Benitez .... prick

Dave Sutton's barnet · Post by **Dave Sutton's barnet** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 8:30 pm

The constructive dismissal idea was apparently floated in a few papers this morning, which may be why I received an email from a motormouth lawyer who's always trying to get his face in the media on football law

bobo the clown · Post by **bobo the clown** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:45 pm

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:The constructive dismissal idea was apparently floated in a few papers this morning, which may be why I received an email from a motormouth lawyer who's always trying to get his face in the media on football law

Then the motor-mouth lawyer is an idiot.

I do this for a living & could claim 1,000's of Liver Birds on the side of my Spitfire (plus a good few hundred Smoggies & hundreds of random ones from all over the place.

Though he could (if he resigns), thechnically, claim Constructive Dismissal, in reality that is a ridiculous concept in this case.

If Benitez wanted to go through months of process & eventually win approx. £3,500 then he could, but your lawyer guy should understand the reality of this option.

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:38 am

My sources are telling me that Liverpool will be taken over by the Arabs, perhaps as early as next week. The Americans are not long for this world.

Worthy4England · Post by **Worthy4England** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:48 am

blurred wrote:My sources are telling me that Liverpool will be taken over by the Arabs, perhaps as early as next week. The Americans are not long for this world.

....Think I did mention somewhere previous in the thread....was reported on SSN last week, when they broke the Hicks/Klinsmann story.

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:59 am

Worthy4England wrote:....Think I did mention somewhere previous in the thread....was reported on SSN last week, when they broke the Hicks/Klinsmann story.

It had been widely reported that they wanted to buy 10-20% interest in the club in the autumn, but that G&H overvalued the club and so they didn't chip in at the time.

Allegedly there's been some behind the scenes pressure from Liverpool on the Royal Bank of Scotland to not give the lending facility to G&H, which would either require them to chip in from their vast fortune, or sell up. The latter is the preferred option of most involved.

We shall see what comes out in the next few days, but I'd be happy if they f*cked off.

bobo the clown · Post by **bobo the clown** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:22 am

They should sack Benitez before they go !

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:58 am

It appears the Echo have the same sources that I do...

Dubai to make Liverpool FC bid

Jan 17 2008 by Tony Barrett, Liverpool Echo

DUBAI International Capital is ready to make an offer for Tom Hicks’s stake in Liverpool FC. The ECHO understands senior executives at the Dubai-based international investment company were given the go-ahead by Sheikh Mohammed Al Maktoum to launch a second bid to buy into Liverpool in a year.

An offer has been agreed in principle.

A source close to DIC today told the ECHO the bid would be for a half share in the club with the Arab consortium willing to enter into a dual ownership deal with George Gillett. He said: “It is a very delicate situation but DIC has reignited its interest in Liverpool Football Club.

“The terms of the offer, which will be made to Tom Hicks, have been agreed and DIC are hopeful they will be finally be able to invest in Liverpool. The offer is now being written up and it should be only a matter of time before it is delivered to Hicks.”

Co-owners Hicks and Gillett are edging closer to clinching a refinancing deal. But DIC are hoping to make a move before any deal is completed. Hicks and Gillet enjoyed a honeymoon period after their acquisition of the Reds.

But recent revelations they talked to Jurgen Klinsmann about the possibility of replacing the hugely popular Rafa Benitez as manager have led to them falling out of favour with the Liverpool fans. While the financial restructuring deal, which would give them the necessary collateral to fund the building of the long-awaited new stadium, remains incomplete, DIC believe a window of opportunity still remains open to them.

Whether Hicks is willing to sell is another matter entirely. The Dallas-based multi-millionaire is on record saying he is not interested in selling his stake, even though there are tensions between himself and Gillett about the proposed refinancing deal.

In a recent interview with the ECHO Hicks said: “I just want to clear up with you that I am not selling any of my shares to anybody. I have no idea why anyone would think that. It was just rubbish.”

But with Sheikh Mohammed, one of the world’s richest men, now back on the scene Hicks looks likely to face some tough decisions in the days to come. On the one hand a deal with DIC could present him with a sizeable return on his initial investment and an opportunity to walk away from the dual problems of securing the necessary loans to service their own debt, fund the new stadium and winning the fans over all over again.

But, on the other, there may be a reluctance to part with an asset which he fought so hard to acquire, one which he firmly believes can pay dividends in the long term. Hicks insists financial restructuring could be complete within days, and if he is proven right it will make an immediate offer from DIC less likely.

The American pair have six weeks to secure a £350m loan that would refinance their original purchase of the club. Hicks recently told the ECHO he hopes a deal can be signed off with the Royal Bank of Scotland and the US investment bank Wachovia by the middle of next week.

If, as expected, DIC follow up their interest with a firm bid the ownership of Liverpool FC could change for the second time in a year.

Club officials said today: “We do not comment on speculation.”

Would suit me to get rid of Hicks - Gillet has remained interestingly silent through all this, and it's Hicks making all the noise.

boltonboris · Post by **boltonboris** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:13 pm

blurred wrote:
Worthy4England wrote:....Think I did mention somewhere previous in the thread....was reported on SSN last week, when they broke the Hicks/Klinsmann story.
It had been widely reported that they wanted to buy 10-20% interest in the club in the autumn, but that G&H overvalued the club and so they didn't chip in at the time.

Allegedly there's been some behind the scenes pressure from Liverpool on the Royal Bank of Scotland to not give the lending facility to G&H, which would either require them to chip in from their vast fortune, or sell up. The latter is the preferred option of most involved.

We shall see what comes out in the next few days, but I'd be happy if they f*cked off.

Why? They've smashed your transfer record and brought in a top class striker, they've broken your transfer record for a defender. or is it because of the way they've treated that manager who's won those vast amounts of trophies since he's been there?

BWFC_Insane · Post by **BWFC_Insane** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:15 pm

I think Liverpool should keep the manager but give him Boltons budget to work on.

Surely thats the fairest way?

Worthy4England · Post by **Worthy4England** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:17 pm

boltonboris wrote:
blurred wrote:
Worthy4England wrote:....Think I did mention somewhere previous in the thread....was reported on SSN last week, when they broke the Hicks/Klinsmann story.
It had been widely reported that they wanted to buy 10-20% interest in the club in the autumn, but that G&H overvalued the club and so they didn't chip in at the time.

Allegedly there's been some behind the scenes pressure from Liverpool on the Royal Bank of Scotland to not give the lending facility to G&H, which would either require them to chip in from their vast fortune, or sell up. The latter is the preferred option of most involved.

We shall see what comes out in the next few days, but I'd be happy if they f*cked off.
Why? They've smashed your transfer record and brought in a top class striker, they've broken your transfer record for a defender. or is it because of the way they've treated that manager who's won those vast amounts of trophies since he's been there?

Aye, and changing the asylum owner, isn't going to change the loonies inside it...

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:21 pm

boltonboris wrote:Why? They've smashed your transfer record and brought in a top class striker, they've broken your transfer record for a defender. or is it because of the way they've treated that manager who's won those vast amounts of trophies since he's been there?

It's the way they do things, pretty much. The mucking around with the stadium, the public undermining of the manager, the ridiculous 'communication problems' which I really don't understand...

And your 'smashing transfer records' is one way of looking at things, and sounds good actually when you put it like that, but it's just as easy to put a different slant on it.

For instance (taking Torres), we offloaded two strikers (Bellamy and Cissé), and effectively gave Atletico Luis Garcia in part exchange, although they bought him off us rather than having it in a swap deal, so we know the monetary value. The actual outlay on Torres is about £6m. They've not 'broken the bank' by any means, we're spending as much as we did before they came to us.

boltonboris · Post by **boltonboris** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:34 pm

blurred wrote:
boltonboris wrote:Why? They've smashed your transfer record and brought in a top class striker, they've broken your transfer record for a defender. or is it because of the way they've treated that manager who's won those vast amounts of trophies since he's been there?
It's the way they do things, pretty much. The mucking around with the stadium, the public undermining of the manager, the ridiculous 'communication problems' which I really don't understand...

And your 'smashing transfer records' is one way of looking at things, and sounds good actually when you put it like that, but it's just as easy to put a different slant on it.

For instance (taking Torres), we offloaded two strikers (Bellamy and Cissé), and effectively gave Atletico Luis Garcia in part exchange, although they bought him off us rather than having it in a swap deal, so we know the monetary value. The actual outlay on Torres is about £6m. They've not 'broken the bank' by any means, we're spending as much as we did before they came to us.

Your finishing paragraph, is a point well taken, but I still don't see you think they are being unreasonable with Benitez, who if at another club, could arguably have been sacked by now - Fair enough the way they have gona about it is shocking, shoddy, unprofessional and pretty embarrasing (any more negative superlatives?) but they kind of have a right to want him out..

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:06 pm

boltonboris wrote:Your finishing paragraph, is a point well taken, but I still don't see you think they are being unreasonable with Benitez, who if at another club, could arguably have been sacked by now - Fair enough the way they have gona about it is shocking, shoddy, unprofessional and pretty embarrasing (any more negative superlatives?) but they kind of have a right to want him out..

Unless you're referring to the comments he's made to the media about the owners, I doubt that any other club would be daft enough to sack a manager who'd taken them to the Champions League final twice in his first three seasons, unless the owners knew absolutely nothing about footb... Oh.

boltonboris · Post by **boltonboris** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:42 pm

blurred wrote:
boltonboris wrote:Your finishing paragraph, is a point well taken, but I still don't see you think they are being unreasonable with Benitez, who if at another club, could arguably have been sacked by now - Fair enough the way they have gona about it is shocking, shoddy, unprofessional and pretty embarrasing (any more negative superlatives?) but they kind of have a right to want him out..
Unless you're referring to the comments he's made to the media about the owners, I doubt that any other club would be daft enough to sack a manager who'd taken them to the Champions League final twice in his first three seasons, unless the owners knew absolutely nothing about footb... Oh.

I was referring to his form football wise and also the media comments

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:57 pm

boltonboris wrote:I was referring to his form football wise and also the media comments

His form footballwise? Yeah, we hate managers who get us to 4 finals in 3 seasons. Terrible stuff. Sack him now, I say...

boltonboris · Post by **boltonboris** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:53 pm

blurred wrote:
boltonboris wrote:I was referring to his form football wise and also the media comments
His form footballwise? Yeah, we hate managers who get us to 4 finals in 3 seasons. Terrible stuff. Sack him now, I say...

You haven't improved in 3 seasons, your competition has.. 1 FA cup (I could be wrong) and a Champions League trophy (Great success - In Borat's words) would have most fans creaming one off, but (Cliché alert) the premiership is your bread and butter, he's looked nowehere near getting that and I honestly don't think he EVER will, despite his financial backing - which you have already disputed

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:11 pm

boltonboris wrote:You haven't improved in 3 seasons, your competition has.. 1 FA cup (I could be wrong) and a Champions League trophy (Great success - In Borat's words) would have most fans creaming one off, but (Cliché alert) the premiership is your bread and butter, he's looked nowehere near getting that and I honestly don't think he EVER will, despite his financial backing - which you have already disputed

Yep, 1 FA Cup and 1 Champions League. I think it's obviously a matter of personal opinion as to whether you believe we've improved, or are going to get nearer to winning the league under Rafa, but we had our best start under him this year, and he's constantly improving the squad, as well as overhauling the youth set-up. I think he's more than deserved patience from the owners/board, and deserves a couple of years further to see if he can get to grips with things in a domestic sense. This is a man who managed to twice win La Liga up against the likes of Barca and Real, too, so he has got the talent to do it. I'm personally happy with him, and most of his decisions.

Abdoulaye's Twin · Post by **Abdoulaye's Twin** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:14 pm

getting rid now would only make Pool be that little closer to Newcastle in terms of sillyness. Not that I'm saying Pool are anything like Newcastle

Bruce Rioja · Post by **Bruce Rioja** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:16 pm

What are your thoughts, or indeed the general thoughts down your way regarding the reported interest from the Saudi Arabians, Blurred?

Dave Sutton's barnet · Post by **Dave Sutton's barnet** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:21 pm

bobo the clown wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:The constructive dismissal idea was apparently floated in a few papers this morning, which may be why I received an email from a motormouth lawyer who's always trying to get his face in the media on football law
Then the motor-mouth lawyer is an idiot.

I do this for a living & could claim 1,000's of Liver Birds on the side of my Spitfire (plus a good few hundred Smoggies & hundreds of random ones from all over the place.

Though he could (if he resigns), thechnically, claim Constructive Dismissal, in reality that is a ridiculous concept in this case.

If Benitez wanted to go through months of process & eventually win approx. £3,500 then he could, but your lawyer guy should understand the reality of this option.

Fair enough, I'll tell him

Don't like the guy anyway, he send emails in 24-point bold

Connect with your social network account

Benitez .... prick

Who is online