Rafa - wants talks with new owners

[jimmylibel]

Benítez keen to clarify strategy with Liverpool's new owners

 

 

Dominic Fifield

Thursday March 15, 2007

The Guardian

 

 

Tom Hicks and George Gillett are on the verge of securing complete control of Liverpool after accumulating 94.4% of the club's shares, but any celebrations may have been dampened by indications from Rafael Benítez that he is seeking talks to clarify their vision.

The manager remains committed to the club but his publicly expressed intention to meet the Americans is disconcerting, given Real Madrid's apparent desire to lure the Spaniard back to his home city. Liverpool rejected an approach from them last year, with Benítez subsequently signing a new long-term contract, but Real's interest in him remains. That is unsettling on Merseyside, even if Real are aware that Benítez's instinct is to remain.

 

Real's interest does offer Benítez a position of strength from which to negotiate, however, and he will do so with Hicks and Gillett when they return to England on March 31. "There are always a lot of rumours and a lot of people have been talking about Madrid," said the manager. "I have read in some papers I've had a meeting with people from Madrid. This is not true. I'm very happy at Liverpool. I couldn't have more support, but now we have new people taking over and it's important I talk to the American owners.

"I have spoken to them once, when they first came to the club, but now I would like to see them as soon as possible and talk about the future. I don't just want to talk about money to spend on players. I would like to hear about the plans which will improve the club."

 

Gillett and Hicks will attempt to convince Benítez that they have the means and intention to pour resources into long-term planning with special emphasis on youth recruitment, an area where the manager feels Liverpool have fallen behind. The Americans are also exploring ways of increasing the proposed 60,000 capacity of the new Stanley Park stadium and have ordered a review, which could delay the start of work.

 

 

Link

[HK]

  jimmylibel said:

Benítez keen to clarify strategy with Liverpool's new owners

Dominic Fifield

Thursday March 15, 2007

The Guardian

Tom Hicks and George Gillett are on the verge of securing complete control of Liverpool after accumulating 94.4% of the club's shares, but any celebrations may have been dampened by indications from Rafael Benítez that he is seeking talks to clarify their vision.

The manager remains committed to the club but his publicly expressed intention to meet the Americans is disconcerting, given Real Madrid's apparent desire to lure the Spaniard back to his home city. Liverpool rejected an approach from them last year, with Benítez subsequently signing a new long-term contract, but Real's interest in him remains. That is unsettling on Merseyside, even if Real are aware that Benítez's instinct is to remain.

 

Real's interest does offer Benítez a position of strength from which to negotiate, however, and he will do so with Hicks and Gillett when they return to England on March 31. "There are always a lot of rumours and a lot of people have been talking about Madrid," said the manager. "I have read in some papers I've had a meeting with people from Madrid. This is not true. I'm very happy at Liverpool. I couldn't have more support, but now we have new people taking over and it's important I talk to the American owners.

"I have spoken to them once, when they first came to the club, but now I would like to see them as soon as possible and talk about the future. I don't just want to talk about money to spend on players. I would like to hear about the plans which will improve the club."

 

Gillett and Hicks will attempt to convince Benítez that they have the means and intention to pour resources into long-term planning with special emphasis on youth recruitment, an area where the manager feels Liverpool have fallen behind. The Americans are also exploring ways of increasing the proposed 60,000 capacity of the new Stanley Park stadium and have ordered a review, which could delay the start of work.

Link

 

very unlike Benitez to talk through the press...

Edited March 15, 2007 by HK

[Herbie von Smalls]

OH MY GOD! RAFA'S LEAVING US FOR REAL MADRID AS SOON AS HE CAN!!!

[Falconhoof]

There's nothing unsettling in what rafa said. He says he hasn't met Madrid so he's clarified that, he says he wants to know more about the plans for developing the club. If you tie that in to other comments Rafa has made about exploiting our brand globally like Real have done then its clear Rafa is just keen to see the club developed to its full potential.

 

Weird how the journalist has put a sensationalist spin on it...who'd have thought it ?

[DanielS]

That site (Guardian Unlimited Football) has absolutely nothing nice to say about anybody or anything. Every club are crap, every manager is leaving and every players is a gak-nosed w*****. Amazing how down they are on everything.

[Bootle Buck]

Real Madrid - The most Secure Job in Football

 

I'm sure despite his affinity for Real, Rafa would be very wary of taking that job. The average tenure is about one season(if that). If he didn't win La Liga or the CL immediately they would be calling for his head.

Edited March 15, 2007 by Bootle Buck

[Guest Budo]

What is the point of this post? It's just regurgated lazy journalism.

[honourablegeorge]

It's a rejigged version of the Echo story, where Rafa said he wanted to chat with the new owners, and work out a strategy to "benefit the club for the next 100 years"

 

This journo halfwit reckons the fact that the manager wants to discuss plans with his new owners is "disconcerting". What a load of specualtive s***.

 

 

Here's the full Echo quote - doesn't sound like a man who's leaving.

 

“I couldn’t have more support than I’ve had here, but now we have new people taking over and it’s important I talk to the American owners.

 

“I have spoken to them once, when they first came to the club, but now I would like to see them again as soon as possible and talk about the future.

 

“As I’ve said before, I don’t just want to talk about money to spend on players, I would like to hear about the plans which will improve the club.

 

“We need to do things which not only help for one or two years, but will help the club for the next 100 years.”

Edited March 15, 2007 by honourablegeorge

[Rory Fitzgerald]

I suppose the first meeting was a meet and greet with the lots of pleasantries. The next step is to hear a plan now that the new guys are making their own grooves in the boardroom seats after 2 months.

 

If nothing had been said in the press you still expect the manager to meet with the new owners to flesh out the 'press quips' they made in January.

 

I dont think there is anything in this

[RP]

  Rory Fitzgerald said:

The next step is to hear a plan now that the new guys are making their own grooves in the boardroom seats after 2 months.

 

 

 

Two days more like.

[jimmylibel]

  DanielS said:

That site (Guardian Unlimited Football) has absolutely nothing nice to say about anybody or anything. Every club are crap, every manager is leaving and every players is a gak-nosed w*****. Amazing how down they are on everything.

 

Fifield is usually a lot better though, a lot more measured. From what I've read from him in the past I think he's one of the British journalists who is closer to Rafa. He generally seems to tow Rafa's line and he's clearly been briefed by Rafa in the past with regards to transfer targets, etc.

[Knox_Harrington]

  DanielS said:

That site (Guardian Unlimited Football) has absolutely nothing nice to say about anybody or anything. Every club are crap, every manager is leaving and every players is a gak-nosed w*****. Amazing how down they are on everything.

Fifield likes us and is one of the better journalists. Others there like us, McCarra for one. However taken as a whole that website, especially its online writers (except for those who write about foreign football) are scandalous, ignorant t***s.

  Budo said:

What is the point of this post? It's just regurgated lazy journalism.

Not everyone in the country reads the Echo in print or online. Yet again, we are the internet geeks, not the real people.

[jimmylibel]

  Budo said:

What is the point of this post? It's just regurgated lazy journalism.

 

Hadn't seen anything about this before I posted it. I found it of interest, thought some of the other people on the forum would too.

[fred milne]

  Knox_Harrington said:

Fifield likes us and is one of the better journalists. Others there like us, McCarra for one. However taken as a whole that website, especially its online writers (except for those who write about foreign football) are scandalous, ignorant t***s.

Its usually Daniel Taylor (their Manchester correspondent?) who comes out with the more negative stuff on us.

 

There's also that fellow (Paul Doyle?) who seems to have a major problem with Ged.

[Knox_Harrington]

  fred milne said:

Its usually Daniel Taylor (their Manchester correspondent?) who comes out with the more negative stuff on us.

 

There's also that fellow (Paul Doyle?) who seems to have a major problem with Ged.

Paul Doyle's a real prick. Hates Houllier and wrote an astonishing article after the 6-3 that us singing YNWA at the end of the game was counter-productive and that we'd be better if we'd boo. Rob Smyth supports United openly.

 

Daniel Taylor does do United and seems to cover for Fifield. He likes to put the boot in. There was nothing wrong with the Conn article - the best journalist about what goes on behind football in the country - yesterday.

[Stevie H]

  fred milne said:

Its usually Daniel Taylor (their Manchester correspondent?) who comes out with the more negative stuff on us.

 

There's also that fellow (Paul Doyle?) who seems to have a major problem with Ged.

yes, daniel taylor is very anti-liverpool and paul doyle's just a weirdo. fifield and mccarra are normally pretty reasonable.

[jimmylibel]

  fred milne said:

Its usually Daniel Taylor (their Manchester correspondent?) who comes out with the more negative stuff on us.

 

There's also that fellow (Paul Doyle?) who seems to have a major problem with Ged.

 

All the online crew seem to - they can't wait to stick the boot into him at any opportunity.

[Knox_Harrington]

  Steve H said:

yes, daniel taylor is very anti-liverpool and paul doyle's just a weirdo.

I have an instinct that Paul Doyle is a red who doesn't care that much. I think it takes a Liverpool supporter to hate Houllier that much.

[jimmylibel]

  Knox_Harrington said:

There was nothing wrong with the Conn article - the best journalist about what goes on behind football in the country - yesterday.

 

Disagree - there was a completely negative spin put on it when he had very little evidence to suggest that we would be taking on the debt - by de facto means or not. Read through some of the other language he used... the line (I'm paraphrasing) about Hicks and Gillette not being the sugar daddies they are being made out be was completely unnecessary, as were a few other of his quips.

[Knox_Harrington]

  jimmylibel said:

Disagree - there was a completely negative spin put on it when he had very little evidence to suggest that we would be taking on the debt - by de facto means or not. Read through some of the other language he used... the line (I'm paraphrasing) about Hicks and Gillette not being the sugar daddies they are being made out be was completely unnecessary, as were a few other of his quips.

I think it's a negative spin if you start from the fyds position.

[jimmylibel]

  Knox_Harrington said:

I think it's a negative spin if you start from the fyds position.

 

"The American businessmen Thomas O Hicks and George Gillett Jr have acquired control of the great football club they still bite their tongues not to call a franchise."

 

&

 

"The document contains a standard assurance that Hicks and Gillett "will not depend to any significant extent on the business of Liverpool" to pay the interest, but the club could still be expected to service that debt. One professional close to the deal said the club could make regular payments towards the interest or pay Hicks and Gillett "a big dividend" at the end of the year to finance the borrowing. Rick Parry, Liverpool's chief executive, said it was "too early" to say how the financial arrangements would be worked out."

 

Just two quick examples but that's negative spin. If you're sticking to the facts there's no need to colour the article with any of this.

 

Thought you were more or less in agreement when I was making this point yesterday.

[crisps]

  HK said:

very unlike Benitez to talk through the press...

 

 

and very unlike benitez to be thinking about the next 100 years rather than aston villa!

Edited March 15, 2007 by crisps

[Bailo]

Can't see how those quotes can be taken as anything other than positive. Rafa's planning for the future. If he's off to madrid in 2 years time, why would he care about off-the-pitch activities?

[Alonso]

  Superdjibril said:

Can't see how those quotes can be taken as anything other than positive. Rafa's planning for the future. If he's off to madrid in 2 years time, why would he care about off-the-pitch activities?

Because he has an affinity with the club and when he leaves he doesn't want it to be left in a shambles but with solid foundations for the future?

[Leo No.8]

The latest bit of big news here then - Rafa wants to talk to the new owners of the club to make some plans. This following on from the bombshell that the new owners have borrowed money to buy the club.

 

And from the same newsdesks, this just in hot off the press - Pope is Catholic.