KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Is This The Beginning Of The End Of Maureen @Old Toilet?

BT Sport - Michael Owen, Chris Sutton & Neil Lennon.



12 minute - Heritage Rant

It's great viewing...so what's everyone's thoughts?

I hope he stays there and spunks another sh*tload of money and continues to fail.

it wasn't too long ago that quite a few on here said they'd love to have him managing us. Gerrard and Carragher used to make comments about him too at the expense of Rafa I believe.

I don't know ANY Utd fans that like him and none would be sad to see him go. He goes against their footballing philosophy.

I'd rather stop following football than have him in charge of LFC.

I was extremely surprised that Utd lowered themselves to Mourinho. I wonder what SAF thinks when he sees Mourinho constantly moaning, bitching, criticising the fans, players and everyone but himself. Plus the incredibly negative tactics, something that Fergie would never have employed!

Fergie was as bad as Mourinho is his own way. Morinho is the perfect fit for them. The only mistake Morinho has made is with his style of football.... and failing to challenge for the title.

Fergie had his moments, but the two are not the same. Mourinho is all about himself and a nasty piece of work when he loses. Ferguson had a bit of class about him, something mourinho is lacking.

LOL.

Fergie was every bit as nasty as Mourinho when losing. Both managers were so obsessed with winning that anyone who came in their way got attacked by any means possible - referees, opposing managers, top players from rival teams, journalists etc.

I don't biuy the line about Fergie having a bit of class. That was just a front and only applied to anyone who was subservient or wasn't a threat.

haha Fergie and Jose are both winners all true winners are bad losers...your not telling me Shanks, Cloughie, Paisley or Jock Stein took defeat any different...
What people have to remember is Jose, Conte and Premier League managers are all under more scrutiny and pressure than those from years ago so the judgement is not fair...we seen how older managers struggled with modern way when Dalglish took charge after about ten years out..remember his embarrassing handling of the Suarez incident and interviews around that time...SKY reporters had him in knots...

Of course most top sports people are sore losers... but you don't need to cross the line. Klopp is also a sore loser as is Conte and Rafa is too... but none of them have yet earnt a reputation of being nasty.

You can also be a winner without being a sore loser... or by chanelling your hurt in a different way. That's the netx step in evolution. Look at Guardiola... or Federer in tennis.

Anyway, this started of in response to a claim that Fergie had 'class'. I just pointed out that I disagreed and why I disagreed. I wasn't claiming that everyone else was perfect... just that claiming that Fergie had some kind of halo didn't sound right to me.

(Not sure what Dalglish's lack of media skills has got to do with... it didn't make him nasty.)

If you look back at the stuff Mourinho did not sure he was ever on that level. Gouging at player's faces, making comments about another managers wife. Mourinho is dirt. I have a lot more respect for Fergie as a person than Mourinho

He's utterly unlikeable. I hated Fergie too and he was vicious at times, but even LFC fans grudgingly respect his acheivements. Jose spunks as much money as possible, and meltsdown as soon as things start to turn, then quits/gets sacked and blames everyone else. He's obsessed with himself and doesn't care one bit about the teams or players he manages. Creating a global brand and over-hauling LFC's titles on one hand, smash and grab on the other. Him and Fergie are uncomparable.

As above, he's a child at the best of times. I do wonder what he's like in private..

Mourinho could never build and sustain a top football club, that's why he only ever manages clubs for 3 seasons at a time. He buys trophies, sure, (Porto the exception) and eventually the players, fans and board get utterly sick of him. Mourinho could never have brought Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, the Neville's through like Fergie did, he doesn't have the patience or the ability. He has to buy world renowned stars for huge money, then wants more money for new stars when they flop in his tactical system. Look how much Pogba is struggling, look at the decline in Sanchez since going there, he was better under Arsene Wenger!

The two best players in the Premiership this season are Salah and De Bruyne, Mourinho had both of these at Chelsea but gave up on them because he couldn't bring them through, look at them now. Man Utd's top goal scorer is Lukaku, he cost £75million, another player Mourinho had and couldn't develop, so he sold him and then bought him when he was closer to being the finished article.

He moans about managers over celebrating, yet remember him at Old Trafford with Porto, running down the touchline, or Chelsea at Anfield, running down the touchline. The guy is a total hypocrite, his style of football is prehistoric and this season he hasn't been able to buy his way to success like he normally does. Guardiola is too good for him, maybe that's why he's even more of a bitter, moaning old man than usual this season.

I think he's mentally unstable tbh.
Needs medical attention

...and he's not the only one!

He's utterly unlikeable. I hated Fergie too and he was vicious at times, but even LFC fans grudgingly respect his acheivements. Jose spunks as much money as possible, and meltsdown as soon as things start to turn, then quits/gets sacked and blames everyone else. He's obsessed with himself and doesn't care one bit about the teams or players he manages. Creating a global brand and over-hauling LFC's titles on one hand, smash and grab on the other. Him and Fergie are uncomparable.

As above, he's a child at the best of times. I do wonder what he's like in private..

Mourinho could never build and sustain a top football club, that's why he only ever manages clubs for 3 seasons at a time. He buys trophies, sure, (Porto the exception) and eventually the players, fans and board get utterly sick of him. Mourinho could never have brought Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, the Neville's through like Fergie did, he doesn't have the patience or the ability. He has to buy world renowned stars for huge money, then wants more money for new stars when they flop in his tactical system. Look how much Pogba is struggling, look at the decline in Sanchez since going there, he was better under Arsene Wenger!

The two best players in the Premiership this season are Salah and De Bruyne, Mourinho had both of these at Chelsea but gave up on them because he couldn't bring them through, look at them now. Man Utd's top goal scorer is Lukaku, he cost £75million, another player Mourinho had and couldn't develop, so he sold him and then bought him when he was closer to being the finished article.

He moans about managers over celebrating, yet remember him at Old Trafford with Porto, running down the touchline, or Chelsea at Anfield, running down the touchline. The guy is a total hypocrite, his style of football is prehistoric and this season he hasn't been able to buy his way to success like he normally does. Guardiola is too good for him, maybe that's why he's even more of a bitter, moaning old man than usual this season.

I HATED Ferguson, but comparing Mourinho to him is disgraceful. He's arguably the best to ever manage in England, and the Dynasty he built there is unmatched. He definitely had a nasty streak about him, and Keane and Beckham have a fair amount to say about his lack of loyalty. He had his mind games with Wenger and Rafa too, and the way he treated referees was terrible, but there was a certain level of class and respect for the game that he had that Mourinho lacked. I hate Ferguson, but I respect him. If I were a United fan, I would love him.

I acknowledge what Mourinho has done in the game is impressive, but he has become such a petulant child. It used to be sort of charming. He was a character, and his players used to run through brick walls for him at Chelsea, but Madrid broke him. He's got so much insecurity, such an inferiority complex. If I was a United fan, I would be so embarrassed by him, and the lecturing of THAT club about football heritage of all things is absurd.

Just think football has changed since Shanks dynasty building days...it's never going to happen now....Posters saying Sir Alex never left any foundations...well did Cloughie...Don Revie or Sir Matt? Are we now saying they weren't top managers because they never left dynasty's...

I have to disagree with some of the opinions about Fergie.

I don't understand how we can acknowledge that the way he treated referees was terrible and then immediately follow that with a claim that he had respect for the game, though I suppose it was qualified by ' a certian level'. Far too low a level to qualify as respect in my opinion.

He hasn't built 'a dynasty' at all. He left the club in need of a rebuild job which so far they haven't succeeded in achieving. He didn't develop/mentor any undertudies that were able to continue the work. This is in stark contrast to Shankly who built a loyal team around him and was able to lay a foundation and pass on priciples which Paisley, Fagan, Dalglish, Moran and Evans were able to carry forward.

Somebody also mentioned that Fergie esablished a global brand. I disagree with that too. Manchester United were a global brand for years before Fergie. Even when we were winning things, I believe they were still the 'bigger' club financially. It was the Sky revolution and the establishment of the PL that was the game changer. That allowed them to take full advantage of their financial might and even increase it. Of course Fergie's management contributed - but to a certain extent, he was in the right place at the right time.

He was at the club for 27 years, which is almost as long as the Shanks, Paisley, Fagan, and Dalglish years all rolled together. He won 13 league titles, 5 FA cups, 2 Champions Leagues, 4 league cups, a cup winners cup and loads of other stuff (38 trophies in 27 years). He knocked us off out perch and oversaw one of the most impressive production lines of young local talent, many of whom are among the greatest to ever play for United or England. To me, that is a dynasty, as much as it sticks in my throat.

I still say Paisley is the greatest to ever manage in England period, but there is definitely an argument to be made for Ferguson. The legacy he has had on nurturing players (many of whom became managers), the innovation, and the fact that he was able to stay on top throughout the cycles of so many other great managers of the league (Dalglish, Clough, Wenger, Mourinho, Benitez) is incredibly impressive. And despite his spats with many of them, there is a level of respect with which he speaks of them and vice versa that I see that I don't see with Mourinho. Fergie was a [oops], but Jose isn't fit to wipe his boots.

BT Sport - Michael Owen, Chris Sutton & Neil Lennon.



12 minute - Heritage Rant

It's great viewing...so what's everyone's thoughts?

I hope he stays there and spunks another sh*tload of money and continues to fail.

Can't be ar5ed reading the whole thread (I know, how rude) but that clip of Maureen is very, very good. It's 15 minutes of reminding everyone how [oops] United are and he's not a miracle worker.

As much as he's a pr1ck, he's still won more silverware with United in 1 season than we have in over 10 years.

Maureen has spent 300 + million and recouped around £57m, selling Morgan Schneiderlin and Memphis Depay for over £20m apiece, leaving his net spend at around £234m. That's not even scratching the surface of wages and add ons to get those players in and keep current players happy.
Weigh that up against Klopp's net spend in that time and what sort of wages and add ons we have given to those players and current players...it's miniscule in comparison!

Maureen has spent 300 + million and recouped around £57m, selling Morgan Schneiderlin and Memphis Depay for over £20m apiece, leaving his net spend at around £234m. That's not even scratching the surface of wages and add ons to get those players in and keep current players happy.
Weigh that up against Klopp's net spend in that time and what sort of wages and add ons we have given to those players and current players...it's miniscule in comparison!

When you look at the current Best Teams, Barcelona have Messi, Real Madrid have Ronaldo, Man City have De Bruyne, Man Utd have errrrrrr
De Gea...A GOALKEEPER!

That's true but the whole premise of what Maureen was saying that to be consistently in the CL, then you have to invest in the squad because what they had/are is not good enough. Yes, there is the here and now but he's on about the bigger picture, and he's right.

For example, there's no way Man U would have sold Couthino. They would have bought in to complement his presence, not cashed in.

I know he's spent more money but hes also won more trophies. United have a much bigger pool of reserves to dip into to strengthen their squad and they are seeing benefit for it but he has admitted that more needs to be spent because they're still not good enough.

We had NO reserve because F$G have never invested in the squad. We'll probably get knocked out of the CL by Cithe so all we will have done is go one further round in the CL than United. We'll still end the season trophyless and top 4 still isn't guaranteed.

Compare balance sheets and we are clear winners but that's not what makes me follow football.

That's true but the whole premise of what Maureen was saying that to be consistently in the CL, then you have to invest in the squad because what they had/are is not good enough. Yes, there is the here and now but he's on about the bigger picture, and he's right.

For example, there's no way Man U would have sold Couthino. They would have bought in to complement his presence, not cashed in.

I know he's spent more money but hes also won more trophies. United have a much bigger pool of reserves to dip into to strengthen their squad and they are seeing benefit for it but he has admitted that more needs to be spent because they're still not good enough.

We had NO reserve because F$G have never invested in the squad. We'll probably get knocked out of the CL by Cithe so all we will have done is go one further round in the CL than United. We'll still end the season trophyless and top 4 still isn't guaranteed.

Compare balance sheets and we are clear winners but that's not what makes me follow football.

Let's be honest here, Maureen has maybe another transfer window or 2 before his expiration date is up, judging by his work history. If Man Utd put up with him any longer, he'll have spent another shitte load of money into the process, but does anybody believe that he is going to topple Guardiola's Citeh in 1 season or even us if Klopp get's his additions in the summer?

Maureen is such an abrasive cvnt, he has isolated himself from the OT dressing room, the OT fans, the media and probably now any ambitious decent players out there. Maureen will only be tempting mercenaries like Sanchez in the last days of his Man Utd tenure.

By the end of this season, we will be in a far better financial position than we were a few seasons ago. leicester got 72m for reaching the QF of the CL. We still have the Couthino money and even if we spend it. Klopp has not spent much overall. We got more money for getting in top 4 last season and hopefully again this season.

I don't want to go down the FSG spending money debate as I am bored of it. But realistically CL means more money and more money means better players and trophies.

By the end of this season, we will be in a far better financial position than we were a few seasons ago. leicester got 72m for reaching the QF of the CL. We still have the Couthino money and even if we spend it. Klopp has not spent much overall. We got more money for getting in top 4 last season and hopefully again this season.

I don't want to go down the FSG spending money debate as I am bored of it. But realistically CL means more money and more money means better players and trophies.

I hope more money does mean better players because we are very vulnerable. An injury to Salah and our aspirations sit along side him in the treatment room.

Salah has scored 40% of our goals in the Premiership. That's a lot of goals from 2 hamstrings with only Solanke in reserve.

I hope more money does mean better players because we are very vulnerable. An injury to Salah and our aspirations sit alongside him in the treatment room.

Salah has scored 40% of our goals in the Premiership. That's a lot of goals from 2 hamstrings with only Solanke in reserve.

I've no idea how much we are going to spend this summer. But even without FSG dipping into their pockets.(we have spent we little over the last few windows) we have Couthino money and extra CL money. I don't even know if we need that much for what is needed for the squad? The rebuilding job is not as big as before.

You could spend a ton, but Klopp is not going to bring in a bunch of new players. Last season or season before it could have been easily spent.

Not even Salah maybe more Lallana. If Salah falls then Firmino and Mane can fill his void(maybe not as well) but you need a player who can fill in for one of those 3.

If we get CL again this season, we are moving forward. We are more attractive than a few years ago. We have a good manager and our style of football should influence possible signings as well.

For example, there's no way Man U would have sold Couthino. They would have bought in to complement his presence, not cashed in.

Why did they sell Ronaldo at the peak of his powers then?

Why did they sell Ronaldo at the peak of his powers then?

Like Beckham before him, Ronaldo wanted off and there was nothing United could do about it. As I mentioned many times on this forum at the time. We never even tried to keep Couthino. F$G wanted the cash

Like Bekham before him, Ronaldo wanted off and there was nothing United could do about it. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

United have no real history of selling their best players, can only think of Ronaldo, some might say Beckham but for me he was on his way down when he was sold, can't think of Chelsea selling their best players and I know Man City would never entertain it, we on the other hand have sold about half a dozen over the years...

Like Bekham before him, Ronaldo wanted off and there was nothing United could do about it. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

Maybe we just have a different interpretation of the word dynasty. What you've described is still not a dynasty to me.

'He knocked us off our perch'. Nonsense. You've fallen for the myth that he himself has probably peddled through the media. We had already faded before he won his first title. In fact, two other teams won the league after our last title and before their first one.

'Production line of young local talent'. Really? There was one batch.

He only 'respected' other managers when they weren't a threat. Whenever they were a threat he was very disrespectful and used his friends at other clubs and probably in the media too to put the boot in as well.

27 years at the richest club in the country and perhaps the biggest club in the world.... and only 2 champions league titles.

Of course, in terms of the league and domestic trophies he served himself and his club very well. But in my opinion he was just like Mourinho... just smarter and more sly in the way he went about it.

Only 2 Champions League Titles? What a silly thing to say. Only Ancelotti and Paisely have won more.

Knocking us off our Perch isn't pipping us to a league title. Leeds, Arsenal, Blackburn, these lot never eclipsed us. Knocking us off our perch was overtaking our League Title count, our trophy count, and our status as biggest club in England. Our own mistakes contributed to that, but even as we declined, we were the bigger club before Ferguson.

Most of the riches the club has to day are the result of Fergie's success too. They were an institution, sure, but they were flirting with relegation the year before he arrived, and they hadn't won a league title since 67 before him.

He is a pr*ck and I won't argue about that. But he isn't a little snot like Jose is, and he's done a long-term transformation job that Jose never could.

I said only 2 Cl 'in 27 years' ... context is importnat. For the richest club in the world that's quite poor... I don't think that's a silly thing to say at all - it's an opinion.

'Knocking us off our perch' - again it's a definition issue. Of course those other teams didn't do it individually. My point is that it wasn't Fergie who put us under pressure and out did us thereby replacing us as the top team in the country. We ourselves had already reached the end of an era and had faded. We had already fallen off our perch. Fergie's team were on the up and esp when the PL was formed and the TV deal arrived, they were in poll position to take full advantage.

We were never the bigger club in terms of finance or support base as far as I'm aware. They were always the bigger club in that respect.

Also, of course Fergie had a big part to play. However, in my opinion, other factors were perhaps equally significant - finance being the key.

I suppose we'll just have to disagee on some thinsgs.

I said only 2 Cl 'in 27 years' ... context is importnat. For the richest club in the world that's quite poor... I don't think that's a silly thing to say at all - it's an opinion.

'Knocking us off our perch' - again it's a definition issue. Of course those other teams didn't do it individually. My point is that it wasn't Fergie who put us under pressure and out did us thereby replacing us as the top team in the country. We ourselves had already reached the end of an era and had faded. We had already fallen off our perch. Fergie's team were on the up and esp when the PL was formed and the TV deal arrived, they were in poll position to take full advantage.

We were never the bigger club in terms of finance or support base as far as I'm aware. They were always the bigger club in that respect.

Also, of course Fergie had a big part to play. However, in my opinion, other factors were perhaps equally significant - finance being the key.

I suppose we'll just have to disagee on some thinsgs.

Maybe they were bigger in th 60s and 70s riding off the highs of the Busby years, but were bigger in every sense in 1986 when he took over them. We ruled England, we ruled Europe (when English teams were allowed to compete at least), we were richer, and we had more trophies in every category. They were a sleeping giant in debt issues and just about fought off relegation the year before. They couldn't have considered themselves bigger than us back then any more than we could consider ourselves bigger now. United are bigger and richer than us now because Ferguson took them there and kept them there when the premier league money came into play. Full Stop.

As for the 2 cl titles being poor comment, that is absurd in any context. Juventus is Italy's richest and most successful club and they only have 2 in their entire history. Are they still not considered a massive European power? There are only 8 clubs in history with 3 or more titles: Us, them, Barca, Milan, Inter, Real, Barca, Bayern, and Ajax. During his tenure winning it twice, making it to two other finals, winning the cup winners cup, and the Inctercontinetal cup (when it was still relevant). Ferguson is one of the only 6 managers to manage more than 100 CL games, holds the record for most games managed (190), and is in the top 8 for overall win percentage in the CL era(53.7).

I say this absolutely hating the wiskey-nosed, bacon-faced F*ck, and I feel like I need to puke, writing all that about him now, but us LFC fans get enough stick about being deluded and being revisionist with history. To call Ferguson's reign at Manchester anything other than a dynasty is just incorrect.

Fergie's United definitely dominated the EPL but not CL as great teams like ourselves, Barca and Real did in their peak.

As I said, we'll just have to agree to disagree. It's all about perspective, perception and opinion.

Just on the point of dynasty though, a dynasty in my understanding is something that is passed on from one person to another within the same family/clan etc, between generations and multiple times such that something is thus continued across many generations. Often used to describe rulers of a country over centuries, e.g the Ming dynasty.

So in football, for us Shankly certainly established a dynasty. Because his work was continued subsequently by Paisley, Fagan and Dalglish.

In Fergie's case, no one was able to carry on his work. They had to go outside the club immediately by turning to Moyes. I don't need to explain what happened and what has happened since.

Fergie's United definitely dominated the EPL but not CL as great teams like ourselves, Barca and Real did in their peak.

so is Shanks the only manager in your opinion who had created a dynasty...

It's not something I've thought of.... and it's a much bigger question than simply assessing whether one particular case can be considered to be a dynasty.

I don't claim to have a full knowledge of football history across every league in the world... but I can't think of any other examples similar to the dynasty established by Shankly. Can you?

Even after Dalglish, the dynasty continued, albeit not as succesfully, but we had Ronnie Moran, Graeme Souness and Roy Evans. The bootroom became a world famous institution. It only came to an end when Houllier took full charge I suppose.

Wasn't the bootroom scrapped by Souness?

You may be right. I was referring to the dynasty ending when we appointed Houllier.

I feel for Souness having his legacy tarnished by it all. It's a bit like trying to follow Fergie. The club was on the decline; wasn't re-investing properly; couple of bad buys and the simple fact was that the times were a changin'.

Souness tried to change things too quickly and it backfired.

To be fair I was 11 at the time so my opinions' based on interviews etc.. rather than experience.

The bootroom was scrapped by souness. Souness gets a lot of unnecessary stick I went to every game home and away in that era. Liverpool were declining and had not adapted to the modern fitness era. Souness made mistakes but he did a lot of work bringing Liverpool to modern standards for which he never gets credit. Houllier and Evans reaped the benefits of that and it's telling they never reversed souness work on the training etc.

The rot started with dalglish souness did some good work whch was necessary but ultimately made a lot of mistakes houliier and Evans progessed it was only with Rafa we went up a level the re emergence of the king and Rodgers eras are better left forgotten Klopp seems to be making some progress but the jury is out still.