7 Days after THAT press conference: Reputations

[Lou]

So who has enhanced their reputations in the last 7 days and who has lost out?

 

Winners:

 

Our fans - a great show of red strength on Wednesday and done in the usual classy manner

Rafa - albeit that he shouldn't have gone public with this because it's not the Liverpool way

The players - kept their heads down and turned in a couple of great results

 

Neutral:

 

Parry - where has he been? Hopefully he's been trying to smooth things over quietly out of the gaze of the media.

Liverpool Football Club - not the greatest week in the history of Liverpool FC but everyone really pulled together on Wednesday night

 

 

Negative

 

Gillett - not sure about this one (maybe a neutral) Most of the negative soundbites appear to have been coming from the Hicks camp. But why wasn't he around for such a big European game?

Hick - his image has taken a serious nosedive amongst the fans and, like Gillett, where was he on Wednesday?

Bascombe - does he really have any genuine inside info any more or did he lose that before he fell out with GH. The story of Rafa being replaced by Jose didn't even make sense (getting rid of one manager for mouthing off and replacing him with the ultimate gob on legs)

[TheLa]

I'd move Gillett to neutral (To be fair to him, he's said and done nothing) and Parry to negative (Because he's said and done nothing).

[fyds]

Enhanced : Rafa with the fans, probably with the players.

Molby, as despite everything, he actually hasn't imploded or shot anyone yet, let alone sacked Ant

 

Neutral : Parry - though the Echo says he sorted it out with Rafa ahead of the Porto game. had he done this in public, wrapped in a Liverbird flag with a spotlight illuminating his afro, he could be in the 'enhanced' category - and some posters would choke on their own tongue.

George Gillett - we don't really know what part he may have had in any of this, as few real facts were available.

 

Negative : Tom Hicks so far as the fans go. Didn't handle his end all that well to say the least, but that may be a culture clash issue as much as anything. Rafa with some journo's (Brian Reade notably) and some ex-players who thought he should have not done that now infamous PC in the manner he chose. They still all wanted him as manager though.

[Tones]

I think the fact that Rick Parry has decided not to go public in all this is a good thing. We havent done things in the media before and im glad he has decided not to again.

[fyds]

I'd move Gillett to neutral (To be fair to him, he's said and done nothing) and Parry to negative (Because he's said and done nothing).

Thing is. Parry has said things in a meeting with Rafa that seems to have calmed things down, though as this meeting was not public or the minutes printed, we don't know what that entailed exactly, though some seem to think it must have been terrible or never happened and Parry is a total one and probably killed Baby Jesus.

 

Gillett - I agree, except we don't know what he has said and done, but he doesn't seem to have been fueling the fire so gets the benefit of the doubt as at least a possible peacemaker.

[fyds]

I think the fact that Rick Parry has decided not to go public in all this is a good thing. We havent done things in the media before and im glad he has decided not to again.

Couldn't agree more. People can't complain about not being done in 'The Liverpool way' and then complain when it finally is.

 

Given the passion and fiery character of one Mr Bill Shankly, does anyone seriously think that in nearly 15years in charge he didn't have a run-in with the board about similar issues or more? Thing is, if we did - we didn't get to hear about them.

Edited November 30, 2007 by fyds

[Kahnee]

What press conference?

[fyds]

What press conference?

I enjoyed it, anyway!

[RP]

Winners

 

Us

Rafa

The Team

 

By default that means LFC have been winners

 

 

Neutral

 

Moores

 

 

 

Losers

Parry

Hicks

Gillett

Bascombe

[Benito7]

Winners

 

Us

Rafa

The Team

 

By default that means LFC have been winners

Neutral

 

Moores

Losers

Parry

Hicks

Gillett

Bascombe

 

 

How Bascombe is a loser for breaking the story in the first place I don't know.

[RP]

How Bascombe is a loser for breaking the story in the first place I don't know.

 

 

Mourinho has been named as our new Manager??? I must have missed that.

[TheLa]

How Bascombe is a loser for breaking the story in the first place I don't know.

 

'Cause he's a horrible, sun loving g*******. And there was no evidence to suggest that Rafa was getting sacked and Mourinho was going to replace him. His whole article was typical sensationalist b******s.

[Frosty Jack]

Bascombe wanted to scare the fans into a mass show of support for the manager, to strengthen his position.

[Cunny]

Bascombe's story did say Rafa to be sacked by the end of the season, so he's got time on his side.

Hope to feck he's wrong like.

[sutty]

'Cause he's a horrible, sun loving g*******. And there was no evidence to suggest that Rafa was getting sacked and Mourinho was going to replace him. His whole article was typical sensationalist b******s.

 

 

The NotW is not the rag. It isn't boycotted.

 

I don't read it, but it isn't the s*n and never has been

 

It's s***, but using the emotive reaction to the rag is out of order. You are basically using that as a stick to beat Bascombe with. It is wrong.

[Cunny]

'Cause he's a horrible, sun loving g*******. And there was no evidence to suggest that Rafa was getting sacked and Mourinho was going to replace him. His whole article was typical sensationalist b******s.

 

 

The fact that the owners have not come out and said he's not getting sacked despite issuing two press statements, suggests Bascombe's story cannot be discounted out of hand. The rest of the press (including The Echo, who chose not to run with it) seem to have been briefed the same thing.

 

Are Steven Gerrard and Michael Owen sun loving g******* as well?

[sutty]

The fact that the owners have not come out and said he's not getting sacked despite issuing two press statements, suggests Bascombe's story cannot be discounted out of hand. The rest of the press (including The Echo, who chose not to run with it) seem to have been briefed the same thing.

 

Are Steven Gerrard and Michael Owen sun loving g******* as well?

 

The s*n stuff really gets on my f***ing nerves

[Tones]

I think thats still open to debate (although i have no wish to start that sort of thread). many people, including S*n readers across the country, believe it is the sunday edition of the rag.

 

I wouldnt buy it, read it, or believe anythin in it myself. Doesnt matter who the journalist is.

[sutty]

I think thats still open to debate (although i have no wish to start that sort of thread). many people, including S*n readers across the country, believe it is the sunday edition of the rag.

 

I wouldnt buy it, read it, or believe anythin in it myself. Doesnt matter who the journalist is.

 

But that's not the point

 

If you read the NotW it is your choice. It isn't part of the boycott.

 

Using the s*n argument and the emotions that come with it is plain stupid.

[usualsuspect]

Thing is. Parry has said things in a meeting with Rafa that seems to have calmed things down, though as this meeting was not public or the minutes printed, we don't know what that entailed exactly, though some seem to think it must have been terrible or never happened and Parry is a total one and probably killed Baby Jesus.

 

Gillett - I agree, except we don't know what he has said and done, but he doesn't seem to have been fueling the fire so gets the benefit of the doubt as at least a possible peacemaker.

 

I would like to think any communications (press release) from Hicks were on behalf of the Chairmen so wherever Hicks goes, so should Gillette. Either way Gillette is co-responsible either tacitly or intacitly.

[IgPig]

Its pretty evident there was truth in the Bascombe story - albeit dressed up in the usual NOTW "world exclusive" nonsense.

[Tones]

But that's not the point

 

If you read the NotW it is your choice. It isn't part of the boycott.

 

Using the s*n argument and the emotions that come with it is plain stupid.

 

Well yeah i know what you mean. but because it isnt boycotted doesnt mean its not linked to the s*n.

[sutty]

Well yeah i know what you mean. but because it isnt boycotted doesnt mean its not linked to the s*n.

 

 

It isn't linked though

 

It's perceived to be, but it isn't. No more than sky, or the times etc are anyway.

[Kahnee]

I think thats still open to debate

 

No it isn't

 

many people, including S*n readers across the country, believe it is the sunday edition of the rag.

 

Many people are wrong

[Tones]

Its pretty evident there was truth in the Bascombe story - albeit dressed up in the usual NOTW "world exclusive" nonsense.

 

I think there were an many untruths as there were truths.