the Liverpool Way, an alarming point.
The ownership issue has long been a provocative one. The cancerous reign of Tom Hicks and George Gillett set Liverpool back years, our fall from grace brutal and not easily remedied.
In ousting their fellow countrymen and seizing power FSG were always likely to be met with caution. Finely tuned rhetoric was unlikely to wash with supporters previously hoodwinked. Once bitten, twice shy.
Nevertheless for ridding us of Tom and Jerry and instigating an epic swindle, goodwill was initially extended. That credit is about to expire.
For John Henry has visited Anfield just once in two years. Between them the ownership group have taken in less than ten home games.
Some may jump to their defence here and argue they have various business interests, the majority of which are based stateside. Nevertheless, their own reticence should at least be placated with the presence of someone on the ground; a board member relaying messages direct and making decisions on behalf of the trustees (Ed note: Michael Gordon appears to have increasing influence and was part of the letter from the owners on the official site signed ‘John, Tom and Mike‘).
Liverpool FC is too big and too precious to be consigned to a portfolio of business ventures. If the rich history that initially enticed Henry and co is to be built upon it cannot be deemed a mere afterthought, third in line behind the Red Sox and the New England Sports Network. It needs day-to-day management, a figurehead who does more than tweet comedic quips.
Fenway have championed the moneyball approach which, though admirable, is never likely to pay footballing dividends. Sure, profit margins may improve and balance sheets will inspire internal pats on the back but frugality is unlikely to breed trophies.
The sad fact of the matter is that in 2015 there are no footballing shortcuts. If a low cost fast track to the Promised Land existed it would have been unearthed long before Fenway rode into town proclaiming themselves visionaries whilst introducing Mighty Red.
You can only cheat the system for so long before you are found out and relegated to the status of also-rans. Liverpool are on that sharp decline.
Granted, Financial Fair Play can prove restrictive but make no mistake it was Liverpool’s policies as opposed to their spending power that so derailed this season. An obsession with buying youth and adhering to pay structures has left us in a state of flux.
Alexis Sanchez is lamented as the one that got away but rather than damn his wife’s taste for London hotspots should we not be asking why he slipped through our fingers? Could we not have demanded his inclusion in the Luis Suarez transfer? Could we not have blown Arsenal out of the water – outbidding them both with the size of our offer and the pay packet provided? Someone other than Ian Ayre may have changed that course of history.
Gerrard’s leaving exposes a squad shorn of any experience, in its place a team of kindergartens developing apace but still years away from their peak. When dips in form occur there is now no voice of reason, no calming influence, no totem. But then that is not reflected upon spreadsheets.
Brendan Rodgers’ calls for experience are loaded with want. He realised long ago you ‘win nothing with kids’, at least not without Luis Suarez. The Northern Irishman knows all too well he is expendable and the likely fall guy if and when this grand masterplan unravels.
Admittedly, in business quarters investing in youth is a sensible approach. Companies should forever be focused on the future. But in sport the here and now facilitates that very future.
The likes of Raheem Sterling, Philippe Coutinho and Jordon Ibe may blossom into world beaters but can Liverpool afford to sit and wait for their potential to be realised? What if banking on their coming of age results in an extended Champions League exile?
Will any of the aforementioned stick it out and spearhead the revival, ala Steven Gerrard? The sad reality is most, if not all, will jump ship before reaching their peak years, thanking Liverpool for the development and thus confirming our status as a feeder club. Such drifting cannot be tolerated, never mind embraced.
Understanding business is one thing, understanding football is something entirely different. Five years into their stewardship you would like to think Fenway are a little more attuned to the intricacies of the beautiful game. Instead they seem none the wiser.
In appointing Damien Comolli – first as Director of Strategy, then Director of Football – they appeared happy to glean advice from one man. When that failed they ripped up the blueprint and established the now mystical transfer committee – its own lack of transparency and appalling track record undermining that thought process entirely. What next? The Sporting Director Rodgers refused to work under? Yet more instability and another five year plan?
FSG are far from disastrous owners, Newcastle supporters would confirm as much and negotiate an immediate swap. But they have hardly covered themselves in glory either. Rightly or wrongly there is a clear disconnect between Boston and Anfield, a sad fact underlined by Saturday’s no-show.
An exclusive interview with the Liverpool Echo, given by Tom Werner, is no kind of send-off for the club’s greatest player. It was a half-arsed effort from owners seemingly half-arsed about Liverpool.
We are someway short of protest marches and online terrorism but we are approaching a crossroads.
Next season, year six of the FSG project, will be the campaign on which they are judged. Ours is a fan base divided; fears over ticket prices and a dwindling atmosphere exasperated by tacky sponsorship deals and the erection of a new stand designed purely to encompass hospitality.
Even Gerrard’s farewell was marred by some ill-advised PR – next season’s kit unveiled and some tactical lead questions fed to him. Ayre again muscled in on the photo op just as he did when Pele came to town last month.
Such moves can be ignored, if not endorsed, providing a winning team emerges from said guff. When mediocrity looms our crowd are less forgiving and sights will be trained on our own Boston Stranglers.
Steven Gerrard’s sad if understandable departure removes the final link to our glorious past. Our future lies in the hands of FSG; let’s hope they don’t forget about us.
Come on Eds, the fella has an agenda just like you do. Air miles don't define ownership.
Far more important is the whole concept of whether they accept that the Moneyball strategy is not going to work in the EPL and that whilst last season was a glorious example, the structure is extremely short term and brittle. Judge the owners on that, not whether they want a photo opportunity alongside Ayres and Stevie.
Reg » Mon May 18, 2015 11:22 pm wrote:Come on Eds, the fella has an agenda just like you do. Air miles don't define ownership.
Far more important is the whole concept of whether they accept that the Moneyball strategy is not going to work in the EPL and that whilst last season was a glorious example, the structure is extremely short term and brittle. Judge the owners on that, not whether they want a photo opportunity alongside Ayres and Stevie.
Once again Reg, you are putting words into my mouth.
I couldn't care less whether they attended Stevie's farewell. I agree, as owners that's not what they should be judged on.
BUT as for the other valid points raised in the article, agree with it all as it's the same thing I have saying for a while now:
- In ousting their fellow countrymen and seizing power FSG were always likely to be met with caution. - Fenway have championed the moneyball approach which, though admirable, is never likely to pay footballing dividends. Sure, profit margins may improve and balance sheets will inspire internal pats on the back but frugality is unlikely to breed trophies. - Granted, Financial Fair Play can prove restrictive but make no mistake it was Liverpool’s policies as opposed to their spending power that so derailed this season. An obsession with buying youth and adhering to pay structures has left us in a state of flux. - Alexis Sanchez. Could we not have demanded his inclusion in the Luis Suarez transfer? Could we not have blown Arsenal out of the water – outbidding them both with the size of our offer and the pay packet provided? - Gerrard’s leaving exposes a squad shorn of any experience, in its place a team of kindergartens developing apace but still years away from their peak. When dips in form occur there is now no voice of reason, no calming influence, no totem. But then that is not reflected upon spreadsheets. - The likes of Raheem Sterling, Philippe Coutinho and Jordon Ibe may blossom into world beaters but can Liverpool afford to sit and wait for their potential to be realised? What if banking on their coming of age results in an extended Champions League exile? - Understanding business is one thing, understanding football is something entirely different. Five years into their stewardship you would like to think Fenway are a little more attuned to the intricacies of the beautiful game. Instead they seem none the wiser. - Next season, year six of the FSG project, will be the campaign on which they are judged. Ours is a fan base divided; fears over ticket prices and a dwindling atmosphere exasperated by tacky sponsorship deals and the erection of a new stand designed purely to encompass hospitality.
I don't think anyone can argue any of these points.
Even you concede now that a number of things aren't working under their tenure.
"LIVERPOOL: 6 European Cups, 19 Domestic Titles, 3 UEFA Cups, 8 FA Cups, 9 League Cups and 4 European Super Cups and 1 Club World Championship
All other English clubs pale into insignificance!"
- In ousting their fellow countrymen and seizing power FSG were always likely to be met with caution.
*** Agreed but in fairness we were all so shell shocked that ANY new owner was going to come under serious suspicion until they proved they were to be trusted.
- Fenway have championed the moneyball approach which, though admirable, is never likely to pay footballing dividends. Sure, profit margins may improve and balance sheets will inspire internal pats on the back but frugality is unlikely to breed trophies.
*** Yes they're doing a good job commercially but agree Moneyball does not work. The days of Brian Clough building a European Cup side based on Larry Lloyd and Kenny Burns are long gone. If you think about it, if Sky pay 5 billion tv rights there is no need for Moneyball and you're stacking the cards against yourself as other clubs WILL spend that tv income! Its an own goal to play Moneyball when cash is available.
- Granted, Financial Fair Play can prove restrictive but make no mistake it was Liverpool’s policies as opposed to their spending power that so derailed this season. An obsession with buying youth and adhering to pay structures has left us in a state of flux.
*** Bad management at club and team level is why we're in the pooh today, not FFP.
- Alexis Sanchez. Could we not have demanded his inclusion in the Luis Suarez transfer? Could we not have blown Arsenal out of the water – outbidding them both with the size of our offer and the pay packet provided?
*** Moneyball is brittle and they don't go the extra mil to get the lad which has now come back in their face. Its very naive really as they have twice the task now to persuade good players to join with Stevie goin and no other world class player at the club.
- Gerrard’s leaving exposes a squad shorn of any experience, in its place a team of kindergartens developing apace but still years away from their peak. When dips in form occur there is now no voice of reason, no calming influence, no totem. But then that is not reflected upon spreadsheets.
*** We have to move on, we can't hide behind Stevie. Tomnorrow is the first real day in rebuilding LFC post SG, post Carra, post Suarez.
- The likes of Raheem Sterling, Philippe Coutinho and Jordon Ibe may blossom into world beaters but can Liverpool afford to sit and wait for their potential to be realised? What if banking on their coming of age results in an extended Champions League exile?
*** They will only become better (I don't think any of them are world class) when surrounded by equal of better players so we still need to bring in 4 first class players.
- Understanding business is one thing, understanding football is something entirely different. Five years into their stewardship you would like to think Fenway are a little more attuned to the intricacies of the beautiful game. Instead they seem none the wiser.
*** They're Yanks, what d'you expect?
- Next season, year six of the FSG project, will be the campaign on which they are judged. Ours is a fan base divided; fears over ticket prices and a dwindling atmosphere exasperated by tacky sponsorship deals and the erection of a new stand designed purely to encompass hospitality.
*** Massive implications next season. If we don't bring the players in I see BR resigning stating the owners strategy is unworkable which will set us back another 2 years. If Sterling walks then Coutinho could similarly go. Big year, the owners have to wake up and BR has to stop acting like a c.unt.
I don't think anyone can argue any of these points. *** Agree.
Even you concede now that a number of things aren't working under their tenure.
*** That's right, as you can see from my answers, and I'm a worried chap. They have to understand how Utd and Arsenal have responded to their dips, we cannot fight against the flow. Did you see my earlier quote?
Quote from the film Moneyball: (after Oakland lost to Minnesota bringing to an end their record winning streak, then subsequent collapse)
Radio Commentator: What the Minnesota Twins exposed, is the fact that the Oakland A's were fundamentally not a sound baseball team. I mean, they had a flawed concept that started with the General Manager and the brain trust over there thinking they could reinvent baseball. You can't approach baseball from a statistically Beane counter point of view, it's won on the field with fundamental play. You have to steal, you have to bunt, you have to sacrifice, you gotta get mens score in position and then you gotta bring 'em in. And you don't do that with a bunch of statistical gimmicks. Nobody reinvents this game.
With Sterlings impending exit FSG need to get off their @rses and make a statement in the transfer market That doesn't necessarily mean spending a fortune but it does mean bringing in players that will excite the fan base and put a stop to this perception in the football world that we are a club that see's success in terms of profits not trophies. Everyone knows why we are looking at Milner and Ings, it's the same reason we looked at Balotelli, no club is going to compete for the top prizes in this country by acting like skinflints and trying to do everything on the cheap. How many deals have fell through over the last few years because we have put in insulting low ball offers? We could sign 3 players in the summer like Kovacic, Yarmalenko and Konoplyanka. Konoplyanka is on a free and you'd probably get the other 2 for £25m each. We'd get most of that money back from selling the likes of Sterling, Borini, Alberto, Aspas, Coates etc etc so signing good players needn't be expensive. If we have another uninspiring window you can bet your bottom dollar that we'll be back here in 12 months time discussing Coutinho's future. Maybe that's what the club wants? Who knows?
Based on this happening, I really want Henry and co to just sell to someone who is willing to invest in players like we are suggesting. Harder said then done though.
It's obvious that if we continue under FSG we are only going to "stabilise" our club to just finish outside the top 4 every year.
At least now we are all on the same page, if we see more cheap dross and over-priced "potential" arrive this summer the supporters will turn on FSG very, very quickly.
"LIVERPOOL: 6 European Cups, 19 Domestic Titles, 3 UEFA Cups, 8 FA Cups, 9 League Cups and 4 European Super Cups and 1 Club World Championship
All other English clubs pale into insignificance!"
FSG will never understand "The Liverpool Way" not just because there Yanks, because they are businessmen and the only thing that interests them is the bottom line. I just wish Steve Morgan had of bought the club. And I don't want a Arab, Russian sugar daddy either. What I want is our club back please.This soap opera has dragged on far far to long. A consortium of wealthy Liverpool fans and that includes players Robbie Fowler comes to mind would be a sensible way forward. I wonder how Moores feels these days for selling us down the river
With all the problems surrounding Rodgers, I'm worried if our "upgrade" (assuming Rodger's gets the boot) also fails to deliver within the next 3-4 years then the Owner's integrity needs to be called into question.
It's been a matter of 5 years and we have shown one League Cup & one season of Champions League football which we failed miserably. FSG will have to admit in some poor decision making leading up to the acquisition of Comolli as DOF. They have also shown naivety in putting in too much trust with vast sums of cash in a series of major transfer failures (in which S&S, and Coutinho have proved to be their value's worth). They also listened too much to fans in the first few years clouding their own judgement but most frustrating of all is they knew very little all about Football when they purchased LFC and still know very little about Football.
The moneyball model hasn't exactly worked either else we would see Liverpool as the bottom 5 spenders each season (Buy for less, sell for more approach).
Sure they've invested fund to build a new main stand & potential rebuild of Anfield Road End. Each season with the inability to win major honours and attract world class talent, I'm wondering whether the "Job too big for FSG" ?
Its clear we need a wealthy buyer to take us to the next level, or back at the level we fell out from. But also an individual who without attachments to largely owned ventures outside of football (which is where being owned by FSG affects us with transfer funding). I wont hold my breath.
I would say that we are far from stable and it seems every 3 years we completely decimate the squad due to incompetent management at ridiculous cost for little value.
Just the transfer business alone shows how compatible FSG are at managing & making appointments in the football business. Not a fooking clue, just another annual review, throw another committee at it, bang done, another season fooked. They promise "we will be better next season.." blah blah... Rodgers does his motivational bit... then every decent player walks away from our tight *****, prolonged transfer committee, and we get the players nobody will miss or wanted in the first place.
They might understand the Liverpool way, but do you really think anything will change with them in charge? Will there suddenly be hundreds of millions available for new players? Will the world class players around the world suddenly want to come here? Will the best managers in the world suddenly see Liverpool as the most attractive club in the world?
What most here seem to want is some filthy rich arab that wants to use the club as his personal toy. Unfortunately there isnt really that many of them around.
LIVERPOOL: FSG – IT’S ALL GONE QUIET OVER THERE By Gareth Roberts TAW
JOHN HENRY — who remains the Principal Owner of Liverpool Football Club — once said: “I think the biggest issue was the sense of disenfranchisement and their sense of not being a part of their own club, so that’s what we discussed. This was a big first step.” He was speaking in October 2010 after meeting Liverpool supporters groups following what was then known as NESV securing a takeover of the club. If Henry found fans to be at a low ebb back then it was understandable. Shafted by Hicks and Gillett. Managed by Hodgson. Beaten by Everton. Nineteenth in the table. Dark days. “We realise the challenge that lies ahead if we are going to go toe to toe with the other big clubs,” added Henry then. “We are not asking for a long honeymoon. This is a contact sport we are in and the going can get rough sometimes. We realise that.” Let’s leave the turd unpolished — lately, the going has been rough. Not 2010 days, of course, but enough to have swathes of Liverpool’s support questioning the club’s direction again.
Two wins in nine at the end of the season. Weak performances against West Brom, Hull, Palace and — of course – Stoke; a day best forgotten, a match easily remembered. In your nightmares.
Add just one win in a relatively easy Champions League group, the Europa League exit and the dismal FA Cup semi against Villa. Given the unprecedented £117million transfer spend on nine players the previous summer, and a record reading nine seasons with only the League Cup to show for it, it was no great surprise when the bookies made it a banker that Brendan Rodgers would soon be clearing his desk when Tom Werner and Michael Gordon came to town. After all the Americans had form. Instead, after a couple of hours of what were described as “good and productive” talks it was revealed “a comprehensive plan for improvement” had been agreed. The phrases favoured by men in suits, shirts and ties arrived in the public domain encased in quotation marks but attributed to nobody. Nothing more has been revealed about that “comprehensive plan” since, although it soon became clear it included P45s for Mike Marsh and Colin Pascoe.
Since then, silence. John Henry seems to have lost interest, the visits curtailed, the tweets no more, and Michael Gordon, FSG’s Liverpool man, favours the low profile and even knocked back an interview with the Boston Globe, a newspaper owned by Henry. It’s left a vacuum, a gap. A place where supporters are speculating what the plan is, or indeed whether there is one. It seems unlikely Rodgers bulleted his coaching staff, particularly given his close relationship with Pascoe. So why was the decision taken? What is Rodgers’ role now? Is the coaching the only aspect of football operations where changes are being considered? What about the transfer committee? If the No.2 that is chosen — by ‘mutual decision’ of Gordon, Werner and Rodgers, according to the local press — is too strong, too purposeful, are we about to usher in another Roy Evans/Gerard Houllier situation?
These aren’t the only questions circulating on a daily basis. There’s the bigger picture stuff, too. Are we walking the walk of a big club? Going toe to toe? If it’s a contact sport it feels like we’ve been on the canvas after swinging some pretty big punches the season before last. But right now the corner man isn’t offering any advice as we prepare to go back out for another round. And as talent and experience continues to leave Liverpool with alarming regularity, fears increase that we’ll be fighting with one hand tied behind our back. More than two weeks have passed since Marsh was told to take up walking the dog full time. Pascoe was left examining his shorts collection shortly after. No explanation. No announcement. No justification. Nothing. Zilch. Silence. Nada. Rewind back to 2010. One of the perceived plus points of the arrival of Henry and Co. on these shores was their willingness to communicate. They were seen as open and honest – the polar opposite of their hated predecessors from the Land of Opportunity. Email Q&As, breakfast with supporters, phone-ins on LFCtv — we had communication from the owners coming out of our ears. It felt fresh. It seemed positive. The mood lifted.
It carried on for a time. Open letters. Statements. Interviews. Tweets. But all of a sudden the silence is deafening. Henry was last seen in L4 in February. No asking what City, United or anyone else interested in Raheem Sterling is smoking. No show for Steven Gerrard’s last game and a similar noticeable by absence moment at Wembley. So what’s changed? When did saying nothing become the strategy?
Henry has in the past praised the city of Liverpool for ‘a culture of toughness, intelligence and creativity’. Equally, he is an intelligent man. You would presume Gordon is too. That being the case, and aided and abetted by the club’s communications team, you would guess that they have predicted the reaction, and the accusations, that have followed their decision to stay schtum. Why would they say anything, you might ask. Why should they say anything, some people say. What other owners would speak in these circumstances, others have said. How about John Henry? Three thousand miles from Anfield, Henry is watching over another sports team’s crisis at the Boston Red Sox. They recently lost seven in a row, and unrest among fans has been building for some time. Christopher L. Gasper wrote in the Boston Globe: “How bad does it have to get before someone in a position of authority or influence on 4 Yawkey Way decides to act, whether that’s changing the manager, recalibrating the roster or altering philosophical course?
“The Sox appear stuck in a state of organisational inertia, preaching patience, spouting platitudes, clinging to hope, and losing games. Rinse and repeat. “There has to be an attempt to shake this team from its torpor. It’s not about finding a fall guy. It’s about trying to salvage a season that is quickly slipping into irrelevance. Trying anything is preferable to doing nothing.” Sound familiar? Within that climate, did Liverpool’s principal owner adopt the ostrich approach? Pull down the shutters and offer the bird? No. He faced the music and answered questions direct in front of an army of reporters.
Ballsy. Bold. And evidence of leadership and direction. Is it too much to ask to see something similar at Liverpool sometime soon? “Reversing the errors of previous regimes” no longer washes as an excuse. This is FSG’s club, with FSG’s players and FSG’s manager, transfer committee and executives. Five years into Liverpool under FSG, we’re seeing a new Main Stand rise above The Kop but the people who regularly grace the former famous terrace wonder how soon the clapping executive-types paying thousands of pounds to fill the structure will see silverware paraded on the pitch in front of them. To say supporters again feel ‘disenfranchised’ is perhaps a bit much, particularly as generalising about the feelings of thousands is always a dangerous game. But what many fans — myself included — would like to see is more evidence of a ‘club’.
Early in his time at Liverpool Brendan Rodgers said: “The template I will put down will be about organisation, on and off the field. What we are trying to do is organise the club so there is a one-club mentality and one shared vision going forwards.” He also said: “When I became a manager I always wanted to go into a club with a clear philosophy, so it’s clear in terms of where everyone is heading.” Does this describe Liverpool FC right now? From the outside — because that’s where fans have been left on this — it looks to be more ideal than reality. What’s the plan? It would be lovely to hear it. Mr Gordon? Mr Henry? Mr Werner? Anyone?
Absolutely describes in painful detail the depth of consternation surrounding this club at the moment as regards the owners
It's the closed season at the moment - people are on holiday , scouts are checking players out at tournaments - all football clubs are quiet right now.
So again - what are the owners supposed to be telling us whilst the closed season is going on ?
For years people didn't hear anything from owners - not one single thing , they as Shanks used to say - are there to sign the cheques.
H&G used to fight their battles daily in the press - they made a mockery of our club and people just wanted them to shut up and leave
Current owners speak when it's needed and beyond that just sit in the background as they no doubt feel they have no need to constantly be in the media.
I would prefer the owners just continue to be going on with stuff in the background and when there is something significant for us to know then they will speak - until then we don't need to know.
by