Liverpool F.c.

[PattayaParent]

I would take the massaged figures of Mssrs H and G with a pince of salt.

The figure I quoted above don't come from H&G but verification can be found on Liverpools own website and the BBC and other football websites.

[StevieH]

He wasn't far off in the figures, Benitez spent 250 million on players, (including 16 in 1 summer shopping spree!!) at a nett of 105 mill.Now if you add in agents fees, signing on fees for freebies, bungs, etc. then 300 mill sounds a fair estimate and since they bought it in 2007 revenue has increased by 55 percent, boosting commercial revenues by 83 percent and operating profit (before player trading and exceptions) has increased by 60 percent.

the figures were way off, as they were every time tom hicks opened his mouth. not least because he attempted to make out that he and gillett had actually invested in the club rather than seeing it reach the brink of administration through their actions.

benitez's net spend over his tenure was around £14m to £16m per season, really not very much for a club which was supposed to keep pace with the man united behemoth and the blank chequebook of chelsea. that we finished second ahead of chelsea and a whisker away from winning the league in 2009 was a frankly incredible overachievement.

also, the club's commercial success had nothing to do with H&G and came in spite of them, not because of them. this was achieved by benitez achieving relative success on the field and the excellent work of commercial director ian ayre. gillett and hicks' contribution was to pay almost £60m to architects over 3 years for design work on a stadium which will never be built.

[PattayaParent]

^as I said above, my figures do not come from H&G but can be independently verified, including LFCs own website.

14 mill per season for 3 seasons is not realistic, 1 player alone cost 28 mill., 1 was 20 mill and another 18 that I remember

Edited October 27, 2010 by PattayaParent

[StevieH]

At the end of the day there is one fact about Q&H that they can never be forgiven for. I dont think they robbed the club. I can understand that things didnt work out. But the real destruction to Liverpool FC came about after it was clear that things were not working and they clung on to the club. The last 12 months of ownership were very destructive.

nah, it's been a steady and systematic process of dismantling through three years, not just the past 12 months. they lied about the new stadium the day they bought the club. it's been downhill since there.

[StevieH]

^as I said above, my figures do not come from H&G but can be independently verified, including LFCs own website.

14 mill per season for 3 seasons is not realistic, 1 player alone cost 28 mill.

rafa benitez's total net spend over 5 seasons was around £78m. so £105m is incorrect, wherever you got them from.

[StevieH]

14 mill per season for 3 seasons is not realistic, 1 player alone cost 28 mill.

which player cost £28m? considering the club's record signing is torres at just over £20m?

[PattayaParent]

14 mill per season for 3 seasons is not realistic, 1 player alone cost 28 mill.

which player cost £28m? considering the club's record signing is torres at just over £20m?

20 mill for a player with a 27 mill release clause in his Athletico contract?

Sounds like a bargain.

Or could it be that Garcia was a part ex in that deal?

Oh and I forgot the costs of Mascherano and Johnson.

Edited October 27, 2010 by PattayaParent

[Jimjim]

Let's not forget the key figure is net spend here, not gross.

You have to include both buys and sales. Anything else is just nonsense.

[PattayaParent]

Let's not forget the key figure is net spend here, not gross.

You have to include both buys and sales. Anything else is just nonsense.

Except when the owners allow the manager to re-spend the money from a sold player instead of using it to pay off debt then they can legitimately claim to have invested that money into the team.

[StevieH]

14 mill per season for 3 seasons is not realistic, 1 player alone cost 28 mill.

which player cost £28m? considering the club's record signing is torres at just over £20m?

20 mill for a player with a 27 mill release clause in his Athletico contract?

Sounds like a bargain.

Or could it be that Garcia was a part ex in that deal?

Oh and I forgot the costs of Mascherano and Johnson.

what release clause? though if there was one then it would have been in euros anyway, so perhaps that's where this 27m figure comes from.

[PattayaParent]

You didn't know that Torres had a 27 million Quid (not Euros) release clause in his Athletico contract?????

[StevieH]

You didn't know that Torres had a 27 million Quid (not Euros) release clause in his Athletico contract?????

seem to recall it being rumoured at the time rather than common knowledge or ever definite.

doesn't explain how we got him for £20.2m though does it?

[PattayaParent]

You didn't know that Torres had a 27 million Quid (not Euros) release clause in his Athletico contract?????

seem to recall it being rumoured at the time rather than common knowledge or ever definite.

doesn't explain how we got him for £20.2m though does it?

It was actually stated in the press, so seems like common knowledge, or should be to an avid fan.

As I asked before, don't you think that Garcia added some value in part ex when he went the other way?

[StevieH]

You didn't know that Torres had a 27 million Quid (not Euros) release clause in his Athletico contract?????

seem to recall it being rumoured at the time rather than common knowledge or ever definite.

doesn't explain how we got him for £20.2m though does it?

It was actually stated in the press, so seems like common knowledge, or should be to an avid fan.

As I asked before, don't you think that Garcia added some value in part ex when he went the other way?

ah, that ever-reliable monster 'the press'.

i'm not sure you really understand how transfers work. we paid atletico madrid £20.2m for fernando torres. in the same week, we also sold them luis garcia for £4m, in a separate transfer. i don't really care what alleged buy-out clause he was supposed to have, because if it was £27m as you seem to believe, we still didn't pay it. in fact, factor in the cash we got for garcia and we effectively only gave them £16.2m for torres.

i don't know why i'm carrying on with this discussion, you don't seem to have a clue what you're on about.

Edited October 29, 2010 by StevieH

[Englander]

i'm not sure you really understand how transfers work.

I dont think any fan really understands them anymore, with all the clauses in them to make up the total sum, money going to 3rd parties, agents etc etc...

[longstebe]

Blackburn game, still <deleted> but a little better than the display at goodison. I recall seeing some nice football for the whole 5 mins.

Nice to see Nando scoring and little Joe smiling in his leaning on the wall interview.

[Devil]

Blackburn game, still <deleted> but a little better than the display at goodison. I recall seeing some nice football for the whole 5 mins.

Nice to see Nando scoring and little Joe smiling in his leaning on the wall interview.

I was impressed with Lucas and the big Greek!

[Jimjim]

When Gerrard kicks the ball on a corner, he says to his foot, "Get Him to the Greek!"

cheesy...

Edited October 30, 2010 by Jimjim

[Devil]

When Gerrard kicks the ball on a corner, he says to his foot, "Get Him to the Greek!"

cheesy...

Love it haha - funny movie as well!

[Moonrakers]

I saw that Take That are playing at Anfield in March.

I've got £10 on them winning 3-1.

[StevieH]

3 points is 3 points and an away win at the reebok is a fine result. we're still gash though and i still hate roy. also coming around to thinking that torres wants to pull his thumbs out of his arse.

________________________________

not strictly technically liverpool these days, but this is a decent read:

An oddity? Maybe, but few coaches are better than Rafael Benítez

Oliver Kay

A familiar perch on the touchline at White Hart Lane awaits Rafael Benítez tomorrow evening. It was there, on a baking-hot August day in 2004, that the Inter Milan coach began his tenure in the Barclays Premier League, immediately attracting quizzical looks with his peripatetic approach, furrowed brow, paunch and notepad.

Benítez was viewed as an oddity then and, as he returns to English soil against Tottenham Hotspur tomorrow, he might be forgiven for thinking that little has changed.

There is little by way of measured debate where Benítez is concerned. Liverpool supporters, in the main, tend to view him as the best thing to happen to their club in the past decade. Farther afield, at least until you get to mainland Europe, he tends to be regarded as a frivolous eccentric who fluked a Champions League triumph and then lost his mind, overseeing a dramatic lurch into mediocrity while blaming everything on the American owners who had given him untold riches to splurge on a procession of wasters.

The truth, as ever, lies somewhere between the two extreme views, but if it is impossible to sit on the fence where this most divisive figure is concerned, count me as a Rafaelite. There was plenty to criticise during his six years at Anfield — and, from a personal perspective, the criticisms were less to do with zonal marking, squad rotation and his transfer record than his divisive behaviour, a scattergun approach to recruiting young players and a lack of interest in intangibles, such as team spirit — but there was far more to commend.

With hindsight, Benítez stayed on a season too long at Anfield — for his and the club’s good — but would anyone have dared to suggest in May last year that he should be sacked after guiding Liverpool to second place in the Premier League with 86 points? In fact, yes, some suggested so, but they tended to be the ones who had been saying so for years and were unwilling or unable to believe that a series of strong runs in the Champions League and top-four finishes were an acceptable return for a squad that, on paper, did not appear to be in the same class as Manchester United, Chelsea or, technically at least, Arsenal.

And whose fault was that? Of course Benítez had the funds, over the course of six years, to find a better left winger than Albert Riera and should have gone into his final season in charge with a suitable replacement for the sorely missed Xabi Alonso and more experienced back-up for Fernando Torres. And that is the point at which his wheeling and dealing in the transfer market — and his inability to arrest what was by now a severe psychological slump — became a problem.

Roy Hodgson inherited a difficult situation at Liverpool, not least in terms of the disaffection of many of his leading players, but if it was myopic and misguided for some observers to blame all of last season’s ills on Benítez, it has been even more so to characterise the troubles in this campaign as an inevitable consequence of the Spaniard’s legacy.

Somehow, though, that suits the narrative when it comes to Benítez: the narrative that he is merely reaping the fruits of José Mourinho’s labour at Inter, as he did with Gérard Houllier’s team in Liverpool in his first season. And, with that narrative in mind, Liverpool’s struggles under Hodgson are used as another stick with which to beat the Spaniard (as, laughably, is the fact that Valencia, La Liga champions and Uefa Cup winners in his final season, collapsed like a pack of cards in the aftermath of his departure).

Benítez once claimed that he would have to do a “perfect” job to turn Liverpool into champions. And it is clear now that he fell short of that standard. But despite some obvious flaws, there are not too many better coaches in world football, hence his latest appointment.

Woe betide Benítez, though, if Inter concede a goal from a set-piece tomorrow, in which case it will all be down to his weird penchant for something called zonal marking. Woe betide him if, with his team already well placed to reach the Champions League knockout stages, he rests a well-known player or two and his team fail to pick up maximum points. And pity his critics — perhaps not least Hodgson — if Inter’s performance does anything to support the alternative view that one of Europe’s most successful coaches might actually know what he is doing.

http://www.thetimes....icle2789117.ece

[carmine]

Interestingly that is one of the very few decent, well balanced articles that i have read from Oliver Kay who is generally a complete and utter knobhead.

Benitez's record in recent years does prove him a very good manager, but apart from his mangerial skills i always felt he was a very decent guy and generally behaved like a gent as opposed to numerous other counterparts i could mention.

[StevieH]

Interestingly that is one of the very few decent, well balanced articles that i have read from Oliver Kay who is generally a complete and utter knobhead.

Benitez's record in recent years does prove him a very good manager, but apart from his mangerial skills i always felt he was a very decent guy and generally behaved like a gent as opposed to numerous other counterparts i could mention.

think oli kay is a fine journo myself carmine. definitely one of the better ones around.

[carmine]

Interestingly that is one of the very few decent, well balanced articles that i have read from Oliver Kay who is generally a complete and utter knobhead.

Benitez's record in recent years does prove him a very good manager, but apart from his mangerial skills i always felt he was a very decent guy and generally behaved like a gent as opposed to numerous other counterparts i could mention.

think oli kay is a fine journo myself carmine. definitely one of the better ones around.

I think its more a case of Olly and i not really seeing eye to eye. For football in particuler, i think the Guardian is leaps and bounds better than the rest.

[carmine]

Interestingly that is one of the very few decent, well balanced articles that i have read from Oliver Kay who is generally a complete and utter knobhead.

Benitez's record in recent years does prove him a very good manager, but apart from his mangerial skills i always felt he was a very decent guy and generally behaved like a gent as opposed to numerous other counterparts i could mention.

think oli kay is a fine journo myself carmine. definitely one of the better ones around.

I think its more a case of Olly and i not really seeing eye to eye. For football in particuler, i think the Guardian is leaps and bounds better than the rest.

[StevieH]

Interestingly that is one of the very few decent, well balanced articles that i have read from Oliver Kay who is generally a complete and utter knobhead.

Benitez's record in recent years does prove him a very good manager, but apart from his mangerial skills i always felt he was a very decent guy and generally behaved like a gent as opposed to numerous other counterparts i could mention.

think oli kay is a fine journo myself carmine. definitely one of the better ones around.

I think its more a case of Olly and i not really seeing eye to eye. For football in particuler, i think the Guardian is leaps and bounds better than the rest.

fair enough. the guardian has gone downhill a lot in recent times for me, though i do know and understand why. its best articles are still those where the journo has had time to report and research a story properly rather than just churning shit out to populate the site's blogs. i do though think that david conn, jonathan wilson, sean ingle, sid lowe and amy lawrence are always really good to read.

[Abrak]

I know it is easy to get all gooiey eyed about Benitez especially with Roy around. He just seemed like an all round nice guy.

You have to admit though that he has just taken on last year's Champion's League winners and they have just let in 6 goals against Spurs over two legs.

[MSingh]

I know it is easy to get all gooiey eyed about Benitez especially with Roy around. He just seemed like an all round nice guy.

You have to admit though that he has just taken on last year's Champion's League winners and they have just let in 6 goals against Spurs over two legs.

He's also lost 50% of the total Serie A Games they lost last Year already AND has lost the same amount after 4 Games of the Champions League than they did in their 13 Game Champiions League winning Year last year, but he's great that Benitez, top quality the Fella...

[StevieH]

i know m, two european cup finals in five seasons with under-resourced liverpool, he is indeed <deleted>. it never ceases to amaze me why the champions of serie a and europe leapt in to appoint him the second he was mutually consented from liverpool given that he is so patently <deleted>.

in other news, damien commoli looks like a sensible appointment. bit out of leftfield but anything that undermines roy's authority and position at this time can be no bad thing.

[rixalex]

i know m, two european cup finals in five seasons with under-resourced liverpool, he is indeed <deleted>. it never ceases to amaze me why the champions of serie a and europe leapt in to appoint him the second he was mutually consented from liverpool given that he is so patently <deleted>.

Mere appointments, even be they to clubs of Inter's stature, don't mean a great deal though, do they? Did the fact that Real Madrid appointed Carlos Queiroz prove anything about that man? Don't think so. His record when he left the club did. Same will be true with Rafa. And i bet you anything his record won't stand up to the record of the man he replaced.