Topic: Rafa knocks back contract

[Deadlogic]

.

That's some post mate.

[Eeyore]

.

Top post thanks for the Insight it's much appreciated

[Shaded Red]

.

Thanks for shedding some light on the fiasco!

[Strawberry Fields]

shanklyboy - Thank you for this post!

It is clear that Rafa loves our club and wants what's best for it. I won't go into the subject of whether he is or isn't the right man since I already stressed most of my thoughts here (and they are nothing like the custom title the mods gave me).
If Rafa truely wants to gradually make our youth system an integral part of the senior team and will look after the young lads (starting with some of those who are on-loan) than he has my full support on this one.

However, how does that fit with his past handlings? such as:
A. Just before giving Darby, Spearing and Kelly some pitch time against PSV away saying: "We have to send out a squad with four local players because of the regulations, so that does not make it easy." (link)
B. Overloading the youth and reserves teams.
C. Development minutes he himself gives comparing with other clubs (link).

I'd really love to believe what he said in his recent interview about the academy but I must admit I'm quite sceptical.

In regard to transfers, I think the best thing that can happen is hiring someone who will deal with transfer negotiations (removing Parry from that role and letting him focus on other things). Someone who Rafa will trust to do the job quickly and effectively.
Also, I think it's crazy that 3 non-footballing men can decide whether a player should or should not be bought unless his price is higher than the budget. However, fans basically want Rafa to have no one questioning his transfer decisions when they themselves questioned them just this past summer with the Alonso/Barry saga.
Although I can certainly see the benefits (ie Alves), I haven't yet made up my mind whether giving him total freedom will be as good as most believe it will be.

[zERo]

why not, he should be given total freedom, if he fails it's his head; and he can't keep complaining in that sense.

Give him total control and see where the club goes.

[Redskin]

I've tried to stay out of this thread as much as I can ....

A great post, well balanced and fair, gives us something to think about.

[Red Rascal]

Thanks Shanklyboy...it now needs to be said more than ever...

[lionel_messias]

.

Very very interesting post. I personally believe that at this point in time Liverpool could not find a better manager than Rafa. Hopefully boardroom machinations work themselves out so that his powerbase is strengthened while Mr Parry's is diminished. Whilst he may work tireless for the club, if he's doing too much that is to the detriment of the club and ultimately he will never be the football man at the fulcrum of our progress, preparing teams on the pitch, like our Spanish manager can.

If some of the players you mention are Dani Alves and Simao, we really missed them in recent years.

[Jólaköttur]

Can't see the problem myself.

Rafa, before committing himself to the club wants the setup to be exactly what is going to suit him the most and give the club the biggest chance for success for the future.

He's got a big heart and guts.

It's up to the owners now to either go with the vision which Rafa wishes to implement or find their own way.

They may find the second option difficult - but time will, of course, tell.

[Cloggs]

I wonder where all the "no one is bigger than the club" merchants from the Agger thread have gone...

[keyo]

Can't see the problem myself.

Rafa, before committing himself to the club wants the setup to be exactly what is going to suit him the most and give the club the biggest chance for success for the future.

He's got a big heart and guts.

It's up to the owners now to either go with the vision which Rafa wishes to implement or find their own way.

They may find the second option difficult - but time will, of course, tell.

without being privy to all of the actual discussions, some compromise on what is being reported has to be found.....cos to be quite honest, "total control" is a concept that would worry anyone when considering the manager's role at a football club......does he want to be able to negotiate fees and contracts, who would be in charge of advising him financially, what structure would this take...........ultimately, everyone has to be accountable, and i don't see how it would work.....secondly, how would he manage the time and effort involved, it is not the same as 30 years ago when shanks or cloughie et al could pick a player and have him signed up before the board even met him, there is alot of energy that goes into these things................replace parry and change the process for sure, making sure the manager gets what he wants without the limits of the clubs budget and ability, but "total control"?

suppose it can all be considered negotiation tactics and brinkmanship to an extent as well

[red annie]

Very illuminating post from Shanklyboy.

Parry really does have to go. He has failed in the task he undertook when first appointed, was instrumental in the takeover by G&H and has managed to undermine Benitez to the extent that Benitez will not sign the offered contract.

I have never believed that "Tom is evil, whilst George is wonderful" they are both equally dreadful. Keeping Parry just as a "no vote" against Hicks means that LFC will continue to struggle commercially, will not be able to develop on the football front and will still be washing our dirty linen in public. I will take some convincing that Parry is not the source of most of our leaks.

G&H hold all the cards, Parry just delays things. He is unable to fulfil his role at the club. He must go and soon.

[Jólaköttur]

without being privy to all of the actual discussions, some compromise on what is being reported has to be found.....cos to be quite honest, "total control" is a concept that would worry anyone when considering the manager's role at a football club......does he want to be able to negotiate fees and contracts, who would be in charge of advising him financially, what structure would this take...........ultimately, everyone has to be accountable, and i don't see how it would work.....secondly, how would he manage the time and effort involved, it is not the same as 30 years ago when shanks or cloughie et al could pick a player and have him signed up before the board even met him, there is alot of energy that goes into these things................replace parry and change the process for sure, making sure the manager gets what he wants without the limits of the clubs budget and ability, but "total control"?

suppose it can all be considered negotiation tactics and brinkmanship to an extent as well

Not sure if you've read the actual articles involved - but he's already stated that he'd be working with the same financial contraints imposed upon him - he just wouldn't have to go through a third party once the finances had been decided and agreed.

[red annie]

Obviously the owners will not give Benitez a blind cheque. The finances will be unchanged. Rafa will set up the deal, get agreement from G&H and then let the lawyers draw up the contract to be signed. This cuts Parry out completely.

He obviously wants control of all football matters at the club. Why should Parry control anything to do with football. The manager should be in charge of football reporting to the owners; the CEO should have control of everything else also reporting to the owners. Benitez should not have to go through Parry to get to the Board.

[mainstandred]

My loyalty is to Liverpool F.C too mate.
I also want the manager to be able to do his job in a way that gets the best for Liverpool F.C.
Managers in the past have been allowed to do the job without one hand tied behind their back. You seem to want Benitez to do that without question, which I find amazing.

You also seem to want to use innuendo and confuse facts with fiction.
You appear to have your own agenda against Benitez. I know you deny it, but nothing I've seen from any of your posts supports that.

so it is Carte Blanche for benitez , seen and heared all this before when houllier was in charge  about he wants to change it his way is the best so on and so on , that's why it took 4 years to get rid of diao 3 to get rid of cheryou who was on 80 grand a week in 2003 .

If Rafa Benitez loves the fans and the club like he says then he should sign the contract as him walking out on the club will not hurt the owners ,will not hurt rick parry and wont hurt the players  , the only ones who would be hurt are the fans so why put the supporters who have total belief in him through the mangle to prove a point .

 

[will2003]

I think the compromise in all this is give Rafa control of the youth set up (as ultimately that could save the club in transfer fees etc), rid the club of Parry in favour of someone who can neg the wages and contracts on Rafa's targets which shouldn't be questioned by Parry or the board unless it going to go over the pre arrange transfer budget. I can't see H and G dipping in to pocket on the last bit but hey who knows.

[redrockydennis]

so it is Carte Blanche for benitez , seen and heared all this before when houllier was in charge  about he wants to change it his way is the best so on and so on , that's why it took 4 years to get rid of diao 3 to get rid of cheryou who was on 80 grand a week in 2003 .

If Rafa Benitez loves the fans and the club like he says then he should sign the contract as him walking out on the club will not hurt the owners ,will not hurt rick parry and wont hurt the players  , the only ones who would be hurt are the fans so why put the supporters who have total belief in him through the mangle to prove a point .

 

if rafa walks out it won't hurt the club? it would set us back years, again.

i reckon you secretly want joe kinnear in.

[mainstandred]

So question  who signed Robbie keane , Andrea Dossena, and wanted Barry in and Alonso out .

Was it Rick Parry or The Owners or Rafa Benitez ?

[mainstandred]

if rafa walks out it won't hurt the club? it would set us back years, again.

Why isn't the a good squad there now why would it set the club back years , reina ,gerrard carragher,skrtel,alonso,torres mascherano . are there players not good enough to carry on ?

Plus if benitez did leave there would be a queue of top world coaches wanting to manage liverpool ,

No one had thought of benitez when houllier was going .

Rafa has to stop digging his heels in which he is doing more and more in recent time example over keane and the likes .

[redrockydennis]

So question  who signed Robbie keane , Andrea Dossena, and wanted Barry in and Alonso out .

Was it Rick Parry or The Owners or Rafa Benitez ?

tables and lampshades.

is all i have to say to you on that subject.

you didn't deny wanting joe kinnear either.

you love him long time.

[redrockydennis]

Why isn't the a good squad there now why would it set the club back years , reina ,gerrard carragher,skrtel,alonso,torres mascherano . are there players not good enough to carry on ?

because the whole management and coaching sructure changes.

and you heart joe kinnear.

[xerxes1]

Benitez should not have to go through Parry to get to the Board.

Let's be clear here.The problem IS Parry. It DOES make sense to have an English CEO, experienced in PL matters and a qualified accountant in charge of day to day matters when the owners have several other business interests and live over 3000 miles away.But it only works if the manager and ceo have a good working relationship which these two do not.

If you then look at Rafa's track record, and Parry's track record,  it does not take long to work out who should go.

Rafa is a good manager, and should stay, if he wants to. But spare me this "in Rafa we trust" bullshit. G&H&P were absolutely right last time to canvas other managers when Rafa hinted at leaving ( with good reason) - it made good football and busines sense.Rafa shamelessly manipulated our support then. The present revelations damage the team and club at a time when we are in our best League position for a generation, and prior to two crucial Derby games. Those are the actions of someone with his own interests at heart, not the Club's.

Rafa is Spanish, he is a "Madridisidta", and the windows of opportunity for him to manage that club will be pretty narrow, and he has been here for five years and won the European Cup for us - be careful who you give your love to.

This needlessly created uncertainty creates problems if Giddy Ciddy, or a Euro laden Milan were to come in with a megabucks offer for Stevie G, Carra, or Torres in the next couple of weeks. Would a cash strapped G&H say no to Ł75m? Would the players definitely stay if offered money which we could not afford to pay them, and the club turmoil looks as though it i going to be ongoing? I am not saying that this is going to happen, i am saying that it is Rafa whoo has created that possibility by going public.

[mainstandred]

tables and lampshades.

is all i have to say to you on that subject.

you didn't deny wanting joe kinnear either.

you love him long time.

yeh ok joe kinnear  yeh great behave  will yeh  . 

[Ultimate Bromance]

.

Very insightful post.

Hopefully Parry steps down before any permanent damage is done and we end up losing Rafa and years of progress made under him. I don't think Benitez is asking for too much in having complete control over player transfers atm. Obviously this doesn't mean he'll have access to empty cheques to buy every player he wants, it just means he'll cut out the unnecessary middle man, until we find someone who can make both parties happy.

[Jólaköttur]

yeh ok joe kinnear  yeh great behave  will yeh  . 

To be fair your post before was pretty stupid..

The 'him walking out' 'Won't hurt blah blah blah'

He doesn't want to 'walk out' to 'hurt the fans'

He wants a situation at the club that is best for him, his job as manager and the club.

What the hell is supposed to be wrong with that?

I'm really struggling with your point of view here. Do you think he's just doing this 'for a laugh' or 'with no purpose'?

[killer-heels]

Surely there has to be a chief executive though, who deals with the day to day running of the football club and is a link between the manager and the board?

I think the plan is to get someone in that works with Benitez well and gets him the targets he has identified.

Hicks is playing it quite clever, siding with Benitez so we all back him.

[red annie]

Surely there has to be a chief executive though, who deals with the day to day running of the football club and is a link between the manager and the board?

There has to be a CEO to deal with all the non football stuff. He should report to the board.

There has to be a manager to deal with all the football stuff. He should report to the board.

I see no reason why Parry or any other CEO should have to be the manager's boss. They should work alongside each other in their different areas each reporting to the board.

[Uhoh AureliOs]

I echo the sentiments of the others on here when I applaud Shanklyboy's post. Cheers for posting - good insight.

[killer-heels]

There has to be a CEO to deal with all the non football stuff. He should report to the board.

There has to be a manager to deal with all the football stuff. He should report to the board.

I see no reason why Parry or any other CEO should have to be the manager's boss. They should work alongside each other in their different areas each reporting to the board.

Indeed. The manager says he wants a certain player, he tells the CEO and that CEO makes the transfer happen.

Thats how it should be.

I cant believe that all this has pretty much come to a head because of Gareth bloody Barry!

[Jólaköttur]

There has to be a CEO to deal with all the non football stuff. He should report to the board.

There has to be a manager to deal with all the football stuff. He should report to the board.

I see no reason why Parry or any other CEO should have to be the manager's boss. They should work alongside each other in their different areas each reporting to the board.

Agree with that.

[xerxes]

Obviously the owners will not give Benitez a blind cheque. The finances will be unchanged. Rafa will set up the deal, get agreement from G&H and then let the lawyers draw up the contract to be signed. This cuts Parry out completely

If that's such a good idea, why does nobody else work like that? Gill negotiates Man Utd transfers, Kenyon Chelsea ones, Whelan Wigan ones. How would you guard against a George Graham scenario where the transfer fee is inflated by a mllion and the excess skimmed off by the managers concerned?

[No666]

Rafa rocks Liverpool: Benitez ready to walk away after rejecting new deal
By JOHN EDWARDS Last updated at 11:45 PM on 16th January 2009
Rafa Benitez will walk away from Liverpool at the end of the season unless he is given total control over transfers.
The Liverpool manager has put Real Madrid on alert after refusing to accept a condition in his proposed new contract that any deals would need higher approval before they could go through.
At a meeting on Thursday night, Benitez poured out his frustrations and made it clear he would quit rather than accept the Ł80,000-a-week, four-and-a-half year contract, even if he were to end Anfield's 19-year wait for the League title.
Co-owner Tom Hicks responded by vowing to find a solution but, worryingly for Liverpool, Real are already making moves to instal Benitez as successor to former Tottenham manager Juande Ramos.
When Hicks and fellow American co-owner George Gillett faxed a draft agreement stating all deals needed final approval from chief executive Rick Parry, Benitez officially rejected their offer and left little doubt they would have to climb down for him to stay.
'There are differences about my responsibilities,' he said.
'The owners feel the manager's decisions need to be subject to the chief executive, but I am subject to results and to our fans. They are my best judges.
'If you do not have a technical director, the manager has to have control of football decisions.
'The only person who can decide the value of a player to his squad is the manager.'
Although there have been claims of a deteriorating relationship between Benitez and Parry, the former Valencia boss would adopt the same approach with any chief executive.
There is now a serious risk of Benitez leaving, following clear signals from Real. A return to the Bernabeu, where he was once youth coach, looks increasingly likely.
Striker Fernando Torres warned there could be an exodus of players if Benitez is allowed to leave.
'Rafa has been a very important manager for me and for many other players, too,' said Torres. 'He has brought a lot of players here and put his confidence in them.
'When Rafa believes in you he is with you all the time, thinking about how you can improve, coming up with ideas, questioning you but listening, too.
'If he goes there could be five or six players looking at their future. But I'd like to stay here, and in that way maybe it does not matter if Rafa is here. I'm a Liverpool player but I'm also assured Rafa is happy here and wants to stay, and that is what I hope will happen.'
Hicks wants to talk Benitez round but Gillett is reluctant to pander to the Spaniard.
'We understand Rafa's frustrations and are working to try and find a solution,' said Hicks. 'I'm coming over for the Chelsea game on February 1.
'I'm comfortable Rafa loves Liverpool, wants to be manager and will be. I'm not worried about it at all.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1120191/Rafa-rocks-Liverpool-Benitez-ready-walk-away-rejecting-new-deal.html

Shouldn't think Rafa is Gillett's greatest priority atm, as we all know he's desperate to sell. Unfortunately without Coco we would currently have Ł190m more in debt placed directly against the club than is the current situation. So I agree with Gedo - both owners out first, then Parry one minute (or less) later. I've bolded bits of this, because a) the sticking point may not be only Parry, but the role of any CEO and b) given that Samuels interviewed Torres for today's Mail, those Torres quotes included here are obviously straight from him, and it appears he's spoken to Rafa and been reassured.

[Jólaköttur]

If that's such a good idea, why does nobody else work like that? Gill negotiates Man Utd transfers, Kenyon Chelsea ones, Whelan Wigan ones. How would you guard against a George Graham scenario where the transfer fee is inflated by a mllion and the excess skimmed off by the managers concerned?

"How would you guard against a George Graham scenario where the transfer fee is inflated by a mllion and the excess skimmed off by the managers concerned?"


That's a pretty disgraceful thing to say to be honest.

[Gedo]

Shanklyboy makes several good points,but to cut a long story short..Parry is and has been for a long time out of his depth.
Benitez at the times, can be unbelievably petty and childish and has to have his own way and generally does.
Parry on the other hand is the biggest ego maniac your ever likely to meet, and with getting the freedom to run the club by Moores finds it hard to give way to Benitez,make no mistake Parry knows he's on borrowed time at the club but would quite willing take Benitez "with him"

Parry's last stranglehold on the Club is the Academy and he doesn't want Rafa anywhere near it.
In effect there are 3 employees at the Academy who claim to run it,each believing they have the final say with Parry.
Piet Hamberg Technical
John Owens  Every day Running
Malcolm Elias Recruitment.
And there lies the problem,to many Cooks..........
Benitez wants total control of ALL playing matters and in my opinion should have it,there only 1 person who Rafa trust with a proven track record at the Academy and that's Malcolm Elias,so it looks like where going to have "Mexican  Stand off"

[xerxes]

"How would you guard against a George Graham scenario where the transfer fee is inflated by a mllion and the excess skimmed off by the managers concerned?"


That's a pretty disgraceful thing to say to be honest.

No it's not. I'm not suggesting that Rafa would do it. Just saying that things are the way they are because in the 90s managers negotiated transfer fees and skimmed some off for themselves. That is a fact. And the system needs to guard against ht possibility.

[4-2-3-1]

Telegraph

Rafael Benitez says 'no’ to new deal at Liverpool
Liverpool were plunged into a new bout of civil war after manager Rafael Benitez publicly rejected his new contract and, in a move seemingly co-ordinated with club co-owner Tom Hicks, laid the blame at the door of chief executive Rick Parry.
 
By Paul Kelso
Last Updated: 9:43AM GMT 17 Jan 2009

In a further sign of the fault lines that divide the hierarchy of the Premier League leaders, well-placed sources have also suggested that the row is evidence of a widening rift between Hicks and co-owner George Gillett.

The pair are known to have disagreed over the potential sale of the club in the past and there are suggestions that Hicks has been conducting significant club business without the knowledge of his fellow American.Hicks will fly to the United Kingdom in the next fortnight to discuss the contract impasse with Benitez, who chose the eve of the most important couple of days in Liverpool's season to reveal that he has refused to sign his new contract.

The terms and length of a 4˝-year extension have been agreed but Benitez said he was rejecting the deal because it would require transfer decisions to be approved by the chief executive."The owners feel my decision needs to be subject to the chief executive," he said. "But I know I am subject to results and to our fans and they are the best judges I will ever have."Benitez is demanding total autonomy over transfer budgets, contract negotiations and player selection, a position that would give him more power than any manager in the League.

The comments mark the second time in a week that comments by Benitez have overshadowed football matters. Last Friday he used his pre-match press conference to launch an outspoken attack on Mr. Ferguson, and his decision to go public with his contract issues yesterday raises further questions about how he is coping with the pressure of trying to steer Liverpool to their first title in 19 years.

The stakes could not be higher, as by the end of today Liverpool could have ceded leadership of the League to Manchester United and on Monday night they face Everton in the Merseyside derby in the League, ahead of the sides' FA Cup meeting a week tomorrow.Sources close to the owners said they would not give in to Benitez's demands but suggested that his outburst had been prompted by a personality clash with Parry.

The chief executive has been leading contract negotiations with the manager on the owner's behalf, but Merseyside insiders expressed surprise at the suggestion the issue had become personal.Parry has been in regular contact with the owners' representatives during contract negotiations, which are understood to have gone through at least 20 drafts.Parry's position was also understood to have been strengthened following recent talks between the owners and Royal Bank of Scotland, which underwrote the Americans' purchase of the club with a Ł350 million refinancing deal a year ago. It was agreed that both the finance and commercial directors, appointed by the Americans' ownership, should report to Parry and that he would lead on financial issues.

That endorsement of the chief executive was at least partially undermined yesterday. Shortly after Benitez's rejection of the contract became public the owners issued a statement in which they sympathised with the manager, an implicit suggestion that they too had issues with Parry. "They understand Rafa's frustrations and are committed to working with him and his advisers to find a solution," the statement said.Given that Benitez's "frustrations" are prompted by a contract approved by the owners there was some confusion within the club over the statement. Within an hour of its release, however, Hicks gave a television interview in which he said he was confident the contract dispute could be resolved.

"I will work with Rafa to get this resolved and I am just not worried about it at all. Rafa is going to be coach of this club for the next five years and we will work through all this," he said. Hicks' prompt availability led to suggestions on Merseyside that Parry was facing a co-ordinated attack from Hicks and Benitez.It remains to be seen whether the apparent move against Parry has the full support of both owners, however, and there are fears that the issue could prompt another bout of internal wrangling at a time when the club should be focused on football.

[Ozzy_Red]

shanklyboy - Thank you for this post!

It is clear that Rafa loves our club and wants what's best for it. I won't go into the subject of whether he is or isn't the right man since I already stressed most of my thoughts here (and they are nothing like the custom title the mods gave me).
If Rafa truely wants to gradually make our youth system an integral part of the senior team and will look after the young lads (starting with some of those who are on-loan) than he has my full support on this one.

However, how does that fit with his past handlings? such as:
A. Just before giving Darby, Spearing and Kelly some pitch time against PSV away saying: "We have to send out a squad with four local players because of the regulations, so that does not make it easy." (link)
B. Overloading the youth and reserves teams.
C. Development minutes he himself gives comparing with other clubs (link).

I'd really love to believe what he said in his recent interview about the academy but I must admit I'm quite sceptical.

In regard to transfers, I think the best thing that can happen is hiring someone who will deal with transfer negotiations (removing Parry from that role and letting him focus on other things). Someone who Rafa will trust to do the job quickly and effectively.
Also, I think it's crazy that 3 non-footballing men can decide whether a player should or should not be bought unless his price is higher than the budget. However, fans basically want Rafa to have no one questioning his transfer decisions when they themselves questioned them just this past summer with the Alonso/Barry saga.
Although I can certainly see the benefits (ie Alves), I haven't yet made up my mind whether giving him total freedom will be as good as most believe it will be.

Another slice of pessimism from RAWK's resident Doom Merchant.

[redrockydennis]

seriously, if rafa can't be trusted to buy players, as some of you seem to think on here, and think the CEO should have the final say, why don't we fuck rafa off and stick rick parry in as manager, after all he's done such a sterling job as CEO and preventing rafa from actually building the squad he wants.

[Jólaköttur]

No it's not. I'm not suggesting that Rafa would do it. Just saying that things are the way they are because in the 90s managers negotiated transfer fees and skimmed some off for themselves. That is a fact. And the system needs to guard against ht possibility.

Of course you're suggesting it. You've just bloody said it (Twice)

[JordanTUTEE]

I don't think he should have total control at all ... but ultimately it shouldn't be left to Parry to decide wether we are paying one or two million too much, or waiting for him to return back from a holiday to sign a player. If Raffa had a clear idea of his budget, etc he could work around it.

I don't think there are any signs to say Raffa will adopt a Houllier type approach, where he just won't admit to his mistakes and keep bad players on for the sake of his own ego. Raffa has shown a ruthless streak to dispense with players to keep his budget afloat on buying improvments. But on the negative aspect, he really did buy some turkeys this season. Let's say he wants to give Heskey a Ł80,000 a week contract for 4 years ... you do need someone to reign that type of insanity in. The point being, as in Houlliers case, the damage done by one manager can linger on for years.

Parry won't go ... and he can't be sacked unless both and Gillette and Hicks agree, and Gillete won't want to lose Parry's vote. So the middle ground would be to give Raffa more control, but not complete control. And no doubt that will happen.

Simple, hey ...