Sport Liverpool Football Club

[SMD]

Well, you're right about his faults, and the aforementioned dodgy buys (although not Luke Young, he's pretty good), but he can sure motivate the players in the first team. I presume there's decent money there from the new owners though, and that's not something i'd trust him with.

But a club like Liverpool can't afford to just have a first team - we need a squad and the players who aren't involved need to feel like they're a part of the squad.

And if we end up overpaying for average English players I might cry.

[Oh Danny Boy]

I reckon Martin O'Neill.

He almost went to Liverpool at the beginning of the season.

Is very motivating so would get the best out of the current squad.

Has big club experience.

And tactically he is streets ahead of Hodgson.

Also players would want to come to Liverpool to be with him.

Best available manager and someone i've wanted to manage Liverppool since his leicester days. I'll be over the moon if we became our new manager

[DeNeo]

Darn:

Lpool latest: Hodgson to hold press conference as planned tomorrow at 1.30

[Gabe]

http://tomkinstimes.com/2011/01/roy-hodgson-%E2%80%93-half-term-report/

Hmm, sorry to keep quoting articles from that site. I have no opinions of my own

I'd say it's pretty damning though..

Lowest points total =25 (previous was 28 in 92/93 and 98/99)

Fewest wins = 7 (previous was 8 in 3 seasons)

Most defeats = 8 (previous was 7 in 4 seasons including last season)

Fewest goals scored = 23 (previous was 28 in 4 seasons)

Worst goal difference = -1 (previous was +6 in 92/93)

Joint worst league position =9th (along with 92/93 and 98/99)

I've never really understood the point of these comparisons at various points during a season; Mancini wasn't sacked for doing worse than Mark Hughes after 11/12 games for Man City; Bobby Robson was sacked after 5/6 games despite his previous overachieving with Newcastle. Were either of those correct decisions, would you say?

And besides which, the biggest point is that no manager was sacked during any of those low points you mention - they were trusted and given time. Even Souness got half of the 93/94 season to work things out (despite having the lowest points total in 92/93 as you illustrate).

So, giving managers a chance is the Liverpool way, and for better or worse we should stick with that.

And finally, what kind of posioned-chalice would the current situation be for anybody coming in right now?

[ras el hanout]

Tomkins is insane.

[Kelthink]

Owen Coyle is the best bet on that list, IMO. He's worked wonders at Bolton inheriting Megson's squad and in a short space of time crafting them into a team that play good football and get results. Plus Bolton don't have the money to keep the team together, and he's already shown he doesn't have any loyalty about him when a bigger club come knocking.

Thing about that is Coyle played and had great respect for Bolton, and to say they're a bigger club than Burnley doesn't do them that many favours; they're still Bolton, a team with fairly mediocre attendance levels.

I think he could do a great job at Liverpool. Just not O'Neill, please.

[Orion]

Owen Coyle is easily the best up and coming British manager. If you can get him it would be crazy not to go for him right now.

Be careful hoping Hodgson might turn things round and sticking with him is not dangerous. He screwed Blackburn Rovers over so badly that we could not recover and got relegated with a very good team on paper.

[ras el hanout]

Do we not need to go through his win ratios? What's his away record like?

[Timmo]

Ramone your jokes in this thread are a bit disappointing to be honest.

[lampkin]

I've never really understood the point of these comparisons at various points during a season; Mancini wasn't sacked for doing worse than Mark Hughes after 11/12 games for Man City; Bobby Robson was sacked after 5/6 games despite his previous overachieving with Newcastle. Were either of those correct decisions, would you say?

Our current manager isn't only doing worse than his predecessor, he's doing a record bad job.

Regarding Mancini / Mark Hughes, is it fair to compare a club who have in fairly recent times come back from relegation? It's a club that's only lately set it's eye on champions league football, I don't really see it as much of a comparison.

Newcastle? They seem to have had as many managers in the last 2 decades then we have had ever.

I'm probably talking bollocks?

Are the circumstances you refer to the same though? Hodgeson was brought in under the premise he'd "stabilise the ship" and get the most out of the current batch of players. Didn't the man himself say judge him after 10 games?

And besides which, the biggest point is that no manager was sacked during any of those low points you mention - they were trusted and given time. Even Souness got half of the 93/94 season to work things out (despite having the lowest points total in 92/93 as you illustrate).

So, giving managers a chance is the Liverpool way, and for better or worse we should stick with that.

And finally, what kind of posioned-chalice would the current situation be for anybody coming in right now?

I do agree with this, I think sacking Hodgeson without a decent replacement is a mistake. I'm not convinced he'll turn it around, but it seems sensible to let this season play out, as long as we're careful with signings.

[FATEone]

I've never really understood the point of these comparisons at various points during a season; Mancini wasn't sacked for doing worse than Mark Hughes after 11/12 games for Man City; Bobby Robson was sacked after 5/6 games despite his previous overachieving with Newcastle. Were either of those correct decisions, would you say?

And besides which, the biggest point is that no manager was sacked during any of those low points you mention - they were trusted and given time. Even Souness got half of the 93/94 season to work things out (despite having the lowest points total in 92/93 as you illustrate).

So, giving managers a chance is the Liverpool way, and for better or worse we should stick with that.

And finally, what kind of posioned-chalice would the current situation be for anybody coming in right now?

I'd agree with you, unless they're going to give Kenny the job, until the end of the season and see what he can do. He's probably the only realistic target that could step straight in and immediately have the utmost respect from the entire dressing room, coupled with his intimate knowledge of your academy and the fact that you will see pass and move football return to Anfield without a doubt, makes him the only man that could turn this season around in terms of performances and ambition.

[the_debaser]

No thanks.

I think it's time to accept the fact that you're Liverpool FC. You're not a Man U or Arsenal or Spurs. You have about as much draw to top managers as a Bolton or Sunderland these days and you'd be fucking lucky to get someone as good as MON.

[FATEone]

I think it's time to accept the fact that you're Liverpool FC. You're not a Man U or Arsenal or Spurs. You have about as much draw to top managers as a Bolton or Sunderland these days and you'd be fucking lucky to get someone as good as MON.

I'm pretty sure he's well aware of the level Liverpool are at right now, (Spurs!!?? LOL!) he's just saying no thanks to Martin O'Neill, and rightly so! Anyone who thinks MON is a good manager needs a Brain transplant! He's tactically average at best, has somehow forgotten what a squad is, and will inevitably sign shit players for over-blown price-tags, as several people have stated in here. As people have commented, there is some myth about him being an amazing motivator of players.. any player will automatically become motivated if the manager likes them and actually talks to them, whilst completely ignoring others. He did well for one season with Villa. That's what he does, seemingly over achieves, though not really, because he actually has spent money and has good players, for one/two seasons then finds some gripe to walk out of the door over and then it's, oh imagine what he could have achieved.

[the_debaser]

Yeah he's really shit. He saved villa from relegation and got them into Europe. He won 3 league titles with Celtic and got to the Uefa cup final and he won 2 or 3 league cup titles with Leicester.

If he had a chance with a big club he'd win silverware year in year out. No doubt.

[The Fox]

I think it's time to accept the fact that you're Liverpool FC. You're not a Man U or Arsenal or Spurs. You have about as much draw to top managers as a Bolton or Sunderland these days and you'd be fucking lucky to get someone as good as MON.

wtf

[redbloodcell]

Yeah he's really shit. He saved villa from relegation and got them into Europe. He won 3 league titles with Celtic and got to the Uefa cup final and he won 2 or 3 league cup titles with Leicester.

If he had a chance with a big club he'd win silverware year in year out. No doubt.

The football wouldn't be particularly pretty though, I'm pretty certain these guys want some pretty football up in tha Kizzop.

[Gabe]

Our current manager isn't only doing worse than his predecessor, he's doing a record bad job.

Regarding Mancini / Mark Hughes, is it fair to compare a club who have in fairly recent times come back from relegation? It's a club that's only lately set it's eye on champions league football, I don't really see it as much of a comparison.

Newcastle? They seem to have had as many managers in the last 2 decades then we have had ever.

I'm probably talking bollocks?

Are the circumstances you refer to the same though? Hodgeson was brought in under the premise he'd "stabilise the ship" and get the most out of the current batch of players. Didn't the man himself say judge him after 10 games?

Well Sven was sacked for having a good season and delivering European football with Man City, so yes, I think it is fair to compare Mancini and Hughes - both were targetted with getting a top-4 finish.

As for Newcastle, they were more stable under Robson than at any point since, so again it's fair to question that decision. Sacking him started this recent turnover of bosses there.

As for Hodgson, it's tricky. I never thought he was the best man for the job and still maintain it was in response to his European cup-run. I also think he's terribly defensive (both in terms of the football he sets the team up to play and with the press), has said some truly stupid things since getting the job and is not the man I see taking the club forward.

All that said, I still don't think he should go until the end of the season. Again, what good would come from somebody new coming in? I don't think it's good for a manager to be left to try and turn around a terrible season because it isn't the kind of platform you want. What if the first 5 games went badly/not up to expectations? He's immediately on the defensive with the press and fans. I'd rather somebody come in during the summer, someone who isn't tarnished by whatever happens this season - I think that is better for the club in the long-run.

[FATEone]

Yeah he's really shit. He saved villa from relegation and got them into Europe. He won 3 league titles with Celtic and got to the Uefa cup final and he won 2 or 3 league cup titles with Leicester.

If he had a chance with a big club he'd win silverware year in year out. No doubt.

He won 2 league cups with Leicester. That competition that most Premiership teams don't give a toss about, when Leicester were a mid-table Premiership team, winning 38% of the games he was in charge for. Winning the league with Celtic isn't particularly amazing either, although getting to the UEFA Cup final was admirable. They had the likes of Henrik Laursen, Chris Sutton, John Hartson, Neil Lennon, Stylian Petrov, Liam Miller, and Bobo Balde, so winning the SPL against Rangers as it was in those days, wouldn't have been that hard. He's good at turning things around, but has never been the man to take things to the next level in the long run, and frankly, his football is one-dimensional.

[dizogg]

I think it's time to accept the fact that you're Liverpool FC. You're not a Man U or Arsenal or Spurs. You have about as much draw to top managers as a Bolton or Sunderland these days and you'd be fucking lucky to get someone as good as MON.

lol

Getting angry that we don't want Martin O'Neill! Next you'll be saying we'd be lucky to get Big Sam!

You're a proper weirdo mate, not only do you talk complete uninformed shit you put it across like a twat. Well done!

[PinkMoon]

I'm pretty sure he's well aware of the level Liverpool are at right now, (Spurs!!?? LOL!) he's just saying no thanks to Martin O'Neill, and rightly so! Anyone who thinks MON is a good manager needs a Brain transplant! He's tactically average at best, has somehow forgotten what a squad is, and will inevitably sign shit players for over-blown price-tags, as several people have stated in here. As people have commented, there is some myth about him being an amazing motivator of players.. any player will automatically become motivated if the manager likes them and actually talks to them, whilst completely ignoring others. He did well for one season with Villa. That's what he does, seemingly over achieves, though not really, because he actually has spent money and has good players, for one/two seasons then finds some gripe to walk out of the door over and then it's, oh imagine what he could have achieved.

A lot of that is really inaccurate, I'm afraid. Apart from anything else, Villa had three excellent season under O'Neill rather than just one.

He did spend money at Villa, but then the squad he inherited from David O'Leary was one of the worst Villa squads in a generation; four years ago we were so far behind the likes of Liverpool it wasn't even funny, and by the time he left we were right up there. We needed to spend that money because we had a Championship-standard squad beforehand. He took us from 16th to 11/6/6/6 (with a cup final and semi in that last season) rebuilding several times to compensate for the loss of Mellberg, Laursen, Bouma and Barry. I couldn't give a flying fuck whether or not he played favourites in the squad or if the players liked him - they clearly got something from him (and his excellent coaches) and they worked their nuts off in that team. His transfer activity was generally better than perceived outside the club too - Ashley Young and James Milner are testament to that, and the likes of Dunne, Collins and Warnock proved to be very shrewd buys last season. Fuck knows what Houllier is feeding them this time around.

Compare and contrast last season to now - with more or less the same squad (minus Milner), we're sitting in 18th and can't buy a win. What's changed? Yup, the manager. O'Neill had a massive impact on Villa - it's absolutely undeniable.

And as for Leicester, who took them to mid-table Premiership? Where were they before, and where are they now?

[SMD]

Err, he walked out on Villa on the eve of the season and didn't give them a chance to get someone in.

He also managed the same league position as O'Leary did.

[PinkMoon]

Err, he walked out on Villa on the eve of the season and didn't give them a chance to get someone in.

He also managed the same league position as O'Leary did.

I can't deny his departure was painful, but still nobody really knows what happened so I don't think we can draw any concrete conclusions from that. He certainly didn't walk out overnight at Leicester or Celtic, so it's not like it's habitual.

O'Leary finished 6th in his first season then spent the next two years plunging towards relegation. That's hardly comparable to turning it around (consistently) for the better.

Anyway, don't think I'm in the 'go-for-O'Neill' camp - I'd rather he stayed well away from Liverpool FC too, just for different reasons. I'm only trying to clear up a few myths.

[Sng]

We should stick with him until Mourinho leaves Madrid! I'm sure he has a soft spot for Anfield.

[dizogg]

We should stick with him until Mourinho leaves Madrid! I'm sure he has a soft spot for Anfield.

Yeah we'll stick with this shit manager for 2 or 3 seasons in the hope that Mourinho has a "soft spot" for us and comes and saves us (which he doesn't and he won't). Good plan.

[SMD]

So, Lawrie Sanchez then.

[FATEone]

I can't deny his departure was painful, but still nobody really knows what happened so I don't think we can draw any concrete conclusions from that. He certainly didn't walk out overnight at Leicester or Celtic, so it's not like it's habitual.

O'Leary finished 6th in his first season then spent the next two years plunging towards relegation. That's hardly comparable to turning it around (consistently) for the better.

Anyway, don't think I'm in the 'go-for-O'Neill' camp - I'd rather he stayed well away from Liverpool FC too, just for different reasons. I'm only trying to clear up a few myths.

He walked out of Norwich after a few months to become Leicester's Manager, and left them for Celtic (Ok fair enough), but he was going to leave them for Leeds before that, until the fans begged him to stay.

[dogsout]

Actually, i'm curious to know why you'd both object to MON so much. He has his faults, no doubt, but he's a fantastic motivator of players. You could definitely do worse.

Roy was supposed to be an amazing motivator as well but that's not turned out so well. I don't like him because:

- he isn't very likeable

- his transfer policy focuses too heavily on British players

- he doesn't seem to be able to manage a big squad (he doesn't rotate enough)

- his teams play kick and rush football

I don't think he's a bad manager by any means, I just don't think he's right for us.

is that a 'no' to Holloway then?

I've always liked Holloway - as a kid, I got his autograph about 9 times. He's a smashing bloke, his teams are great to watch, and he's got a brilliant sense of humour. I'd have him over O'Neill, but he's not at the top of my list due to the risks he presents.

[the_debaser]

Err, he walked out on Villa on the eve of the season and didn't give them a chance to get someone in.

He also managed the same league position as O'Leary did.

So that's one club he walked out on then? He spent 6 years at Leicester. Then understandably moved to Celtic where he spent 5 years before leaving to look after his wife who had cancer. Then he spent another 4/5 years at villa. Yes he left dramatically but a lot of villa fans saw it coming. So should the board.

[Hawkeye]

He won 2 league cups with Leicester. That competition that most Premiership teams don't give a toss about, when Leicester were a mid-table Premiership team, winning 38% of the games he was in charge for. Winning the league with Celtic isn't particularly amazing either, although getting to the UEFA Cup final was admirable. They had the likes of Henrik Laursen, Chris Sutton, John Hartson, Neil Lennon, Stylian Petrov, Liam Miller, and Bobo Balde, so winning the SPL against Rangers as it was in those days, wouldn't have been that hard. He's good at turning things around, but has never been the man to take things to the next level in the long run, and frankly, his football is one-dimensional.

What! Rangers had won twelve of the previous thirteen league titles. They had Dick Advocaat as manager. They'd spent big bucks and had players like Stefan Klos, Ronald de Boer, Barry Ferguson, Jörg Albertz, Claudio Reyna, Giovanni van Bronckhorst, Michael Mols as well as splashing out on Tore André Flo.

If anything his only shame at Celtic was losing two titles they should have won! Celtic fans remember are another mob of the game should be played a certain way, funny how they didn't feel the need to bring that up when they started winning though!

[rgraves]

Roy was supposed to be an amazing motivator as well but that's not turned out so well. I don't like him because:

- he isn't very likeable

- his transfer policy focuses too heavily on British players

- he doesn't seem to be able to manage a big squad (he doesn't rotate enough)

- his teams play kick and rush football

I'd love MON at Liverpool - I actually think he'd be just what the club needs right now. He'd shake things up from top to bottom, and if anyone wasn't pulling his direction then they'd be out of the door.

- I actually think he's very likeable - he speaks his mind, and I have a lot of time for managers in the game that are prepared to do that (I hate all this 'lets take the positives' rubbish, if the team played poorly then just come out and say it we're not stupid).

- I think the transfer policy thing is a complete myth - there have been foreign players in all of his successul teams and he's bought plenty into clubs as well.

- He's never really, properly, had to manage a large *quality* squad - so it's impossible to tell if he could do it or not.

- His teams play effective football given the players he has. He didn't hide that while he was at Leicester. Saying that, it's complete nonsense to say that's how Villa played under him. There certainly were not a kick and rush team by any means.

Winning the league with Celtic isn't particularly amazing either

Try telling that to Dalglish...