Liverpool FC Forum

by **NANNY RED** » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:02 pm

I was just having a nosy on the Liverpool way an saw this topic Regarding Sir Bob i thought it a great read that the lad posted and i know im cheatin by nicking it an putting up in here but i couldnt help meself

Liverpool's Sir Bob was the greatest manager ever - but would Paisley be tops today?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*

People have different views on who is the greatest-ever manager in British football. Fans of Manchester United will say either Matt Busby or Alex Ferguson, Liverpool supporters will be divided between Bill Shankly and Bob Paisley and others will put forward the merits of great bosses like Jock Stein, Alf Ramsey, Bill Nicholson, Brian Clough and many others.

If the title went to the manager who won the most silverware, then Paisley would be the winner. But I think that would be unfair to the rest of the challengers; they all faced different challenges when they took charge of their respective clubs, so it's not all about medals and cups, it's about what they did for their respective clubs. That is why we can never say who is the best from the past . We can only state what our opinion is, and here is mine and why.

For me Paisley will always be the greatest, but it is impossible to write about him without mentioning the great Bill Shankly because their managerial careers are so intertwined. Shankly took over at Liverpool when they were a mediocre team in the old second division, who every year nearly got promoted but always fell at the last hurdle. Shankly took them into the first division and went on to make them the best team in England and started the Liverpool empire, and for his achievements the Liverpool fan base will always be divided on who was the greatest, Shankly or Paisley. But as one journalist once said: ''Shankly lit the fire, and Paisley fueled it.''

'Paisley was decades ahead of his time in realising the importance of having a squad of players being ready for battle both mentally and physically. He was a man of few words but when he spoke, people listened'

For me, this also shows why Paisley comes out number one. Shankly was the great motivator of that team while the soft-spoken Paisley was the better tactician and would have a quiet word here and there with the players. While Shankly's achievements in building the Liverpool empire might seem the greatest feat, we have to remember that Paisley played a major part in all of this.

When Shankly made his shock announcement that he was retiring and recommended to the board that his replacement should be his number two, Paisley reluctantly accepted, and on the first day of pre-season training walked into the dressing room and announced to the players: ''Shanks has gone and they're giving me the job even though I didn't really want it. But we must try to carry on what he's started.''

And from here the Paisley era started; an era that would produce the greatest football club team the world has ever known, a team that in nine years won six League titles,three European Cups,one UEFA Cup, one European Super Cup, five Charity Shields and three League Cups. This was all done by a man who would never raise his voice and would potter around Anfield in his flat cap, woolly cardigan and carpet slippers.

But the question is how would Paisley fare in the football world of today, with the Mourhinhos and the Fergusons that the modern game has produced? No doubt Shankly would relish the present-day war of words between managers, but it would be shortlived. Because of Shankly's quick wit and killer statements, no one would dare take him on. But Paisley would never reply, such was his manner, and instead let his team speak for him on the pitch.

People whot think that Paisley could or would not embrace the technology that is part of the modern game would be very much mistaken. When Bob finished his playing career he took a huge interest in psychology and physiotherapy and actually sat in on a number of operations to learn more about the human body and its injuries.

Paisley had an amazing ability to spot and diagnose injuries early on, and it was said that he could diagnose a player by just watching him walk. He said himself: ''I'd always had an interest in physiotherapy and psychology. The physio side probably stemmed from the knocks I got as a player. I found that valuable later on. It stood me in good stead. If I was pinned down I'd say that was my greatest asset. I could speak to players and give them examples of injuries and how they heal.''

Whatever he was doing worked, because while he was at Liverpool, they had very few long-term injuries compared to other teams of the day.

Paisley was decades ahead of his time in realising the importance of having a squad of players being ready for battle both mentally and physically. He was a man of few words but when he spoke, people listened. When he reluctantly took over the helm at Anfield many people thought because of his soft-spoken manner and his very few words that he was too soft to run and continue the building of the empire built by his predecessor Shankly. How very wrong they were!

He showed his ruthlessness by selling Kevin Keegan, the star of the Liverpool team of the day, which in comparable terms would be like selling Steven Gerrard today. But he also bought one Kenny Dalglish, and the rest is history.
Imagine Paisley in today's modern game. One picture keeps coming to me - Mourhinho standing in his technical area on the sideline in his expensive Armani suit and beside him, the grandad-like figure of the great Bob Paisley in his flat cap, woolly cardigan and carpet slippers.

So if people want to know if famous sports people from the past would succeed in today's world, they should look no further than Bob Paisley. Not only would he survive in today's game, he would thrive in the world of 21st-century football.

His biggest attributes were that he could spot talent from a mile away, he was not afraid to change his tactics for different teams (as he proved with his European conquests) and he embraced new ideas on fitness and psychology, so there is no question that he if he were around today he could once again conquer the football world.

And finally, we don't need the government to recognise what the great man achieved by giving any gongs or medals. To all Liverpool fans across the globe, he will always be the great Sir Bob Paisley.
___

I was around when Shanks and Paisley were the boss although i was still a youngster when Shanks was here an did go the game to watch his magic. For me Sir Bob is the greatest signing this club has ever made.

Sorry the lad to credit with this piece is Scousetapas

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 1:41 am

The one thing that Paisley never seems to get credit for was he completely changed our style of football, especially at Anfield.

Under Shankly we were all used to the team being camped in the opposition half the whole game, pressing forward in wave after wave of attacks. Yeats and Smith would be on the half way line, as our last line of defense Lawrence paced the edge of the penalty area waiting to rush out if our opponents broke through.

When Paisley first took over he made a little speech about how he wanted Liverpool to play slightly differently and that he hoped the fans would be patient with him. He wanted Liverpool to play the game with more ebb and flow, allowing the other team to come out more and give us the room to play our football.

We still played the pass and move football that Shankly had perfected, but under Bob we took it to a whole different level.

Two great managers .......... how lucky we were.

by **NANNY RED** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:43 am

How do you think he would have fared into todays game though?

In my opinion he would have been just as succsessful the man had a special knack of spotting talent and bringing the best out of them. I mean who had heard of Hanson cause i hadnt. Who could turn a striker into one of the best midfielders this club has seen Ray Kennedy. As Saint said the man had a football brain far beyond his times and in todays game he still would of been streets ahead with that brain working overtime.

The only thing that i couldnt see him handling today would be the cheats and players feighing injury on the pitch. The media would be to much for him also, I would have loved to have seen his reactions though to sit in the dugout and comeup against the likes of Fergie, Alladice, or Mourinio. I think hed still outwit them brain and tactic wise but he would of laughed his head off at the antics of them.

I also wonder would we have had a lot more players from the lower leagues in the squad

by **112-1077774096** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:53 am

he could also tell you what injury a player had by the way they were walking, and was always spot on with it.

the guy knew is football, i think hewould still do well and not overcomplicate the game

by **Judge** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:11 am

He was a great manager that never won the FA cup, everything else but that

strange when you think of all the other achievements

by **GYBS** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:54 am

Bob has been the best ever and always will be in my eyes. Think he owuld be just as successful in the game now as he was back then. Was lucky to meet him as a kid and the guy was as humble as they get. Such a great man .

by **stmichael** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 12:22 pm

It would have been interesting to see how he would have dealt with the player power of today, that's for sure.

by **Owzat** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 12:44 pm

Like Bradman, would he have been as prolific if he played cricket today under today's laws and against the superfit pace bowling attacks out there? It's a million dollar question with no answer simply because you don't know unless you try it and unless someone invents a time machine then it's a tad difficult to take a man in his pomp from decades ago and try them in the current environment.

by **Judge** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 12:55 pm

stmichael wrote:It would have been interesting to see how he would have dealt with the player power of today, that's for sure.

years ago i was watching saint and greavsie on tv.

saint said he once went in to ask shanks for a pay rise. needless to say he told saint where the door was.

what a great man also. i reckon both bob and bill wouldve dealt with player power more readily - perhaps!

by **spion** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:28 pm

Quick answer is he wouldn't get the job nowadays. Old men are seen as out of step with modern thought & most clubs shy away from experience in favour of youthful exuberence. The bootroom would be regarded as oldschool also, in fact most of Liverpools traditional practices would be derided in the press. Too many great managers are out of work because they are seen as dinosaurs when they have masses of knowledge that is being wasted by the chairmen of today. George Graham, Kenny D & Graham Taylor to mention a few who could still do a job today but get overlooked in favour of managers like Paul Ince. Sad really.

by **Number 9** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:36 pm

Football has evolved!
Legend and best manager ever ever
But football has changed a lot since then.Its Incomparable really

by **taff** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:23 pm

Football has changed but paisley today would be a different person as well as he would have been bought up to understand todays game. I think in Sport that a natural talent will always get you through. The era debate IMO just means that you were a man of your era.

You could also ask how would Gerrad and Carragher cope with the drinking and gambling culture of years ago

by **Owzat** » Sun Oct 19, 2008 10:21 am

taff wrote:You could also ask how would Gerrad and Carragher cope with the drinking and gambling culture of years ago

They would have loved it! :laugh:

Is there an aspect of football that hasn't changed?

- offside rule
- backpass rule
- other rules including those on tackling
- number of subs
- ever increasing wages
- ever increasing transfer fees
- ever increasing number of international qualifiers
- ever increasing number of foreigners
- increased number of European Cup matches
- transfer window

It's a vastly different game, even to when Division One stopped being Division One and became the Premiership. Would a manager be able to buy the best player from their rivals, and defending champions, for a mere £1.2m? Even if you converted that to a comparable figure in today's market that would be a bargain. Would any of the now 'big four' sell any valuable player to a rival? In those early days of the Premiership you could assemble a squad for around £25m, by my reckoning only Hull, Stoke and Blackburn's squads cost less than that of all TWENTY Premiership teams.

Many acclaim Don Bradman as the greatest ever batsman in cricket by a long margin. Would he have averaged near 100 in Tests against the West Indies pace attack of the 70s and 80s? Or against the Aussie attacks of the 90s and 00s? It is a vastly different game, different eras. Just the attitude and mentality is different, a good example being said 'drinking and gambling culture'. Anybody who saw the recent series of 'The Big Match' on ITV4 may have noted how different the game was just 25 years ago. It is a shame they stopped that series and don't show other archive highlights. Some are all too ready to dismiss out of hand the past despite it being part of the game's history - and important. Those same people will mention the past when it suits them

Liverpool FC Forum

Would paisley be number one today

Who is online