Liverpool FC Forum

by **metalhead** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:15 pm

Its on SSN!

wtf is going on?

by **RUSHIE#9** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:28 pm

Just three weeks into the season and one (nearly two)managers gone already. :no

The FA Premier League is descending into the FArce Premier League!

by **metalhead** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:32 pm

Heard this is a similar case to the one of Kevin Keegan with deals and funds and what not.

the cases reminds me of another manager in a team we support, fortunately he hasn't resigned yet :nod

Its quite shocking.

by **account deleted by request** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:11 pm

I think this will happen more and more as "none football" owners take over clubs. They put their money in and want control of the finances and the financial decisions which includes transfers. Managers are gradually losing a lot of the "power" that they have had in the past. First the players took away much of the historical power and control of the managers, and now the owners are doing the same.

by **Sabre** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:25 pm

It's like Spain!

Glad at least we haven't descended into that. Changing a coach in 3 weeks doesn't make much sense, if you didn't feel the manager was good in summer, do not let him start the season. If you trust the manager enough to start the season, don't change your mind in 3 weeks.

by **JoeTerp** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:50 pm

s@int wrote:I think this will happen more and more as "none football" owners take over clubs. They put their money in and want control of the finances and the financial decisions which includes transfers. Managers are gradually losing a lot of the "power" that they have had in the past. First the players took away much of the historical power and control of the managers, and now the owners are doing the same.

very very very rare in America to see the same person that coaches the players and manages the games, also be the same person responsible for making personel decisions. If managers are on a short leash, it doesn't make sense for them to have total control over players because that could set the team back years if a manager buys players for a certain system, plays terribly and gets sacked (or gets hired for a better job) and the next manager plays a completly differnet system. Too much turnover all the time is not good.

by **dawson99** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:51 pm

Fecking Curbishley has just cost me, backed fecking keegan to be first out, wtf!

by **account deleted by request** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:05 pm

JoeTerp wrote:
s@int wrote:I think this will happen more and more as "none football" owners take over clubs. They put their money in and want control of the finances and the financial decisions which includes transfers. Managers are gradually losing a lot of the "power" that they have had in the past. First the players took away much of the historical power and control of the managers, and now the owners are doing the same.

very very very rare in America to see the same person that coaches the players and manages the games, also be the same person responsible for making personel decisions. If managers are on a short leash, it doesn't make sense for them to have total control over players because that could set the team back years if a manager buys players for a certain system, plays terribly and gets sacked (or gets hired for a better job) and the next manager plays a completly differnet system. Too much turnover all the time is not good.

Yeah mate, its the same on the continent (Europe to you

) but the big advantage of our system is the buck stops at the managers door, whereas under other systems it could be the person buying the wrong players, or the coach not picking the right formation or coaching the players well. Plus we don't get the problem of players being bought that the coach doesn't want.

Swings and roundabouts I suppose.

by **JoeTerp** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:33 pm

s@int wrote:Swings and roundabouts I suppose.

what does that mean?

also what the hell does 6s and 7s at the back mean?

by **dawson99** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:35 pm

a situation affording no eventual gains or losses. u could do this or that, dont matter, its swings and roundabouts

by **dawson99** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:37 pm

6s and 7s is a state of confusion, being all 6s and 7s... confused

by **Bad Bob** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:39 pm

JoeTerp wrote:
s@int wrote:Swings and roundabouts I suppose.

what does that mean?

also what the hell does 6s and 7s at the back mean?

Make your choice, Joe!

by **account deleted by request** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:53 pm

"At sixes and sevens is a very old catchphrase and relates to gambling. It first appears c. 1374 in Chaucer's Troylus. The original phrasing was set upon six and seven. It originally referred to betting one's entire fortune on one throw of the dice . It connoted carelessness, and over time the phrase came to mean confusion, disorder, and disagreement. The plural form sixes and sevens became standard in the 18th century."

I thought you would know what it meant Dawson....... cards in your case though mate

by **The Manhattan Project** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 6:42 pm

According to Manhattan's sources, Ray Winstone is the new West Ham manager.

When asked to comment, Mr Winstone said "Wotcha facking tawkin' abarrrrt, yew slagggggg!!!!!"

by **RUSHIE#9** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:33 pm

The Manhattan Project wrote:According to Manhattan's sources, Ray Winstone is the new West Ham manager.

When asked to comment, Mr Winstone said "Wotcha facking tawkin' abarrrrt, yew slagggggg!!!!!"

PMSL

Classic Manhatten! :bowdown

Liverpool FC Forum

Curbs just resigned

Who is online