Liverpool FC Forum

Reg wrote:“It is naive to think that clubs are not looking at their options,” Cook said. “Of course they are. Do we think that Liverpool just talked to Klinsmann? I am sure they also spoke to others, and I have no doubt that Roberto Mancini was one of them. Of course he would have been.”

Reg wrote:Liverpool upset by Garry Cook’s claim of Roberto Mancini approach

Tony Barrett

Garry Cook, the chief executive of Manchester City, has sparked fury at Anfield by claiming that Liverpool approached Roberto Mancini with a view to the Italian replacing Rafael Benítez as manager.

Cook’s latest controversial comments have landed him in hot water with the Liverpool hierarchy, who have refused to comment. Privately, they have not been impressed by Cook’s outburst and are likely to regard it as a smokescreen after the sacking of Mark Hughes and subsequent appointment of Mancini as City manager.

The City chief executive was criticised after he claimed that Mancini had not been offered the job until last Thursday but it had emerged that the decision to replace Hughes had been taken three weeks ago.

In an attempt to explain his actions, Cook shifted the attention on to Liverpool, using their approach to Jürgen Klinsmann as a potential replacement for Benítez two years ago as evidence that clubs often have managerial successors lined up before the incumbent has been dismissed. “It is naive to think that clubs are not looking at their options,” Cook said. “Of course they are. Do we think that Liverpool just talked to Klinsmann? I am sure they also spoke to others, and I have no doubt that Roberto Mancini was one of them. Of course he would have been.”

Shortly after talks were held with Klinsmann, in November 2007, Tom Hicks, the Liverpool co-owner, confessed that an approach had been made to the German but said it was only as a contingency in case Benítez left the club to join Real Madrid.

At the time, Liverpool were not linked with any other manager nor was there any evidence that they had launched a recruitment offensive, with agents employed to sound out potential successors to the Spaniard.

Benítez will also see Cook’s comments as an unnecessary distraction as he attempts to reinvigorate Liverpool’s flagging fortunes. However, one issue that he believes will right itself is the form of Steven Gerrard, which Benítez insists will improve as his captain’s fitness levels increase, enabling him to play and train more regularly.

“He knows that he needs to improve but that in itself is very positive for me because it shows that he realises he is an important player for us,” Benítez said.

“He was doing much better, we were analysing his data and this was very clear. In the last game [against Portsmouth] he wasn’t at the same level, but this can sometimes happen and he knows that he is improving physically and this is the main thing for his confidence.

“We have a lot of conversations, not just with Stevie, but with a lot of players. They want to improve and sometimes that can be a problem because they can try to too hard and that makes it more difficult.

“If you analyse our team, people always talk about Gerrard and [Fernando] Torres. They are very important for us and they would be for any team. They have to be good because this means the rest of the team will be better and if they don’t play at the level they can, it can affect the team.

“Steven is a very good player and because the fans have seen him play very well they expect him to play at the same level, but it’s not easy when you’re not training with the team. If he has no [injury] problems, I am sure he will be better.”

LFC2007 wrote:

Reg wrote:“It is naive to think that clubs are not looking at their options,” Cook said. “Of course they are. Do we think that Liverpool just talked to Klinsmann? I am sure they also spoke to others, and I have no doubt that Roberto Mancini was one of them. Of course he would have been.”

I think the headline is quite misleading if it is based on those two quotes.

Seems to me that Cook is speculating as to what big clubs tend to do; making enquiries about the availability of the top managers regardless of whether there's a man still at the helm.
I think it's without class though that he couldn't just defend City's decision with his own justifications rather than deflecting attention by citing G&H's approach to Klinsmann. As if that fiasco is an exemplar ffs.

bigmick wrote:Man City will definately have spoken to Mourinho first. The fact he didn't go there can only mean one of two things IMHO, he's either coming to us next season or Man Utd.