LOLiverpooLOL - Next Season

[PlasticRoyale]

Shirley KKKing KKKenny must be under pressure now

[frimmers3]

who will replace the sweaty sock?...his days are done.

[leon]

originally he inherited a good team at Liverpool, he won at a massively bankrolled blackburn, the rest has been pretty sh*t

[Super_horns]

originally he inherited a good team at Liverpool, he won at a massively bankrolled blackburn, the rest has been pretty sh*t

If the current manager wasn't a club legend he would be under some pressure I suspect...?

A poor run of form (generally home form is patchy at best) and a few expensive signings yet to gel fully (give them I time I guess)

[Simon's Church]

It's all still Hodgson's fault.

[1871 Royal]

originally he inherited a good team at Liverpool, he won at a massively bankrolled blackburn, the rest has been pretty sh*t

If the current manager wasn't a club legend he would be under some pressure I suspect...?

I think if he wasn't a club legend he would be under serious pressure. They never would have let Hodgson get away with this. But because its King Kenny he can do no wrong it seems do me a favour.

[cmonurz]

Not sure what the is for. Are you really an advocate of chopping and changing managers every few months? Hodgson should have got more time, Dalglish should get and will get more time.

The players aren't gelling, I'm not sure why. As much as few of the club's signings are real 'superstars', the likes of Downing, Henderson and Carroll are still very good players at this level, but it just isn't working out. I don't personally think playing Carroll on his own up front is the right way to go about things. In Suarez's absence I'd have Gerrard in the middle of the park, Maxi on the wing, and Kuyt playing off Carroll up front.

[1871 Royal]

The is for the fans are blinkered into thinking the idea that a club legend will always bring success and he just needs more time. Did Hodgson get more time, no. But a club legend is allowed more time? If it had been Hodgson in this position there would be protests to get him out so fast it would make the speed of light look like the pace of John Terry.

[No Fixed Abode]

LOLiverpooLOL.

King Kenny.

[Friday's Legacy]

LOLiverpooLOL.

King Kenny.

it's head scratching how you make light of liverpool every week, and yet chelsea are having their worst season since roman abramovich threw a billion pounds at the club. this season you will be very lucky to qualify for the champions league, let alone more dreams of winning the cup for the first time in your history.

[No Fixed Abode]

Kenny's been in charge longer and spent more money m8.

Good old King Kenny.

[cmonurz]

The is for the fans are blinkered into thinking the idea that a club legend will always bring success and he just needs more time. Did Hodgson get more time, no. But a club legend is allowed more time? If it had been Hodgson in this position there would be protests to get him out so fast it would make the speed of light look like the pace of John Terry.

Are Liverpool known for shipping managers out at the first sign of problems then? Hodgson is the only Liverpool manager in history (take a look at the link) who hasn't been given real time to stamp himself on the team - even the likes of Souness got three years at the helm, and he was useless. Souness and Fagan are the only managers going back 50 years not to have had 300 games in charge of the club, and Fagan retired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Li ... ._managers

Liverpool haven't had a great deal of success for 20 years, but they've generally stuck with managers, and they will stick with Dalglish now, and rightly so.

[1871 Royal]

I'm not saying they wont keep him, all I am saying is that Hodgson was treated quite unfairly and his successor isn't getting the same level of abuse for what in the main is similar form.

[TheMaraudingDog]

and they will stick with Dalglish now, and rightly so.

agreed.

[1871 Royal]

and they will stick with Dalglish now, and rightly so.

agreed.

[exileinleeds]

The is for the fans are blinkered into thinking the idea that a club legend will always bring success and he just needs more time. Did Hodgson get more time, no. But a club legend is allowed more time? If it had been Hodgson in this position there would be protests to get him out so fast it would make the speed of light look like the pace of John Terry.

Are Liverpool known for shipping managers out at the first sign of problems then? Hodgson is the only Liverpool manager in history (take a look at the link) who hasn't been given real time to stamp himself on the team - even the likes of Souness got three years at the helm, and he was useless. Souness and Fagan are the only managers going back 50 years not to have had 300 games in charge of the club, and Fagan retired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Li ... ._managers

Liverpool haven't had a great deal of success for 20 years, but they've generally stuck with managers, and they will stick with Dalglish now, and rightly so.

May I say, as one who has absolutely no interest one way or the other, that this is a complete and utter load of tosh?


Imagine the board meeting:

"Liverpool always give the manager time. ...In the last 20 years there has only been 1 manager didn't get 3 years...."

"Fuk that, we have bills to pay, sponsors to attract...this is not the 70's- deliver or else.

[cmonurz]

What exactly is 'utter tosh' ? I simply stated fact that Liverpool as a club does not historically shed managers Man City-style when things go a bit awry.

I've posted on plenty of threads in the past that managers don't get enough time - Hodgson should not have been sacked; Dalglish has had a year, give him another one, at least.

[Jackson Corner]

6th place and a Carling cup would represent a good season for Liverpool. That is where they are at now accept it, unless they get some rich Arabs to splash the cash like City they will be amongst the also rans.

[exileinleeds]

What exactly is 'utter tosh' ? I simply stated fact that Liverpool as a club does not historically shed managers Man City-style when things go a bit awry.

I've posted on plenty of threads in the past that managers don't get enough time - Hodgson should not have been sacked; Dalglish has had a year, give him another one, at least.

Might I tactfully point out, that I believe Liverpool no longer have their historical owners?

Do you really think that the current owners don't give a flying fukk about "history" or some romanticised view that the club is in some way special. It's not. It's a business. Any member that fails to achieve is likely to be out. THere is no room for sentiment in business.

[cmonurz]

Not really sure what point you are arguing. Like when they bought their baseball side, Fenway bought into the history of the club, its previous achievements and a desire to get that status back as the country’s best team. I don’t doubt that there will be more ‘business’ decisions under these owners than 20 years ago, and I never stated that that would be the case. But there is an ‘environment’ that permeates around Anfield, a culture that Fenway have spoken of in the past – add that Dalglish has the fans’ support (well whaddyaknow, a club legend gets the support of the fans, would you ever believe it), and he’ll get at least to the end of this season, I’d expect at least next too.

It’s disappointing that so many football fans (well, 1871 Royal and EIL so far) are fully signed up to the two managers a season approach of the modern day football club.