Rodgers Sacked

Bollocks . The comparisons give context

 

#touchedanerve

 

It would be hypocritical if I thought United had a right to success. I don't, possibly because they weren't very good when I was a lad. The problem with many Liverpool fans of my generation is that they grew up on a diet of success, and chose the club because of that success. They got used to it and can't understand why it isn't a given any more. The same is true of United fans who started supporting the club in the 90's.

 

But unlike those teams you mention Stan we've survived and grown as a commercial commodity. After 25 years of not winning the league , almost going into admin due to **** owners we are still in the top ten as a financial force. While that is all unromantic it suggests we, with the right football setup should be comfortably obtaining 5th and challenging for the above spots.

We aren't Not Forest or Leeds or Villa. We can't be compared to them logically

 

Although Kenny is and always will be a club legend, his managerial method was a bit outdated. That coupled with the flak from the Suarez affair was enough to explain the owners' decision, imo.
Whether or not we agree with it, we know their avowed policy is to go with the younger, more modern approach, so it's no surprise to me that BR was given the 3 years (although I did expect he'd be out at the end of last season).
Having said all that, if he hadn't had such a good 2nd season, I don't think he'd have been given a 3rd.

 

It isn't a proper discussion until you get involved Mr Personality!

 

If you'd accused me of the same thing...

It would be hypocritical if I thought Liverpool had a right to success. I don't, possibly because they weren't very good when I was a lad. The problem with many Man Utd fans of my generation is that they grew up on a diet of success, and chose the club because of that success. They got used to it and can't understand why it isn't a given any more. The same is true of Liverpool fans who started supporting the club in the 70's.


It's a two way street

 

Thing is Shtan I experience the LFC/EFC banter in real life on an everyday basis and that's the difference.

 

I didn't accuse you of anything Gerrez. It was you who said that I was a hypocrite.

 

and the people you encounter in real life on an everyday basis have my deepest sympathies. It can't be easy listening to you whine and drone on while wagging your finger at them.

 

Whatever kid.

 

And how many of our fans insist it is our "right"? You're condemning people for a crime they've committed only in your imagination. We want to be back competing at the top, and with the right management it isn't beyond the realms of possibility, given our resources.

Liverpool weren't all that good when I started to watch them. However, I saw them climb from First Division newcomers to one of the best clubs in the world, and then decline ( comparatively) again.
If that's taught me anything it's not to believe that the status quo does, or should, last forever.
However, things change only with the will to change them, so how you can maintain that we have no right to ambition or expectation is beyond me.
Unless you're simply on the wind-up.

 

I never said you did, I pointed out what you was arguing could be construed as hypocritical. You then gave me a response which could have been used as a defence for both clubs and therefore backing up my claim.

No club as a right to win anything. Every club must earn that honour. However, some clubs (Liverpool and Man Utd) have aspirations of winning everything. That is not a a right or entitlement, that is aspiration or expectation.

Liverpool have been a sleeping giant for years, we've been at our lowest for over fifty years in recent seasons, but we are still within touching distance of the top clubs in this country. It is not beyond the realms of reality or expectation to think we might be able to attract a manager with a reputation like Klopp or Ancelotti. Just like it wasn't beyond Man Utd to get LVG after finishing seventh, you were heavily linked with Mourinho and Klopp too if I remember rightly.

 

Jimmy here's another way of looking at it.

Klopp had control of transfers in at BD. Do you think he made better buys than the ones you award the committee?

And if so, why do think he'd accept them telling him they know better?

 

Klopp only signed the bad ones, the committee signs the good ones

 

Klopp didn't have control at BD. He didn't sign a single one of those players. He worked under a DOF and team of scouts who looked after recruitment - klopps job was to coach and develop these players.

But Dortmunds recruitment was inspired to say the least, but it helps when you have a manager who believes in a) the team who recruit for him and b) the players who are given to him.

No internal politics. They all work together. Rodgers was the one who was causing conflict because he wanted the power. It was always going to end badly the moment he refused to work under a DOF.

 

#HeadInSand

 

You're doing well to type then

 

Not being a scouser, you don't get it It comes with the territory and has nothing to do with us at the moment, us last season, us 5 years ago ............

 

Lol ok, I'll take that claim on face value but I'd like evidence of it if you've got it handy.

But following you're logic and that he's "only a coach" do you think BD transfers were better than the ones the committee bought?

If so, what makes you think the committee won't still make more average signings than excellent. And please don't now try and claim any of our players are excellent. They are simply not.

You've provided absolutely no evidence on this board that Rodgers was responsible for the politics at LFC. Again Carragher who was there suggested yesterday the problems will remain beyond Rodgers.

Or do you have quotable evidence from others that were there that refute Carraghers claims? I can show you the video of Carraghers condemnation after all.....