Soccer #23

[Renasko]

Interesting development. I hope Liverpool are in much better shape in twelve months time. They're an important part of English football.

[ljkeane]

I've also got a new found respect for Martin Broughton over this. I thought he was just a corporate shill for Hicks and Gillet but I quite like the way he's apparently stabbed the greedy bastards in the back, if he wasn't a Chelsea fan maybe he wouldn't be too bad as a chairman.

[Dark Knight]

ljkeane, have to second everything you said:-).

It was quite unexpected really, and from what I've read about NESV there is a bright furutre to look forward to, at least at the man management area, which was the main problem during H&G reign - to many people in the club without a clue about soccer.

[Slick Mongoose]

Hicks and Gillete really are a couple of greedy wankers, aren't they?

[Renasko]

If the move doesn't go through, when will it? The current owners have already been told their estimate of the club's value is too high. Are they thick? Entertainment sports are a risky business; no worse than soccer. I don't see where the money they supposedly invested into the club has went, but chairmen coming into the game, should've been prepared for the worst. You don't tend to make much of a profit, unless you're hugely successful. Fans constantly want the team revamped with new star players, a nice modern stadium, the player's to want to stay at the club long term, etc. All means way more money than sense is involved.

Thankfully it seems Liverpool's owners don't have a leg to stand on. Let's be havin' these new American dealers.

They can't be worse than this pair, who've riddled the club with huge debts, ignored their promise to build a new stadium, have orchestrated poor transfer sense, maligned and ostracised themselves to the supporters. Didn't the son of Gillet even fuck off one of the main men involved in Liverpool's supporters trust?

[Slick Mongoose]

I don't get it because RBS can take the club over in a week anyway, from what i've heard. And H&G would get nothing. So why delay? It could be misreporting from the press, of course.

[Mme Erzulie]

No, Dicks and Gillett are taking it to the courts. Word on the street (i.e. Liverpool's official website) is that we should have a verdict within a week and that a potential appeal will be dealt with equally swiftly.

While I'm also reluctant to welcome more Americans to the club, I have to say that there seems to be a marked difference in the way the current douchebags and NESV seem to run their respective businesses. I just hope Hicks dies during autofellatio. And if Gillett died while shaving, well, wouldn't that be ironic.

[mormont]

I don't get it because RBS can take the club over in a week anyway, from what i've heard. And H&G would get nothing. So why delay? It could be misreporting from the press, of course.

Offended pride? Having RBS force the sale is one thing, but it can't be pleasant to have your own appointed stooges turn on you and vote to sell the club from under you in a manner that means you get SFA. Looks bad.

[Slick Mongoose]

You're probably right, I was looking at it from a purely business point of view.

[mormont]

From a business POV, I suppose you could make the argument about looking bad too - reputation, and all. Don't mess with us. But either way, personal or business, I'd have to agree it actually looks pretty petty. No dignity to it. Either they let the board sell the club from under them, or the bank will.

[Slick Mongoose]

If they're being really petty, they might be trying to force RBS to put the club into administration to get rid of them, getting Liverpool a 9 point deduction. :stunned:

[Alcibiades]

It seems like one last roll of the dice. The only thing that could save Hicks is some savior to roll in with a larger bid that will give him a profit, or another bank gives him a refinancing deal. If either of those were going to happen, they would have already. But, since his reputation in the UK is already trashed, why not fight to the end for whatever minuscule chance of turning things around.

[Black Wizard]

Forget about Liverpool, the big news is that Dundee FC have entered administration for the second time in seven years. Obviously it's not appropriate for me to laugh about people losing their jobs but rival fans are fair game.

[Renasko]

Scottish game is in a very sorry state, at the moment. Least Liverpool can sort out their problems over time. It looks to be a different story for the likes of Dundee...

[Black Wizard]

If people ran football clubs properly then there'd be no discussion about this. Just look at how al-Fayed has run Fulham, then compare him to Hicks & Gillette.

[Zoë Sumra]

If people ran football clubs properly then there'd be no discussion about this. Just look at how al-Fayed has run Fulham, then compare him to Hicks & Gillette.

This being the major reason why the talk about al Fayed selling Fulham scares me.

[mormont]

If people ran football clubs properly then there'd be no discussion about this. Just look at how al-Fayed has run Fulham, then compare him to Hicks & Gillette.

OK then. When Fayed took over, he made exactly the sort of absurd and ultimately false promises as Hicks and Gillett did on arrival: he promised big names, Champion's League football, and a new stadium. None ever arrived. He undermined Jean Tigana when he was manager by appointing a Director of Football without telling him, then sacked him unfairly in a move that cost the club £3m (Fayed concluded on the basis of no evidence whatsoever that Tigana had taken a bribe to sign Steve Marlet). Fayed was found in court to have lied about Edwin van der Sar's transfer - far from the first time a judge has decided he has lied, by the way. The club is now heavily indebted (to the point where they don't meet UEFA's new rules), albeit not to the extent that Liverpool are - quite. £240m vs £167m. About the best thing you can say about his stewardship of the club is that in recent years he's decided he doesn't much care any more.

In comparison to Hicks and Gillett, he comes off as quite possibly the most dubious character to own a Premiership football club: and when your competition includes Davids Gold and Sullivan (and Roman Abramovich) that's an achievement. There is no doubt in my mind that he fails the 'fit and proper person' test and that he should not be allowed to own the club. He's a serial liar and fantasist, whose wealth is largely based on a takeover that he is lucky didn't land him in jail for fraud (again, he was found in court to have lied about having the funds). He has bought or intimidated his way out of more court cases than I can list here. He even lies about his name*. If Fayed were to be linked in any way with my club I would run a mile, and my club's owned by 'Mad' Vlad Romanov.

Was that the sort of thing you had in mind?

(I tend to find praise of Fayed-as-owner is based on short memories and uncritical thinking. Sorry.)

*The 'al' is an honorific indicating high-class descent, which Fayed certainly does not have.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

Here's a question from somebody who's only been following football on and off since the 2006 World Cup:

How good was David Beckham in his prime?

During the World Cup, the general consensus on Beckham was that he was a overated, plodding, attention-whoring-pretty-boy with a decent free kick and even though I've heard of him having several decent years with Madrid and Milan and saw highlight videos of some accurate long balls, that's the general impression I've kept of him.

Then tonight, during my regularly scheduled procrastination, I was looking up Ballon d'Or winners and imagine my surprise when I saw that Beckham came in second in 1999.

So what type of player was he? Was he ever particularly exciting to watch. I picture him now as providing accurate distribution from the back of the midfield, kind of like Xabi Alonso now. Am I completely off base?

[baxus]

his free kicks were magnificent, as were his crosses. there wasn't another player who could match him in that.

unfortunately, his priorities changed when he married victoria and suddenly it was more important to be seen on some fancy event (and get his picture taken and published) than getting his name on the scoresheet.

had he kept his feet on the ground, i believe he could have been one of the all time greats.

of course, after signing for real madrid, he was moved from the right side of midfield to a defensive midfield role, which baffled me

[BigFatCoward]

How good was David Beckham in his prime?

Then tonight, during my regularly scheduled procrastination, I was looking up Ballon d'Or winners and imagine my surprise when I saw that Beckham came in second in 1999.

he was very effective, but not even remotely interesting to watch. He was slow, had no trickery, a very weak left foot and couldn’t head the ball to save his life. He made a lot of what he had with hard work (his fitness levels were incredible). He was never ever the second best player in the premier league never mind Europe (in fact he might never have been the 2nd best player at Man utd). But I’ve not seen anybody who could strike a ball like he could before or since.