Says briefly- saddened by Roy leaving,no plans YET to link up,reckons Roy would get the same LFC squad into top 4,will bring stability,there are people he would rather work with at FFc than others (Curbs??)would want the MD to consult top players before appointing anyone,does have ambition to manage but reckons he has 2 years playing,and would like to move forward with FFC,mangement is 2 years too early,being brutally honest the manager of England organised team and the England were disorganised,naive and was managers fault,playing Gerrad on left was a waste,
Spoke very well.
Quote from: Mo on July 01, 2010, 10:26:48 AM
Says briefly- saddened by Roy leaving,no plans YET to link up,reckons Roy would get the same LFC squad into top 4,will bring stability,there are people he would rather work with at FFc than others (Curbs??)would want the MD to consult top players before appointing anyone,does have ambition to manage but reckons he has 2 years playing,and would like to move forward with FFC,mangement is 2 years too early,being brutally honest the manager of England organised team and the England were disorganised,naive and was managers fault,playing Gerrad on left was a waste,
Spoke very well.
i was just thinking that the first most likely player that will linkup with Hodgson again from us would be Danny with his affiliation with the club. That would be disaster number two..
Loosing Murphy without a decent replacement would be a disaster.
loosing Murphy a disaster - not so sure. He is now looking old and tired and probably won't play 90 mins much this season...
Quote from: Edward_Winston_Malone on July 01, 2010, 12:49:12 PM
Loosing Murphy without a decent replacement would be a disaster.
loosing Murphy a disaster - not so sure. He is now looking old and tired and probably won't play 90 mins much this season...
He is integral to everything we do. To not have him will change the dynamic completely. He's a very unique player, something i didn't realise before he played for us (just considered him a thug for THAT tackle on Steed). He needs to be replaced in the long run and maybe Dikgacoi can do it eventually but he needs another season around Murphy.
I can't think of another player that we could realistically get that would be as effective as Murphy playing wise and as a leader
Murphy is still good enough to play a lot of minutes for us. I think he's also a very positive influence on the other players, many of whom I've felt have modeled their own game after Murphy's.
Murphy has more time in him and I can see him becoming our manager some day. He should stay as the stabilizing force from the Hodgson departure and takeover in 3-4 years.
Quote from: RidgeRider on July 01, 2010, 04:33:52 PM
Murphy has more time in him and I can see him becoming our manager some day. He should stay as the stabilizing force from the Hodgson departure and takeover in 3-4 years.
Whether he leaves or stays would have little effect on the possibility of him returning as a manager some day. I would not think his remaining here to be influential at all regarding his future as a manager.
Liverpool supporters would not see the return of a 33yr old ex player as a forward step
In any case part of Hodgson's severence deal is that he's not allowed to sign Fulham players
"In any case part of Hodgson's severence deal is that he's not allowed to sign Fulham players"
Source for that assertion? (I hope it is true.)
Quote from: Oakeshott on July 01, 2010, 09:46:11 PM
"In any case part of Hodgson's severence deal is that he's not allowed to sign Fulham players"
Source for that assertion? (I hope it is true.)
BBC Sport - Football - Roy Hodgson leaves Fulham to become Liverpool manager (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/8721942.stm#id8780000/8781100/8781134-audio)
Hodgson, who is not allowed to sign Fulham players as part of his severance deal with the London club, added: "I don't think there's anybody here at the club who would welcome losing them.
If correct, great.
Quote from: Brede Butter Pudding on July 01, 2010, 09:52:36 PM
Quote from: Oakeshott on July 01, 2010, 09:46:11 PM
"In any case part of Hodgson's severence deal is that he's not allowed to sign Fulham players"
Source for that assertion? (I hope it is true.)
BBC Sport - Football - Roy Hodgson leaves Fulham to become Liverpool manager (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/8721942.stm#id8780000/8781100/8781134-audio)
Hodgson, who is not allowed to sign Fulham players as part of his severance deal with the London club, added: "I don't think there's anybody here at the club who would welcome losing them.
Er?!...
BB
That addition "I don't think there is anybody here at the club ..." threw me, but on checking the BBC Sport story it is clear that it relates to the Liverpool stars like Gerrard and not to Fulham players.
If indeed the report that Roy has agreed not to raid Fulham for signings is correct, presumably that was part of the price we exacted for agreeing the early ending of his contract.
Quote from: Oakeshott on July 02, 2010, 06:32:07 AM
BB
That addition "I don't think there is anybody here at the club ..." threw me, but on checking the BBC Sport story it is clear that it relates to the Liverpool stars like Gerrard and not to Fulham players.
If indeed the report that Roy has agreed not to raid Fulham for signings is correct, presumably that was part of the price we exacted for agreeing the early ending of his contract.
Further into the interview he is directly asked about raiding Fulham (unless the journalist is a Fulham fan that's a really derogatory attitude towards us, as if we are there to be raided now). He says that he doesn't think it would be right to do so but doesn't say he won't get anyone. There is nothing of any agreement not to buy any of our players which is fair enough because that would be ridiculous
Just listened to the interview and there's no mention of Fulham or our players, or any severance deal.
He is not going to say his package included a "No Poaching" clause. This stuff is usually confidential. No doubt to get his release they put that in the release. Clearly MAF was upset at him leaving and was not going to let him go without exacting a proper price which would likely include you can't take any players with you.
We allowed him to speak to Liverpool so can't be surprised or even upset at his decision to leave.
The unpleasantness must have been about terms and the suggestion that Hodgson was demanding payment of bonuses rings true. We refused, forcing his resignation. Hodgson's angry that he missed out on those bonuses and MAF's furious that going to Liverpool wasn't enough for Hodgson.
That's my guess.
Quote from: TonyGilroy on July 02, 2010, 06:11:28 PM
We allowed him to speak to Liverpool so can't be surprised or even upset at his decision to leave.
The unpleasantness must have been about terms and the suggestion that Hodgson was demanding payment of bonuses rings true. We refused, forcing his resignation. Hodgson's angry that he missed out on those bonuses and MAF's furious that going to Liverpool wasn't enough for Hodgson.
That's my guess.
[/quot
What unpleasantness? Have i missed something?
Hodgson said that his last discussion with MAF was unpleasant. Not sure if that was the precise word used but that was the clear impression he gave.
Quote from: RidgeRider on July 02, 2010, 04:11:59 PM
He is not going to say his package included a "No Poaching" clause. This stuff is usually confidential. No doubt to get his release they put that in the release. Clearly MAF was upset at him leaving and was not going to let him go without exacting a proper price which would likely include you can't take any players with you.
What, so while Roy Hodgson is manager of Liverpool he can never sign a Fulham player?! No way. There would never be anything like that. I can't believe any club would agree that their new manager cannot buy the players that were successful for him! And I can't believe Al Fayed would even ask for that..
Quote from: TonyGilroy on July 02, 2010, 08:31:43 PM
Hodgson said that his last discussion with MAF was unpleasant. Not sure if that was the precise word used but that was the clear impression he gave.
The interview on Sky?
Quote from: beijing ben on July 02, 2010, 08:37:00 PM
Quote from: TonyGilroy on July 02, 2010, 08:31:43 PM
Hodgson said that his last discussion with MAF was unpleasant. Not sure if that was the precise word used but that was the clear impression he gave.
The interview on Sky?
Just listened to it again. Understand what you mean now. I think when he says that it wasn't very pleasant from his point of view, i'm guessing it was along the lines of
Al: "How could you want to leave after I gave you your chance to get back into the premiership?"
Roy: "I'm sorry but this is a fantastic opportunity..."
Al: "Whatever Roy... whatever"
Kind of like a scene from Coronation Street. Like a classic Bet and Alec argument. For premiership read the Rovers. I can see Al Fayed dressed in leopard skin print smoking a cigarette in a cigarette holder, refusing to look at Roy, thinking to himself "...another relationship down the drain. Why do I let 'em get close to me..."
