Really, you seriously blame Hodgson more than King Kenny for your current predicament.
Poll: Who do you think will/should replace Sir Alex Ferguson?
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
Really, you seriously blame Hodgson more than King Kenny for your current predicament.
I am a little surprised that you are saying that. I think most people who are not Liverpool supporters would place the blame squarely on his shoulders. Had Hodgson spent £100m on sub par players I could understand it but that was where the real damage was done. If you had given Rogers that war chest you would probably have been competing for titles again.
I can't actually think of a single positive that came of Dalglish's reign.
Luis Suarez? Stopping us getting relegated by Hodgson?
Those 'most' people would also be wrong placing the blame squarely on his shoulders. He didn't have us in relegation, Roy Hodgson did.
(This does not take away from the absolute garbage he bought, whether he actually had any say in the price which I doubt he still bought a load of turd compared to what was available.)
Dalglish took the club forward from where Hodgson left us. You could argue that was easy considering how **** Hodgson done though and that Dalglish should have taken us further forward than he did.
The £100m thing is slightly misleading too; I'd question how big a say he had in either the Carroll or Suarez signings considering he had only just got the caretaker job when they were signed. Comolli was very much the driving force in those two deals.
And didn't we win a trophy (and get to another final) under him? Surely that's a positive.
Dalglish made his mistakes and should have done better than he did however he began repairing the damage done to the club, primarily by Hicks & Gillett but later assisted by Hodgson and Purslow.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
http://www.statto.com/football/teams/liverpool/2011-2012/results
Have a little look at both seasons. First half of 2010/11(pull down menu at the top to change season) was very Europe heavy... I can't remember exactly when who got fired/hired and when so take the first half of the season, 19 games, 7 wins, 4 draws, 8 losses, definitely not good. Second half of the season with Dalglish primarily, also with Suarez who for me was by far and away the best player for you at any point of that season, 10 wins, 3 draws, 6 losses. Better, but you also had few cup games as you went out early and not THAT much better either.
So busy first half of the season, worse form, not busy second half better form but its still only 3 wins, and when you have City/Utd/Spurs/Newcastle/Blackburn away (Blackburn were just still hard to beat at home that season and immensely awful away), then you'd actually expect a better second half of a season with less big away games.
So 2011/2012, no Europe, no cups, empty first half of a season and you get 9 wins, 7 draws, 3 losses, too many draws but much fewer losses. Second half, with two long cup runs.... form went to crap, again. 5 wins, 3 draws, 11 losses. Significantly worse, with a significantly stronger squad than Hodgson.
The fact is that Liverpool no matter the manager were going to do worse in a half of a season with about 14 games extra each time. You've already had 4 Euro games.... and your league form under another rated manager is again much much worse. Almost every team I can think of bar literally 3 or 4, tend to suffer in form if they have an extended run in a cup. Fulham, Birmingham went from the team no one could ruddy beat, the draw kings, to relegated, over and over and over again we see a team playing an extra 10 games + lose league form.
I don't think Hodgson did well, but I don't think he did as bad as many make out, and compare similar situations and Dalglish did no better, if not significantly worse considering the squad he had at his disposal. It would have been incredibly unlikely that Liverpools form wouldn't have improved had Hodgson stayed, after going out of the Europa league.
Hodgson's half of the season wasn't so bad that you couldn't still end up higher than you could last year when Dalglish had the whole season, another what 80mil spent, and finished even worse.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2012
- Posts
- 2,960
- Location
- Canberra
Steve Kean please
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2012
- Posts
- 2,960
- Location
- Canberra
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,017
- Location
- Surrey
Now we seem to be discussing Hodgson and KK.
Arsenal have won as many times at Anfield in the league in 2012 as liverpool
No way? Seriously?
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2012
- Posts
- 2,960
- Location
- Canberra
Yeah. I found it hilarious when someone told me. I had to check it and yep, sure is true.
Back to the topic in hand, when do people think the 'old man' will retire?? I remember he was going to retire around 2002 or 2004?? and then decided to change his mind and carry on winning things
lol
Arsenal have won as many times at Anfield in the league in 2012 as liverpool
And Liverpool have won as many trophies in 2012 as Arsenal have in as long as I can remember
How could Dalglish's signings have damaged the squad? The squad and the teams position was better when Dalglish left than when he arrived. As above, the main damage done to Liverpool was done by our previous owners, Hodgson and Purslow later assisted them though.
I'm guessing that it's not a coincidence that Utd fans seem defensive of Hodgson's spell at Liverpool.
when do people think the 'old man' will retire?? I remember he was going to retire around 2002 or 2004?? and then decided to change his mind and carry on winning things
I reckon 2 more years at least (that includes this season). Certainly cant see him calling it a day in the next 12 months
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2012
- Posts
- 2,960
- Location
- Canberra
And Liverpool have won as many trophies in 2012 as Arsenal have in as long as I can remember
touche!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Liverpool finished 7th under Benitez, and then 8th under Dalglish... with a full season and over 100mil spent..... sure Hodgson had a poor record in the first half of the season, but Dalglish spent over 100mil and when he played a half season with 12-14 extra games in the same time period, had a record worse than Hodgson.
It's easy to say look at someones position midseason, but its completely disingenuous, there is almost no team in the world whose league form doesn't improve, under any manager, with less games being played. There is no reason to think Hodgson/Liverpool's form wouldn't be significantly better second half of the season out of Europe, and if Suarez had been bought either way, then he'd still have a proper striker rather than a misfiring/non interested one.
Hell, you could if you really wanted to make the argument than Liverpool survived the "busy" period BETTER under Hodgson and that the reason Liverpool managed 6th that year was because hodgson picked up more points than KK did during the busy spell..... yeah, that is a stretch, but to completely ignore that Liverpool had a MASSIVELY easier second half of the season, no Euro travel, 14 less games and most of the demoralising, away to big team games were in the first half of the season is ridiculous.
Would you expect Arsenal, playing the majority of the top 6 away in the first half of the season to get more or less points in the second half of the season with the top 6 all to play at home, or Utd, City, anyone else.
One of Liverpool fan's biggest mistakes, and one of my biggest problems, is their assumption that Liverpool would have done as well with Hodgson as in the first half of the season OR that Liverpool would have done as well in the first half of the season as with KK in the second half of the season, both are ridiculous notions.
Lets do it with pure numbers(I'm estimating but showing the point), both seasons there was roughly a 5 month period with 19-20 games, and a 5 month period with 32-33 games..... does anyone really expect ANY team to do as well playing 50% more games in the same amount of time, really? Hodgson never had a 5 month spell with around 20 games, ONLY the busy period, KK has two easy spells and one busy spell, his busy period was abysmal, worse than Hodgsons.
Last edited: