Gillett upset Liverpool comments appeared in press
-
-
and man u r fags
-
Yeah this is a good place for rival fans and own fans to bash our own boss .
-
Liverpool owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks, otherwise known as Tom and Jerry - a couple of cartoon-strip characters making a laughing-stock of one of the finest footballing institutions.
LIVERPOOL fans may be well known for their sharp sense of humour. But they have found little with which to amuse themselves after the latest extraordinary gaffe by American owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks.
Or, rather, Tom and Jerry - a couple of cartoon-strip characters making a laughing-stock of one of our finest footballing institutions.
For years, Liverpool had a reputation for not washing their dirty linen in public. Now it has become the norm. Not that long ago, they had to admit they had orchestrated talks with Jurgen Klinsmann about replacing manager Rafa Benitez.
Now Gillett has been struck down by another outbreak of foot-in-mouth disease. The latest report is that Liverpool's co-owner told a representative of the Spirit of Shankly supporters' group: "If it's not getting better, it's not because of Gillett and Hicks. It's the manager and the scouting."
He then claimed Benitez had been provided with more than enough funds. So, once again, it is the manager carrying the can - even though he has not got a minute's play out of Alberto Aquilani, his £20million purchase from Roma.
Gillett is now apparently upset because he thought it was a private conversation. That shows you how much a man who said on his arrival at Anfield that he wanted to embrace everything about Liverpool has actually learned. Just as there is no such thing as a free dinner, so there is no such thing as a private conversation in the small, footballing village on the banks of the Mersey.
That was Gillett's first mistake. Then, again, he has spent most of the little time he passes on Merseyside trying far too hard to curry favour with the club's supporters.
Secondly, many of his other claims are highly debatable. The most laughable was his assertion that Liverpool 'is in an extraordinarily good financial position - far better than Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal'. Now the Glazers may have burdened United with huge debts but the club is still an enormous money-making concern, with a vast global fan base and 75,000 at every home game.
As for Arsenal, the best-run club in the business, their debt revolves around a state-of-the-art, 60,000-capacity stadium. In the last financial year, they generated profits of £35million.
Liverpool, on the other hand, are nowhere near even starting on a new ground, three years after Tom and Jerry arrived - despite Hicks writing off £10m by scrapping existing plans so architects from his native Texas 'could design a more spectacular stadium'.
Under the stewardship of the embattled and embittered Americans - like their cartoon equivalents, they cannot stand each other - the debt has also spiralled to £250m.
Add the same amount for a new ground and the club are staring at a minimum black hole of half a billion.
Almost as rib-tickling is Gillett's assertion that he and Hicks have invested £128m in the club over the last 18 months on top of the income from sales. Some would suggest this 'investment' is made up largely of wages and the financing of the debt with which they lumbered the club when they bought it.
All Gillett, in fact, has managed to achieve is unite Liverpool fans behind Benitez. Which, in its own way, could well create further problems.
Benitez, of course, is far from blameless. His side have already lost three league games this season, plus another against Champions League group rivals Fiorentina.
There are at least three players who should be nowhere near the team, while the current style of play - full-backs bombing down the line - has come unstuck against better-class opposition, as there is no one other than Fernando Torres to convert the balls that do come into the box.
These tactics, plus the zonal marking system at the back and the defensive frailty of new boy Glen Johnson (and others), have piled further responsibility on Anfield warhorse Jamie Carragher.
There has also been criticism of Benitez's employment of Yossi Benayoun, a player whose instant impact as a sub against Chelsea suggested he should have started.
Torres apart, Benitez has operated an easy-come, easy-go attitude to strikers like Djibril Cisse, Milan Baros, Fernando Morientes, Peter Crouch, Craig Bellamy and Robbie Keane.
Had he persevered with Bellamy, Liverpool, rather than Manchester City, could have been benefiting from the form that currently makes the Welshman the most dynamic forward in the Premier League.
As to scouting fresh talent and new players coming through the ranks, where are they? So the manager is not exactly above suspicion.
-
Originally posted by charleslee:
then who u want to take over? jurgen klinnsmann?who to take over is another issue that need to be solve.
but i believe it can be easily solved as long as BOTH rafael and yanks are out
-
Gillett upset Liverpool comments appeared in press
Liverpool co-owner George Gillett is upset over his comments regarding the club's situation made their way into the press yesterday, it has been revealed.
The Daily Mail says Gillett is believed to be unhappy that a supposedly private conversation between him and a member of a supporters’ group, which found its way on to a fans’ website, portrayed his thoughts as being anti-Benitez when he also referred to his "genius".
Gillett responded to a question about Liverpool’s start to this season by saying: "In the last 18 months, we have invested £128m, on top of what has come in. That means it should be getting better. If it is not getting better, it’s not Gillett and Hicks. It’s the manager, it’s the scouting."
-
tell rafa n e 2 owners to go.
full stop.
-
Originally posted by AEW5001:
tell rafa n e 2 owners to go.
full stop.
who can tell??
-
Originally posted by iceFatboy:
who can tell??
the people who lended the $$ to the 2 clowns? -
Originally posted by limpper:
Gillett upset Liverpool comments appeared in press
Liverpool co-owner George Gillett is upset over his comments regarding the club's situation made their way into the press yesterday, it has been revealed.
The Daily Mail says Gillett is believed to be unhappy that a supposedly private conversation between him and a member of a supporters’ group, which found its way on to a fans’ website, portrayed his thoughts as being anti-Benitez when he also referred to his "genius".
Gillett responded to a question about Liverpool’s start to this season by saying: "In the last 18 months, we have invested £128m, on top of what has come in. That means it should be getting better. If it is not getting better, it’s not Gillett and Hicks. It’s the manager, it’s the scouting."
Smart Americans like thomas edison,martin luther king jr managed to earn respect from the world with their perserverance and charisma while f***** up ones like the hicks and gillett , George W bush only managed to earn scorn and even hate from the world with their greed and stupidity...
-
Originally posted by limpper:
who to take over is another issue that need to be solve.
but i believe it can be easily solved as long as BOTH rafael and yanks are out
May i ask who are willing to work with a team that has very average players bar a selected few? and a club whose ownership will be shroulded in uncertainty?
-
thanks God chelsea don't have a owner like those 2 jokers..
-
Originally posted by charleslee:
May i ask who are willing to work with a team that has very average players bar a selected few? and a club whose ownership will be shroulded in uncertainty?
when owners are change, arabs or saudi ones come in. $_$ will not be an issue, and when money is not an issue, anyone will come.
-
Trust and faith have been given to Ah Ben for the past five seasons.
But, his fundamental stubbornness and his inflexibilty in changing his team formation have left fans disappointed and fustrated.
It is not a case of pushing the blame to him.
But, in reality, it is clear who are the players that should be playing on sat was not on the field.
Just check out the influence of benny when he is unleashed.
Babel also played quite well.
If Ah Ben remains stubborn about his player selection for the next few seasons, prepare to see the departure of key players.
Wenger and SAF are much better in getting the right players and team tactics.
Ah Ben is running out of or no ideas.
-
Originally posted by limpper:
when owners are change, arabs or saudi ones come in. $_$ will not be an issue, and when money is not an issue, anyone will come.
Not tt easy, wat abt the debts on the club? who's going to pay for it?the new owners? -
Originally posted by Medicated Oil:
Trust and faith have been given to Ah Ben for the past five seasons.
But, his fundamental stubbornness and his inflexibilty in changing his team formation have left fans disappointed and fustrated.
It is not a case of pushing the blame to him.
But, in reality, it is clear who are the players that should be playing on sat was not on the field.
Just check out the influence of benny when he is unleashed.
Babel also played quite well.
If Ah Ben remains stubborn about his player selection for the next few seasons, prepare to see the departure of key players.
Wenger and SAF are much better in getting the right players and team tactics.
Ah Ben is running out of or no ideas.
Right you are....however there's no suitable candidates right now tt's avaliable to replace ah ben....dun even mention jurgen klinnsmen...he's nt the one we nid...we nid someone who's flexible in tactics and usage of manpower, someone like capello -
Originally posted by charleslee:
Not tt easy, wat abt the debts on the club? who's going to pay for it?the new owners?debts dont have to clear at one go.
with the saudi/arabs financial power, pay alittle first, say 50% first then slowly pay off, im sure banks wont object.
with money, the world goes round.
-
Originally posted by youyayu:
thanks God chelsea don't have a owner like those 2 jokers..
but should chelsea win the UCL
will roman finally be happy and then stop playing this "game"?
-
Originally posted by limpper:
debts dont have to clear at one go.
with the saudi/arabs financial power, pay alittle first, say 50% first then slowly pay off, im sure banks wont object.
with money, the world goes round.
50% is like still a lot leh...it's nt little at all....n i disagree with u abt money makes the world go round.... it's true unless u meet two greedy and stupid american clowns...
-
Originally posted by charleslee:
50% is like still a lot leh...it's nt little at all....n i disagree with u abt money makes the world go round.... it's true unless u meet two greedy and stupid american clowns...
if we get new owners alr, you think what you're worrying now will still be a problem?
money makes the world go up and down
-
Originally posted by limpper:
if we get new owners alr, you think what you're worrying now will still be a problem?
money makes the world go up and down
i agree... bt will the arabians meet the price and conditions set out by the yankees? most probably they will wait... by then our liverpool will be fighting hard for a place in champions league or heaven forbid, europa league... -
Originally posted by charleslee:
i agree... bt will the arabians meet the price and conditions set out by the yankees? most probably they will wait... by then our liverpool will be fighting hard for a place in champions league or heaven forbid, europa league...they are already waiting, and that's why we're in shit now, the longer they wait, the longer the yanks hang on, the more shit we have.
-
Originally posted by limpper:
they are already waiting, and that's why we're in shit now, the longer they wait, the longer the yanks hang on, the more shit we have.
n the yanks may not just let go, becoz' they see the BPL as a gd business or ' franchise' as the yankees as termed it...so wat they do to cling onto such gd business? they will sell players to repay their debts...n they dun care wat happens to the club as long they get money out of it.... -
Originally posted by charleslee:
n the yanks may not just let go, becoz' they see the BPL as a gd business or ' franchise' as the yankees as termed it...so wat they do to cling onto such gd business? they will sell players to repay their debts...n they dun care wat happens to the club as long they get money out of it....not they might not let go, is they die also dont want to let go.
unless someone kill them both, if not they will not let go.
In Rafa You Ppl still trust?
-
Originally posted by limpper:
not they might not let go, is they die also dont want to let go.
unless someone kill them both, if not they will not let go.
In Rafa You Ppl still trust?
yup, that has been my point all this while...we nid a new manager who's flexible and even revolutionary...bt as i have said before, we nid new owners b4 things move.. for the yankees, it's all abt $$$$.. u can practically see $ signs in their eyes...