 |
#209977 - 09/04/12 05:23 PM
king kenny
|
Member
Registered: 11/01/11
Posts: 132
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210027 - 09/04/12 08:41 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: plums]
|
Member
Registered: 30/12/10
Posts: 3399
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210156 - 09/04/12 10:37 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: TheKopProphet]
|
aldo
Unregistered
|
and this relevant because (simon garner says so)
more of the old friends brigade spouting crap while ignoring the league table and money spent. erm... no... it's relevant because Blackburn won the premiership three years after Kenny went through such a losing streak, meaning that it is not always the best decision to just sack the manager in times of hardship. Although I am fully with you on the 'Sack Kenny' nonsense, you can't really use the Blackburn thing, I mean come on there is easily a counter argument.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210163 - 09/04/12 10:42 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: ]
|
Member
Registered: 29/07/11
Posts: 4709
|
and this relevant because (simon garner says so)
more of the old friends brigade spouting crap while ignoring the league table and money spent. erm... no... it's relevant because Blackburn won the premiership three years after Kenny went through such a losing streak, meaning that it is not always the best decision to just sack the manager in times of hardship. Although I am fully with you on the 'Sack Kenny' nonsense, you can't really use the Blackburn thing, I mean come on there is easily a counter argument. Doesn't matter. The possibility is there - there is a precedent not only for it to happen but to happen with this manager. The probability is that it won't happen but the doom-gloomers can't have the rhetoric all their way. Just because we had a poor season and our new transfers were all disappointing... doesn't mean that exactly the same thing will happen next season. In fact, identical seasons don't normally come back to back. Everything depends on the players we supplement our team with this summer... many of our disappointing new arrivals could still make it with the right additions whether it comes from Kenny or someone else.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210165 - 09/04/12 10:47 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: TheKopProphet]
|
aldo
Unregistered
|
and this relevant because (simon garner says so)
more of the old friends brigade spouting crap while ignoring the league table and money spent. erm... no... it's relevant because Blackburn won the premiership three years after Kenny went through such a losing streak, meaning that it is not always the best decision to just sack the manager in times of hardship. Basically what we have here is a Schrodinger's cat situtaion Although I am fully with you on the 'Sack Kenny' nonsense, you can't really use the Blackburn thing, I mean come on there is easily a counter argument. Doesn't matter. The possibility is there - there is a precedent not only for it to happen but to happen with this manager. The probability is that it won't happen but the doom-gloomers can't have the rhetoric all their way. Just because we had a poor season and our new transfers were all disappointing... doesn't mean that exactly the same thing will happen next season. In fact, identical seasons don't normally come back to back. Everything depends on the players we supplement our team with this summer... many of our disappointing new arrivals could still make it with the right additions whether it comes from Kenny or someone else. So basically your saying what we have here is a Schrodinger's cat situation
Edited by aldo (09/04/12 10:48 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
#210204 - 09/04/12 11:27 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: Stanley Park]
|
Member
Registered: 05/04/12
Posts: 2689
|
Stan, Shankly's first major signing never played a 1st team game.
He wasn't infallible either That was what I said but overall the direction was fast progress. promoted after 3 seasons...kenny wins silverware in first ,maybe both domestic cups.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210296 - 10/04/12 01:15 AM
Re: king kenny
[Re: EMP]
|
Member
Registered: 21/07/11
Posts: 889
|
he does of course. he is the manager, but like i said imo carroll was being bought no matter what. hendo to i feel was commolli's pet stats signing. straight in for him in the summer, whilst kenny's signings downing,adam dragged out a bit. maybe i am wrong but thats how i see it. carroll is a mare that needs to be forgotten about but i would be much happier if commolli left rather than kenny I personally see Carroll as a total kenny signing. Think Kenny saw him to make a big man little man link up, young and english, think he was Kennys number one signing. Henderson I could see being suggested to him though due to his incredible stats at the end of last season.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210338 - 10/04/12 01:47 AM
Re: king kenny
[Re: heggypompom]
|
craney91
Unregistered
|
hendo will come good
carroll is a dalglish signing as kenny is still living in the 80's with his football concepts
big man small man combo
how old is this thinking in football terms? About 12-13 years. It did "exist" back when we was successful, with the likes of Toshack and Keegan, but nobody pointed out the "big man, little man stereotype" it was just simply, one good player, playing of, of another. Only relatively recently have we come into a culture of the "big man, little man" A philosophy much used by a Harry Redknapp at West Ham, Portsmouth and early on at Spurs, although not so much now. Carroll was bought to create options and space for players around him, bring them into play, assist goals and score them, whether or not the players around him are all 6'4 or all 5'5. Kenny had two "big men" up front at Blackburn, with Shearer and Sutton. They were successful, did anyone complain about the "big man, big man" combination? Your big man, little man, Kenny "80's football concept" falls on its ars*! 1. Kenny hasn't deployed Carroll and Suarez every single game. and 2. When he has, it's not with the one dimensional conventional "big man, little man" philosophy either. Finally, what makes you believe Hendo "will" come good, but Carroll won't? Carroll hasn't exactly fired on all cylinders either, but there is a valid argument to make, that he has done more than Henderson AND offered a better option. Also, take into account, less trust, faith and persistence with Carroll. Neither player has played to their maximum at all and neither justify the money spent on them. But this Hendo "will" come good consensus I hear, is baseless. I for one really hope so, but I feel people are looking at Lucas as some sort of comparison and justification as to why Hendo "will" come good. The fact is, Henderson isn't being converted to another position, like Lucas was. Henderson is playing in positions, attacking positions, familiar to him as a player. Positions he has played in before, and can admittedly play. The fact that his output, is virtually nil, (even when played in his preferred position) worries me. I doubt whether Henderson will come good at all, I just haven't seen the small signs (like Lucas showed for instance) and especially when he didn't really set the world a light at Sunderland either.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210376 - 10/04/12 02:18 AM
Re: king kenny
[Re: ]
|
Member
Registered: 14/06/10
Posts: 1092
|
hendo will come good
carroll is a dalglish signing as kenny is still living in the 80's with his football concepts
big man small man combo
how old is this thinking in football terms? About 12-13 years. It did "exist" back when we was successful, with the likes of Toshack and Keegan, but nobody pointed out the "big man, little man stereotype" it was just simply, one good player, playing of, of another. Only relatively recently have we come into a culture of the "big man, little man" A philosophy much used by a Harry Redknapp at West Ham, Portsmouth and early on at Spurs, although not so much now. Carroll was bought to create options and space for players around him, bring them into play, assist goals and score them, whether or not the players around him are all 6'4 or all 5'5. Kenny had two "big men" up front at Blackburn, with Shearer and Sutton. They were successful, did anyone complain about the "big man, big man" combination? Your big man, little man, Kenny "80's football concept" falls on its ars*! 1. Kenny hasn't deployed Carroll and Suarez every single game. and 2. When he has, it's not with the one dimensional conventional "big man, little man" philosophy either. Finally, what makes you believe Hendo "will" come good, but Carroll won't? Carroll hasn't exactly fired on all cylinders either, but there is a valid argument to make, that he has done more than Henderson AND offered a better option. Also, take into account, less trust, faith and persistence with Carroll. Neither player has played to their maximum at all and neither justify the money spent on them. But this Hendo "will" come good consensus I hear, is baseless. I for one really hope so, but I feel people are looking at Lucas as some sort of comparison and justification as to why Hendo "will" come good. The fact is, Henderson isn't being converted to another position, like Lucas was. Henderson is playing in positions, attacking positions, familiar to him as a player. Positions he has played in before, and can admittedly play. The fact that his output, is virtually nil, (even when played in his preferred position) worries me. I doubt whether Henderson will come good at all, I just haven't seen the small signs (like Lucas showed for instance) and especially when he didn't really set the world a light at Sunderland either. Craney a good sensible post and one without comeback as we just don't know. Henderson is a classic moneyball type signing, he is athletic, technically very good, no1 assists at Sunderland, quite strong and has a good injury free record. Against his peers he stands out as having it all BUT doesn't really possess anything magical, something to change game or have burning desire to attack in a certain way. This is why he neither offends nor pleases, he rarely gives the ball away and positionally is good. He also has an eye for a good pass, several assists this season. Do we notice he is there though? probably not, he will as it stands not change a game for you. Carroll from his highlights at Newcastle is the opposite, he doesn't have great Technical skills, is not athletic or a great footballer or thinker- he is however known to be unplayable even devastating when in the mood, this has not been evident so far in a red shirt. His all round game has improved since he joined us but the bit he was good at has gone and doesn't look like coming back soon. He has to find that spark, maybe the humiliation at Newcastle was it, maybe not shouting at the ref for fouls might help. maybe
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210602 - 10/04/12 05:09 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: heggypompom]
|
thundyr
Unregistered
|
he cares about the club can you say all these blind dalglish faithers do? Oh, I get it - supporting the manager means not caring about the club. I think some people need to step away from the keyboard before they make right fools of themselves.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210636 - 10/04/12 05:55 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: TheKopProphet]
|
Member
Registered: 21/10/09
Posts: 11041
Loc: Grimsville
|
Rubbish what do you know about Shankly ? he would not have stood for this nor would he have paid £35m for a pony tailed championship player. ok he did sign Alun Evans but we will ignore that. Shankly progressed the club more or less from day one he had small setbacks but overall the club went forward and fast. He was good with the media too unlike Kenny who is pityfull. Regarding Shankly: Yes, well done for seizing on one of my rare typos! I also forgot that you alone are the only one qualified to comment on our pre-Rafa history on this site. As has been pointed out - you are trying to compare two completely different eras. And for someone that criticises others for lapsing into nostalgia you show you are more than capable of it when it suits you. I don't think you can say who Shankly would have signed with today's money... but I can tell you he wouldn't kick the club in the teeth when their down... like you do every day! So what would he do then just carry on mid table in perpetuity. From what I remember of Shankly he would have hated the game today pricing out loyal fans the billionaires etc. He was a simple man and a socialist from a mining village in scotland long way from the game today. As for kicking the club in the teeth I at least pay £1000 plus every year to them so if thats a kick in the teeth anyone can kick me anytime they like. Club is a global brand and we have the right to complain if things are not going to plan its fine for you to say give it x years be patient you only have to worry about your keyboard wearing out. Next season if I am to pay I WANT hope and something to look forward to.
_________________________
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210731 - 10/04/12 09:33 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: jboy]
|
Member
Registered: 21/07/11
Posts: 889
|
Have to agree with what you said Stan.The club is a multi-national company and we as fans are the shareholders due to the large sums of cash we inject annually.In a large company there is a shareholders meeting [end of season for us] and things have to be changed for the next financial year[next season].We as fans are not wrong to demand that changes be made to improve the situation.Now it's up toFSG to listen and make the changes or at least tell us the plan an dshow us how we are progressing. The analogy could work, but you've somewhat incorrectly applied it in my opinion. Yes Liverpool is a multi national company. But the fans are not share holders. Football is an entertainments bussiness. The fans are punters/customers. The only way fans have a say is like customers, they affect things by not purchasing or purchasing more. The share holders are the share holders. It doesn't really need the analogy. It is in fact exactly the same.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210748 - 10/04/12 09:53 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: Bar]
|
Member
Registered: 21/10/09
Posts: 11041
Loc: Grimsville
|
Actually a lot of fans are shareholders as well Stanley!  You have an avatar!! I tried to put my own up but lifes too short.
_________________________
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210780 - 10/04/12 10:10 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: Stanley Park]
|
Member
Registered: 18/04/11
Posts: 7409
|
Actually a lot of fans are shareholders as well Stanley!  You have an avatar!! I tried to put my own up but lifes too short. Why not use the one I made for Faz?? 
_________________________
*RODGERS *SKRTEL *JONJO
'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?' 'If there is hope, it lies in the proles'
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210789 - 10/04/12 10:17 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: Stanley Park]
|
Member
Registered: 14/06/10
Posts: 1092
|
Actually a lot of fans are shareholders as well nope sorry Stan they are not. All shares sold to Hicks/Gillete when they completed the 2007 deal. Now owned by FSG. Used to be split between Moores 60%ish, Granada TV 20% and then others
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210790 - 10/04/12 10:18 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: cp1972]
|
Member
Registered: 21/10/09
Posts: 11041
Loc: Grimsville
|
Actually a lot of fans are shareholders as well nope sorry Stan they are not. All shares sold to Hicks/Gillete when they completed the 2007 deal. Now owned by FSG. Used to be split between Moores 60%ish, Granada TV 20% and then others You are right sorry
_________________________
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
#210792 - 10/04/12 10:20 PM
Re: king kenny
[Re: Stanley Park]
|
Member
Registered: 14/06/10
Posts: 1092
|
Actually a lot of fans are shareholders as well nope sorry Stan they are not. All shares sold to Hicks/Gillete when they completed the 2007 deal. Now owned by FSG. Used to be split between Moores 60%ish, Granada TV 20% and then others You are right sorry in Germany fans own a minumum of 25% by law. ooh how things would look different if fans had a real say.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|