Liverpool F.c.

[MrRed]

It is probably a bit early to come to any conclusions about what any team can achieve next year given that there is a month to go in this transfer window. I imagine that Henry will be a bit disappointed if he is left with the current squad trying to achieve a top 4 place.

Lol never mind Henry,what about the fans???

Henry has already stated that United will win the title,imagine if Hodgson had said that??? god forbid anyone speaking the truth at An failed

double bubble standards again

Ps i let you into a secret.......you need defenders not 5 more Gerrard clones!

[Abrak]

It is probably a bit early to come to any conclusions about what any team can achieve next year given that there is a month to go in this transfer window. I imagine that Henry will be a bit disappointed if he is left with the current squad trying to achieve a top 4 place.

Lol never mind Henry,what about the fans???

Henry has already stated that United will win the title,imagine if Hodgson had said that??? god forbid anyone speaking the truth at An failed

double bubble standards again

Ps i let you into a secret.......you need defenders not 5 more Gerrard clones!

Henry owns the club - Hodgson was a temporary manager.

It isnt double standards it is different standards.

Re-defenders - maybe you could pop over to the Spurs thread and tell them they need a striker or two.

[smokie36]

Henry owns the club - Hodgson was a temporary manager.

Loving it.

[MrRed]

It is probably a bit early to come to any conclusions about what any team can achieve next year given that there is a month to go in this transfer window. I imagine that Henry will be a bit disappointed if he is left with the current squad trying to achieve a top 4 place.

Lol never mind Henry,what about the fans???

Henry has already stated that United will win the title,imagine if Hodgson had said that??? god forbid anyone speaking the truth at An failed

double bubble standards again

Ps i let you into a secret.......you need defenders not 5 more Gerrard clones!

Henry owns the club - Hodgson was a temporary manager.

It isnt double standards it is different standards.

Re-defenders - maybe you could pop over to the Spurs thread and tell them they need a striker or two.

Of course he was a temporary manager your clairvoyance skills where great at the time of his appointment?? NOT!

What about KING K then any predictions from your temporary silver balls!

[Abrak]

Of course he was a temporary manager your clairvoyance skills where great at the time of his appointment?? NOT!

What about KING K then any predictions from your temporary silver balls!

My point is very simple he was appointed by the old owners - H&G - to manage the club when they were forced to sell it within 6 months. He had a 3 year contract but it is only natural for EVERYONE to assume that new owners would in fact install their own management (within their own time frame). That is not a heroic assumption to make.

If you wish to state that the fact he signed a 3 year contract from H&G shows that he was a permanent appointment you have to implicitly assume the old owners would be around to honor the contract. Which they clearly were not going to be.

I have never stated that he was anything other than a 'temporary' appointment on this forum at anytime.

[adder]

Of course he was a temporary manager your clairvoyance skills where great at the time of his appointment?? NOT!

What about KING K then any predictions from your temporary silver balls!

My point is very simple he was appointed by the old owners - H&G - to manage the club when they were forced to sell it within 6 months. He had a 3 year contract but it is only natural for EVERYONE to assume that new owners would in fact install their own management (within their own time frame). That is not a heroic assumption to make.

If you wish to state that the fact he signed a 3 year contract from H&G shows that he was a permanent appointment you have to implicitly assume the old owners would be around to honor the contract. Which they clearly were not going to be.

I have never stated that he was anything other than a 'temporary' appointment on this forum at anytime.

You in denial ? Anyway k will be gone soon .

[sharecropper]

Of course he was a temporary manager your clairvoyance skills where great at the time of his appointment?? NOT!

What about KING K then any predictions from your temporary silver balls!

My point is very simple he was appointed by the old owners - H&G - to manage the club when they were forced to sell it within 6 months. He had a 3 year contract but it is only natural for EVERYONE to assume that new owners would in fact install their own management (within their own time frame). That is not a heroic assumption to make.

If you wish to state that the fact he signed a 3 year contract from H&G shows that he was a permanent appointment you have to implicitly assume the old owners would be around to honor the contract. Which they clearly were not going to be.

I have never stated that he was anything other than a 'temporary' appointment on this forum at anytime.

1. If they told him it was likely he'd be booted out when there was a change of ownwership, and he was well-rewarded (I can't recall his payoff) then fair enough.

2. A legal point - you have to implicitly assume the old owners would be around to honor the contract.

The "old" owners didn't sign a personal contract with Roy, and would have nothing to be around to honour. The multinational corporation that is Liverpool Football Club signed it and would have to honour it, whether the old, new, or even future owners come in.

To be honest, I think he was the wrong manager, he made a lot of crap signings, and they were right to get rid of him. But don't tell that to StevieH, as I want to reserve my position on him, and his likely successes, as we move into the new season under Prince Kenny.

[smokie36]

If you wish to state that the fact he signed a 3 year contract from H&G shows that he was a permanent appointment you have to implicitly assume the old owners would be around to honor the contract. Which they clearly were not going to be.

Not really true this though is it?

If Hodgson had known that last summer he would never have taken the job.

[Abrak]

If you wish to state that the fact he signed a 3 year contract from H&G shows that he was a permanent appointment you have to implicitly assume the old owners would be around to honor the contract. Which they clearly were not going to be.

Not really true this though is it?

If Hodgson had known that last summer he would never have taken the job.

Really? I beleve he made close to 8m quid from less than 10 months work because he had to be paid out on his contract.

Quite the opposite. He was approaching retirement. He signed a 3 year contract knowing full well that he wouldnt last more than a year but that he would have to be paid out in full when he was replaced. Why do you think he took the job rather than stay at Fulham? Why do you think he signed 30 year old players on 3 and 4 year contracts unless he was fairly certain he wasnt going to be around to see them not perform on the pitch when they were 33?

And why, if the club was going to be sold in 6 months, did he have a 3 year contract? Because he knew he was going to get 3 years pay for 6 months work. He also thought 'wrongly' that he would be kicked out to be replaced by the new owners - so that he would get 3 years pay for 6 months work without actually performing badly.

There is absolutely 'NO COINCIDENCE' to the fact that Hodgson 'approaching retirement' signed a 'long term contract' based on the fact that it was only 'short term' employment and he would be paid out in full and that he subsequently employed a whole load of footballers 'approaching retirement' on 'long term contracts' based on the fact it would prove 'short term' employment with a long term payment - hence Cole, Poulsen, Jovanovic and Konchesky.

[Abrak]

Of course he was a temporary manager your clairvoyance skills where great at the time of his appointment?? NOT!

What about KING K then any predictions from your temporary silver balls!

My point is very simple he was appointed by the old owners - H&G - to manage the club when they were forced to sell it within 6 months. He had a 3 year contract but it is only natural for EVERYONE to assume that new owners would in fact install their own management (within their own time frame). That is not a heroic assumption to make.

If you wish to state that the fact he signed a 3 year contract from H&G shows that he was a permanent appointment you have to implicitly assume the old owners would be around to honor the contract. Which they clearly were not going to be.

I have never stated that he was anything other than a 'temporary' appointment on this forum at anytime.

1. If they told him it was likely he'd be booted out when there was a change of ownwership, and he was well-rewarded (I can't recall his payoff) then fair enough.

2. A legal point - you have to implicitly assume the old owners would be around to honor the contract.

The "old" owners didn't sign a personal contract with Roy, and would have nothing to be around to honour. The multinational corporation that is Liverpool Football Club signed it and would have to honour it, whether the old, new, or even future owners come in.

To be honest, I think he was the wrong manager, he made a lot of crap signings, and they were right to get rid of him. But don't tell that to StevieH, as I want to reserve my position on him, and his likely successes, as we move into the new season under Prince Kenny.

1. The club was up for sale. It is only natural to assume that new owners will install there own choice of management. They dont need to tell him this.

2. You are quite right. The 'old owners' are in a position to sign a long term contract with anyone until the date of sale. In fact one particular footballer had a contract extension the day before the sale went through. The point is that the new owners are liable for this contract not the people who signed it. The point with the management contract is that if H&G had offered a 10 month contract up until sale, noone decent would have taken it. But a 3 year contract that would be paid in full if the new owners chose to install their own management was a nice deal. So 'yes' the old owners were effectively signing contracts on the new owners behalf.

[Abrak]

The best paid man in football...... even more than Messi.....

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/04042011/58/premier-league-hodgson-7-3m-reds-pay.html

Now consider how well he would have done if FSG had kicked him out the day they arrived for the fraud that he was.

So now you think he wouldnt have taken the job Smokie?

Not quite true is it?

Edited August 3, 2011 by Abrak

[smokie36]

The best paid man in football...... even more than Messi.....

http://uk.eurosport....m-reds-pay.html

Now consider how well he would have done if FSG had kicked him out the day they arrived for the fraud that he was.

So now you think he wouldnt have taken the job Smokie?

Not quite true is it?

Strong case that Abrak. Thanks for the info. Now how do I become a Premiership manager?

[sharecropper]

The best paid man in football...... even more than Messi.....

http://uk.eurosport....m-reds-pay.html

Now consider how well he would have done if FSG had kicked him out the day they arrived for the fraud that he was.

So now you think he wouldnt have taken the job Smokie?

Not quite true is it?

Strong case that Abrak. Thanks for the info. Now how do I become a Premiership manager?

I tells ya, that Abrak is starting to make them Liverpool lot look quite sane.

Re Roy's Reward, that is astonishing, and fair play to him for taking the money - sorry, the job, although I bet his lawyers and he made sure that if any new owners wanted to kick him out it would cost them dearly.

Perhaps he even engineered his own downfall - with those signings and tactics and "foot in mouth" utterances. Looked at it like that, who can be so sure?!

[smokie36]

The best paid man in football...... even more than Messi.....

http://uk.eurosport....m-reds-pay.html

Now consider how well he would have done if FSG had kicked him out the day they arrived for the fraud that he was.

So now you think he wouldnt have taken the job Smokie?

Not quite true is it?

Strong case that Abrak. Thanks for the info. Now how do I become a Premiership manager?

I tells ya, that Abrak is starting to make them Liverpool lot look quite sane.

Re Roy's Reward, that is astonishing, and fair play to him for taking the money - sorry, the job, although I bet his lawyers and he made sure that if any new owners wanted to kick him out it would cost them dearly.

Perhaps he even engineered his own downfall - with those signings and tactics and "foot in mouth" utterances. Looked at it like that, who can be so sure?!

Yeah all of a sudden he appears to me like a very savvy operator rather than a doddery old fool.

[MrRed]

The best paid man in football...... even more than Messi.....

http://uk.eurosport....m-reds-pay.html

Now consider how well he would have done if FSG had kicked him out the day they arrived for the fraud that he was.

So now you think he wouldnt have taken the job Smokie?

Not quite true is it?

Strong case that Abrak. Thanks for the info. Now how do I become a Premiership manager?

I tells ya, that Abrak is starting to make them Liverpool lot look quite sane.

Re Roy's Reward, that is astonishing, and fair play to him for taking the money - sorry, the job, although I bet his lawyers and he made sure that if any new owners wanted to kick him out it would cost them dearly.

Perhaps he even engineered his own downfall - with those signings and tactics and "foot in mouth" utterances. Looked at it like that, who can be so sure?!

Yeah all of a sudden he appears to me like a very savvy operator rather than a doddery old fool.

All the way to the bank!

[carmine]

The best paid man in football...... even more than Messi.....

http://uk.eurosport....m-reds-pay.html

Now consider how well he would have done if FSG had kicked him out the day they arrived for the fraud that he was.

So now you think he wouldnt have taken the job Smokie?

Not quite true is it?

Strong case that Abrak. Thanks for the info. Now how do I become a Premiership manager?

Strong case for what? Stating the obvious? calling him a fraud!

This is nothing more than a play on timing and numbers. This would be the same situation given any of the top managers sacked on a longterm contract in such a short space of time. A real "shit, we've nothing to write about scenario. Its a very strong case for a very childish arguement.

Blame the berk that gave him the contract not the wise man that signed it.

Edited August 4, 2011 by carmine

[MrRed]

Abrak is just trying to fill the holes he keeps digging himself into.

Spouting <deleted> about Hodgson......the past again hoping it will cover up KING KENNY'S dodgy signings when it goes tits up with the new owners.

Funny though!

[smokie36]

Abrak is just trying to fill the holes he keeps digging himself into.

Spouting <deleted> about Hodgson......the past again hoping it will cover up KING KENNY'S dodgy signings when it goes tits up with the new owners.

Funny though!

I'm waiting for his response....better be careful though...I reckon carmine's in the mood for a fight this morning....

[Abrak]

Blame the berk that gave him the contract not the wise man that signed it.

The 'berk' is not a 'berk' he is also a wise man because he is giving the 'other wise man' a 3 year contract of which he only pays the first 6 months and the balance is paid with other peoples money.

The 'wise man' is not a fraud for taking advantage of this opportunity - that is capitalism.

(I do however believe he is a fraud because while managing LFC he signed contracts that were blatantly against the best interests of the business but that is a separate issue.)

But as you say it is a statement of the bleeding obvious - if you sign a 3 year contract to manage a business that will have new owners in six months, you are being appointed to manage the business for 6 months. If you assume otherwise you are simply too stupid to manage a business in the first place.

[Abrak]

Abrak is just trying to fill the holes he keeps digging himself into.

Spouting <deleted> about Hodgson......the past again hoping it will cover up KING KENNY'S dodgy signings when it goes tits up with the new owners.

Funny though!

So Mr Red you are a fortune teller and can predict the future.

Essentially I believe decisions should be based against things that can be measured as opposed to predicted. But I do admit to being vastly outnumbered in my approach.

Anyway tell us more about this dodginess. Really signings are largely Comolli's responsibility in terms of price.

I really dont know what you expect me to say about the future. We are not really competing with you at the moment. You beat us by 20 points which is how much we beat Blackpool by who got relegated. And I believe that was with your worst away record during Premier League history.

And ultimately some rich Arab will buy out the Glaziers pay off all your debt and you can sit on top of the league with Mickey Mouse managing you. Essentially you will have to pull off something pretty heroic to screw things up from here.

[MrRed]

Abrak is just trying to fill the holes he keeps digging himself into.

Spouting <deleted> about Hodgson......the past again hoping it will cover up KING KENNY'S dodgy signings when it goes tits up with the new owners.

Funny though!

So Mr Red you are a fortune teller and can predict the future.

Essentially I believe decisions should be based against things that can be measured as opposed to predicted. But I do admit to being vastly outnumbered in my approach.

Anyway tell us more about this dodginess. Really signings are largely Comolli's responsibility in terms of price.

I really dont know what you expect me to say about the future. We are not really competing with you at the moment. You beat us by 20 points which is how much we beat Blackpool by who got relegated. And I believe that was with your worst away record during Premier League history.

And ultimately some rich Arab will buy out the Glaziers pay off all your debt and you can sit on top of the league with Mickey Mouse managing you. Essentially you will have to pull off something pretty heroic to screw things up from here.

I predict United will win another trophy this coming season.

Who is Comolli by the way? director of football my arse!

Your silver ball is correct,the future is RED and not scouse Red

[sharecropper]

ABRAK: So Mr Red you are a fortune teller and can predict the future.

But when I suggested Liverpool might bomb next season and Prince Kenny get sacked by King Comolli, or crack under the pressure, you replied "absolute <deleted>", so I have to ask you, are YOU a fortune teller?

[Abrak]

ABRAK: So Mr Red you are a fortune teller and can predict the future.

But when I suggested Liverpool might bomb next season and Prince Kenny get sacked by King Comolli, or crack under the pressure, you replied "absolute <deleted>", so I have to ask you, are YOU a fortune teller?

Someone who looks into the future to predict the future is a fortune teller.

I tend to only look at what can be measured which by definition is historic. While you obviously cannot predict the future you can ascertain often with a fairly high degree of certainty what is likely to happen. Unfortunately one of those things is that Man U are virtually certain to beat LFC in the league.

I cant remember the exact post that I wrote 'absolute <deleted>' on but given that Kenny does not even report to Comolli - him sacking him is pretty ridiculous. Given the trouble that FSG went to, to appoint Kenny as permanent manager it would be incredibly unlikely if they didnt keep it permanent. There is also the fact that FSG believe in collective decision making and collective responsibility so it simply doesnt make sense to blame the manager for poor results. Anyhow, just how bad do you think they are going to be. It would be highly improbable that Liverpool would finish lower than 8th - certainly less than 1%. In fact as a glorious fact Liverpool will be celebrating their 50th consecutive year of coming 8th or above.

As far as Kenny cracking under pressure that certainly cannot be ruled out. He is somewhat sensitive.

I seem to remember you saying that LFC might go tits up under the new owners. Actually the outlook for these businesses is pretty good. We can guarantee that no new City's will come along and your two biggest competitors have to cut back spending to get somewhere near breakeven.

At some point you guys will eventually get your act together and work out that it is pretty piss poor that your commercial revenues are 30% below Bayern Munich's when you clear have an infinitely greater franchise. And when you monetize your say 300m global fan base you will probably be a very large business indeed. Given that your major competitors will no longer be able to generate large losses you will find it incredibly difficult not to make huge profits. I am rather hoping that Facebook take you over and turn you into a PS3 game.

[MrRed]

"Actually the outlook for these businesses is pretty good. We can guarantee that no new City's will come along and your two biggest competitors have to cut back spending to get somewhere near breakeven."

No Gaurantees in life never mind football mate.

Who are the two biggest competitors you go on about?

And also for clarity who was the last paragraph about?

PS.... Comolli is the director of football and will have a big say in the players that the club have/will signed something that will get to Kenny sooner rather than later,especially if they don't perform as a TEAM!

Comolli=background irritation to a man with the LFC history of KK

[Abrak]

"Actually the outlook for these businesses is pretty good. We can guarantee that no new City's will come along and your two biggest competitors have to cut back spending to get somewhere near breakeven."

No Gaurantees in life never mind football mate.

Who are the two biggest competitors you go on about?

And also for clarity who was the last paragraph about?

PS.... Comolli is the director of football and will have a big say in the players that the club have/will signed something that will get to Kenny sooner rather than later,especially if they don't perform as a TEAM!

Comolli=background irritation to a man with the LFC history of KK

I genuinely dont think there is a single bit of evidence that Comolli and Kenny dont actually work well together. I actually think that it is a pretty ridiculous concept that Kenny has the time and can put in enough due diligence to justify making a 100m player acquisition program. It really is a lot of money to ask someone to spend on his time off while his full time job is managing the club. I mean if you give the same guy responsibility for managing a club you have spent 300m on also responsibility for spending 100m on player acquisitions you clearly would seem to have far more money than sense.

Yes sorry I see your big two competitors at the moment as City and Chelsea and as one is losing 130m a year and the other 70m a year and they must show some semblance of breakeven under FFP and they are unable to beat you with massive losses, the odds of you beating them over time are fairly high. In fact given that breakeven is a prerequisite for CL then your costs are determined by your revenues and as Man U revenues are by far the highest in the league it is axiomatic that they can have the highest costs and achieve breakeven which is the basic parameter for winning the league (I think you have to go back to 2004 or so for a club that has actually beaten you in the league and had lower costs). What is more you have the largest global fan base and that is bound to drive revenues over the next 20 years.

So what I meant in the last paragraph is that at present your matchday revenue from 75,000 fans is roughly equal to your commercial revenue from a fan base that could easily be 300m or certainly grow to that sort of number. I would guess that the worlds largest social network is Facebook with 500m subscribers and a valuation of US$50bn. Seems to me that Man U fans are a social network too and far easier to monetize than Facebook. I find it totally extraordinary that the EPL has created probably the largest global sports business and they are basing their profit model on screwing an extra dime out of their match day attendance who's revenues are virtually irrelevant in the greater scheme of things. And how come Bayern Munich's commercial revenues are 40% higher than ManU's do you really think they are a bigger franchise? So your fastest area of growth is where you have the largest competitive advantage.

[sharecropper]

"Actually the outlook for these businesses is pretty good. We can guarantee that no new City's will come along and your two biggest competitors have to cut back spending to get somewhere near breakeven."

No Gaurantees in life never mind football mate.

Who are the two biggest competitors you go on about?

And also for clarity who was the last paragraph about?

PS.... Comolli is the director of football and will have a big say in the players that the club have/will signed something that will get to Kenny sooner rather than later,especially if they don't perform as a TEAM!

Comolli=background irritation to a man with the LFC history of KK

I genuinely dont think there is a single bit of evidence that Comolli and Kenny dont actually work well together. I actually think that it is a pretty ridiculous concept that Kenny has the time and can put in enough due diligence to justify making a 100m player acquisition program. It really is a lot of money to ask someone to spend on his time off while his full time job is managing the club. I mean if you give the same guy responsibility for managing a club you have spent 300m on also responsibility for spending 100m on player acquisitions you clearly would seem to have far more money than sense.

Yes sorry I see your big two competitors at the moment as City and Chelsea and as one is losing 130m a year and the other 70m a year and they must show some semblance of breakeven under FFP and they are unable to beat you with massive losses, the odds of you beating them over time are fairly high. In fact given that breakeven is a prerequisite for CL then your costs are determined by your revenues and as Man U revenues are by far the highest in the league it is axiomatic that they can have the highest costs and achieve breakeven which is the basic parameter for winning the league (I think you have to go back to 2004 or so for a club that has actually beaten you in the league and had lower costs). What is more you have the largest global fan base and that is bound to drive revenues over the next 20 years.

So what I meant in the last paragraph is that at present your matchday revenue from 75,000 fans is roughly equal to your commercial revenue from a fan base that could easily be 300m or certainly grow to that sort of number. I would guess that the worlds largest social network is Facebook with 500m subscribers and a valuation of US$50bn. Seems to me that Man U fans are a social network too and far easier to monetize than Facebook. I find it totally extraordinary that the EPL has created probably the largest global sports business and they are basing their profit model on screwing an extra dime out of their match day attendance who's revenues are virtually irrelevant in the greater scheme of things. And how come Bayern Munich's commercial revenues are 40% higher than ManU's do you really think they are a bigger franchise? So your fastest area of growth is where you have the largest competitive advantage.

Bugger. I thought he was talking about Everton.

My two serious points about King Comolli and Prince Kenny are that, when - and IF - misfiring signings hit the fan, or Liverpool have a bad run, two things are likely to happen:

1. Prince Kenny will get fired, not some collective self-firing of the whole Fenway Sports Group. That's not how the blame game works.

2. IF that under-performance happens, "fans" will start to blame King Comolli, and leave Prince Kenny out of it, as they "do a Rafa", namely blindly ignore a manager's failings and seek to blame somebody - everybody - else. In Comolli you have a ready-to-go fall guy.

By the way I DO like your stats, especially the the 50 years in the top 8 one, which I didn't know.

[Abrak]

Bugger. I thought he was talking about Everton.

My two serious points about King Comolli and Prince Kenny are that, when - and IF - misfiring signings hit the fan, or Liverpool have a bad run, two things are likely to happen:

1. Prince Kenny will get fired, not some collective self-firing of the whole Fenway Sports Group. That's not how the blame game works.

2. IF that under-performance happens, "fans" will start to blame King Comolli, and leave Prince Kenny out of it, as they "do a Rafa", namely blindly ignore a manager's failings and seek to blame somebody - everybody - else. In Comolli you have a ready-to-go fall guy.

By the way I DO like your stats, especially the the 50 years in the top 8 one, which I didn't know.

There is virtually no possibility that Kenny will be fired next season for poor results. Henry is entirely logical and statistics show that firing a manager in the face of short term poor performance is counter productive. What you should do is perhaps change what you are doing. Henry didnt take a year to appoint a permanent manager simply to immediately render his appointment temporary. If you are in the habit of judging your manager on short term results you might as well appoint yourself. Essentially if you sack the manager based on poor short term results you are the problem not the manager. I would guarantee that Henry thinks Abromavich is stupid for firing managers every 18 months because all the evidence points to the fact that it is a stupid thing to do. Worst still, firing an individual manager after 18 months can be a smart decision but the probability of firing 6 managers in 8 years being smart is incredibly low. And even if Abromavich trusts his own judgment he shouldnt.

As for Comolli I think he is settling in nicely. One thing he has learnt to do is leave the talking to Kenny which is very wise. Essentially what Comolli does is cross the 'ts' and dot the 'is' from my perspective if you dont do due diligence and make objective measures where you can it is totally irresponsible. Comolli has a pretty dirty job but somebody has to do it. And I would be surprised if Kenny doesnt appreciate it. Nobody particularly dislikes stats as long as someone else gets them for them.

[carmine]

Bugger. I thought he was talking about Everton.

My two serious points about King Comolli and Prince Kenny are that, when - and IF - misfiring signings hit the fan, or Liverpool have a bad run, two things are likely to happen:

1. Prince Kenny will get fired, not some collective self-firing of the whole Fenway Sports Group. That's not how the blame game works.

2. IF that under-performance happens, "fans" will start to blame King Comolli, and leave Prince Kenny out of it, as they "do a Rafa", namely blindly ignore a manager's failings and seek to blame somebody - everybody - else. In Comolli you have a ready-to-go fall guy.

By the way I DO like your stats, especially the the 50 years in the top 8 one, which I didn't know.

There is virtually no possibility that Kenny will be fired next season for poor results. Henry is entirely logical and statistics show that firing a manager in the face of short term poor performance is counter productive. What you should do is perhaps change what you are doing. Henry didnt take a year to appoint a permanent manager simply to immediately render his appointment temporary. If you are in the habit of judging your manager on short term results you might as well appoint yourself. Essentially if you sack the manager based on poor short term results you are the problem not the manager. I would guarantee that Henry thinks Abromavich is stupid for firing managers every 18 months because all the evidence points to the fact that it is a stupid thing to do. Worst still, firing an individual manager after 18 months can be a smart decision but the probability of firing 6 managers in 8 years being smart is incredibly low. And even if Abromavich trusts his own judgment he shouldnt.

As for Comolli I think he is settling in nicely. One thing he has learnt to do is leave the talking to Kenny which is very wise. Essentially what Comolli does is cross the 'ts' and dot the 'is' from my perspective if you dont do due diligence and make objective measures where you can it is totally irresponsible. Comolli has a pretty dirty job but somebody has to do it. And I would be surprised if Kenny doesnt appreciate it. Nobody particularly dislikes stats as long as someone else gets them for them.

OK, now you've got me listening to this little squable.

Please will you explain to me, factually, without any personal perspectives, exactly what Damien has done to be given your credit for settling in so well? Apart from securing players at a price most would describe as obscenely overpriced.

Edited August 5, 2011 by carmine

[Abrak]

OK, now you've got me listening to this little squable.

Please will you explain to me, factually, without any personal perspectives, exactly what Damien has done to be given your credit for settling in so well? Apart from securing players at a price most would describe as obscenely overpriced.

As a theoretical point.

If I wished to buy a player, I would presumably wish to buy one that I felt was undervalued by the market. (You could of course have a strategy to buy players below the market price. Why I do not know and it would be self defeating because the price you pay is the market price.) Anyhow lets assume I want to buy a player that I believe is undervalued by the market. That would mean I value the player at more than market price. Now assuming that the seller is not stupid he is going to be reluctant to sell below the price he thinks he can sell it at which is by definition market price. So I have to offer him at least a little over market price so he thinks I have paid as much as he is going to get. Obviously I am happy because I have bought a player that I thought was undervalued.

Simply put an undervalued player must be a player that you value well above market price to begin with. I have to pay at least market price or the seller wont sell. By definition I would only be interested in buying players that I valued at far higher than the market price. So the minimum price I will pay is the market price. If other bidders come in I might well be prepared well above market price. Almost by definition if you buy based on value the market will consider what you pay overpriced and honestly most sellers dont sell until they believe you have overpaid.

Anyway Downing is definitely expensive although well worth the premium to Young because of his lower wage. But you should understand that JW Henry is not a 'value investor' but a 'trend investor' and certainly is against the concept of not buying because it is 'overpriced' when he feels it is 'undervalued'. Really the other alternative is that you end up doing very little at all. But here are some Henry quotes and as you can see he doesnt predict future price movements.

They have an inherent bias against the notion that data or mechanical formulas can lead to success over time in markets. They have personally watched my success now for more than 20 years. Yet, if anything, they are now no more convinced than they were 20 years ago that I am going to be successful in the future using data over analysis.

Trend following consists of buying high and selling low. For 19 years we have consistently bought high and sold low. If trends were not the underlying nature of markets, our type of trading would have very quickly put us out of business. It wouldn’t take 19 years or even 19 months of buying high and selling low ALL of the time to bankrupt you.

1) it is part of the nature of life itself (and markets are simply manifestations of people’s expectations) to trend, and 2) I will never have a complete or full understanding of anything. Therefore, all investment decisions should be based on what can be measured rather than what might be predicted or felt.

Anyway to actually answer your question. Comolli has done the transfers so no blame is attached to Kenny. As you say Comolli determines the price but knowing Henry certain positions have to filled. And knowing FSG they are going to go in quite aggressively on the likes of Henderson (shame about Jones). To the extent he hasnt dont much or been low profile I think that is good. He is the stats guy and stats take a lot of work. To be honest if he was doing lots of stuff I would be more concerned. I will admit that I am expecting him to be pretty ruthless with the 'deadwood' but you cant judge windows until they end

Edited August 5, 2011 by Abrak

[carmine]

OK, now you've got me listening to this little squable.

Please will you explain to me, factually, without any personal perspectives, exactly what Damien has done to be given your credit for settling in so well? Apart from securing players at a price most would describe as obscenely overpriced.

As a theoretical point.

If I wished to buy a player, I would presumably wish to buy one that I felt was undervalued by the market. (You could of course have a strategy to buy players below the market price. Why I do not know and it would be self defeating because the price you pay is the market price.) Anyhow lets assume I want to buy a player that I believe is undervalued by the market. That would mean I value the player at more than market price. Now assuming that the seller is not stupid he is going to be reluctant to sell below the price he thinks he can sell it at which is by definition market price. So I have to offer him at least a little over market price so he thinks I have paid as much as he is going to get. Obviously I am happy because I have bought a player that I thought was undervalued.

Simply put an undervalued player must be a player that you value well above market price to begin with. I have to pay at least market price or the seller wont sell. By definition I would only be interested in buying players that I valued at far higher than the market price. So the minimum price I will pay is the market price. If other bidders come in I might well be prepared well above market price. Almost by definition if you buy based on value the market will consider what you pay overpriced and honestly most sellers dont sell until they believe you have overpaid.

Anyway Downing is definitely expensive although well worth the premium to Young because of his lower wage. But you should understand that JW Henry is not a 'value investor' but a 'trend investor' and certainly is against the concept of not buying because it is 'overpriced' when he feels it is 'undervalued'. Really the other alternative is that you end up doing very little at all. But here are some Henry quotes and as you can see he doesnt predict future price movements.

They have an inherent bias against the notion that data or mechanical formulas can lead to success over time in markets. They have personally watched my success now for more than 20 years. Yet, if anything, they are now no more convinced than they were 20 years ago that I am going to be successful in the future using data over analysis.

Trend following consists of buying high and selling low. For 19 years we have consistently bought high and sold low. If trends were not the underlying nature of markets, our type of trading would have very quickly put us out of business. It wouldn’t take 19 years or even 19 months of buying high and selling low ALL of the time to bankrupt you.

1) it is part of the nature of life itself (and markets are simply manifestations of people’s expectations) to trend, and 2) I will never have a complete or full understanding of anything. Therefore, all investment decisions should be based on what can be measured rather than what might be predicted or felt.

Anyway to actually answer your question. Comolli has done the transfers so no blame is attached to Kenny. As you say Comolli determines the price but knowing Henry certain positions have to filled. And knowing FSG they are going to go in quite aggressively on the likes of Henderson (shame about Jones). To the extent he hasnt dont much or been low profile I think that is good. He is the stats guy and stats take a lot of work. To be honest if he was doing lots of stuff I would be more concerned. I will admit that I am expecting him to be pretty ruthless with the 'deadwood' but you cant judge windows until they end

Good post abrak. The way i see the preferable approach in the transfer market would be in a line drawn between the possibly over agressive (not meant detrimentally) approach of FSG and the pathetic undervaluing in buying players coupled with the ridiculous overpricing of players to be offloadind that appears to be Tottenhams current stance.

I also echo your point on supporting the club as opposed to the shareholders.