Club Statement

[Rip Van We Go Again]

Incompetent?

I don't see it as that.  They've seen AM as the best person for the role as the manager and went about getting him.  Their choice may prove to be the incorrect one but their actions are not those showing incompetency.

Bren.

We've been told time and time again by members of this site that 'we don't need to pay them anything' yet we've now shelled out £3m, despite the fact he walked citing contructive dismissal.

£3m is ludicrous, it's what I would expect us to shell out for a quality Manager under contract elsewhere.

Two things:-
1.  It's what one paper says, so unless they've been tapping phones the accuracy of £3m is debatable at best.
2.  It was also for some of his staff, such as Peter Grant.

I don't care if it was Hugh Grant, Student Grant and the fucking ghost of Cary Grant.
£3m for the standard of McLeish and co. is madness and quite frankly indefensible.

We'll probably find out in time if the £3m figure is correct, but after throwing wads of cash at Houllier to get rid of him, it wouldn't surprise me.

[Merv]

This just gets better and better.

We could have just given Rafa Benitez an extra £3m (or whatever it was but let's assume it was anywhere between £1m and the £5m Blues were demanding) in salary.

[Brend'Watkins]

Incompetent?

I don't see it as that.  They've seen AM as the best person for the role as the manager and went about getting him.  Their choice may prove to be the incorrect one but their actions are not those showing incompetency.

Bren.

We've been told time and time again by members of this site that 'we don't need to pay them anything' yet we've now shelled out £3m, despite the fact he walked citing contructive dismissal.

£3m is ludicrous, it's what I would expect us to shell out for a quality Manager under contract elsewhere.

Two things:-
1.  It's what one paper says, so unless they've been tapping phones the accuracy of £3m is debatable at best.
2.  It was also for some of his staff, such as Peter Grant.

Exactly, 'undisclosed amount' means negotiations took place to an extent that both parties were happy with the outcome. 

AM now has his staff in place and we move on without the need for a potentially  distracting court case.

[Concrete John]

This just gets better and better.

We could have just given Rafa Benitez an extra £3m (or whatever it was but let's assume it was anywhere between £1m and the £5m Blues were demanding) in salary.

The issue with Rafa was the amount of control he wanted and not the wages we would have paid him.

[hilts_coolerking]

Exactly, 'undisclosed amount' means negotiations took place to an extent that both parties were happy with the outcome. 

Does it?  Or could it mean we paid them a lot of money and asked them not to reveal quite how much it was?

[hilts_coolerking]

The issue with Rafa was the amount of control he wanted and not the wages we would have paid him.

Where's that info from?  And I thought one of the things in Randy's favour was that he doesn't interfere with the work of the manager.

[Simon Ward]

The issue with Rafa was the amount of control he wanted and not the wages we would have paid him.

Where's that info from?  And I thought one of the things in Randy's favour was that he doesn't interfere with the work of the manager.

I think that is true but it was control in other areas that worried Randy et al.

[Risso]

The issue with Rafa was the amount of control he wanted and not the wages we would have paid him.

Where's that info from?  And I thought one of the things in Randy's favour was that he doesn't interfere with the work of the manager.

I think that is true but it was control in other areas that worried Randy et al.

Yes, being a demanding bugger and winning the Champions League as a result must be a nightmare for an owner.  Far better to appoint somebody much more manageable with two Premier League relegations to his name.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

This just gets better and better.

We could have just given Rafa Benitez an extra £3m (or whatever it was but let's assume it was anywhere between £1m and the £5m Blues were demanding) in salary.

The issue with Rafa was the amount of control he wanted and not the wages we would have paid him.

Wasn't that sourced from a newspaper?

[Concrete John]

The issue with Rafa was the amount of control he wanted and not the wages we would have paid him.

Where's that info from?  And I thought one of the things in Randy's favour was that he doesn't interfere with the work of the manager.

It was from a few 'ITKs', so in honesty it's accuracy is about as trustworthy as the Telegraph's £3m claim.   

[Chris Smith]

Exactly, 'undisclosed amount' means negotiations took place to an extent that both parties were happy with the outcome. 

Does it?  Or could it mean we paid them a lot of money and asked them not to reveal quite how much it was?

Or not so much money and they asked us to keep quiet?

They're in the same position of having a new manager who wants to bring in his own people but can't until this was resolved.

It's a pointless game trying to speculate when we have nothing to work with.

The alternative to not settling was to have this drag on for months. That would hamper McLeish in his job and I'm sure that whatever we think of the appointment we all want him to have the best possible chance of succeeding. Don't we?

[Brend'Watkins]

Exactly, 'undisclosed amount' means negotiations took place to an extent that both parties were happy with the outcome. 

Does it?  Or could it mean we paid them a lot of money and asked them not to reveal quite how much it was?

You could be right, equally, it could be said that there's a case for constructive dismissal but without going down that road a compromise was made that allowed us to get the staff that AM required.

I'm against giving them anything but it appears we've started to behave like other clubs when we set out to get what we want.  These actions come at a price.

[Concrete John]

Yes, being a demanding bugger and winning the Champions League as a result must be a nightmare for an owner.  Far better to appoint somebody much more manageable with two Premier League relegations to his name.

I know you'll take the anti-board line on most things right now, but in truth he wasn't about to win the CL with us.  My own reading of the situation is that we wanted too much cash for players and control on how and where it was spent.  And haven't we said that the board were complacent for allowing MON to do similar with deals like Harewood and Beye?

It would've all ended in tears, IMO.

[Merv]

The issue with Rafa was the amount of control he wanted and not the wages we would have paid him.

Where's that info from?  And I thought one of the things in Randy's favour was that he doesn't interfere with the work of the manager.

It's brand new exclusive info, introduced into the arena of discussion today.

Actually, my guess would be an element of this with Rafa was true - more along the lines of: 'your budget will be X... (Rafa's face drops).... and we'll be selling Young and Downing sharpish...' At which point, Benitez declared himself out of the running.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

The alternative to not settling was to have this drag on for months.

The alternative was not bothering with him, but that's been done to death I suppose.