37 minutes ago, JM7 said:

I thought Frank agreed with Roman to have a minimum of 2 years?

i dont think it includes finishing out of top 8

finish 5th/6th is terrible but still understandable, but if we finished 9-10th it is a definite sack, it is embarrassing

Willian has produced just two shots on target in his 20 appearances in all competitions for Arsenal this season.

Who was it that wanted Willian back yesterday? Played his heart out for a final fat contract, & has been cruising ever since. You know if he was here Lamps will keep playing because of his experience 

27 minutes ago, RMH said:

I was replying to a specific comment by @Slojo who decided that Klopp is good but Frank not because Klopp delivered a PL and CL within 5 years and Frank hasn’t in one and a half. But this same poster would have never given Klopp the chance at Chelsea because he got a horrid start and he’d be asking for his head as he is doing with Frank now. I was just pointing the incongruence.

We can discuss wether Frank has more or less experience, but let’s not kid ourselves, if Klopp had started at Chelsea as he did at Liverpool, those same posters would have got on his back pretty quickly.

I am sorry but allow me to disagree with you on this. I am not trying to be a prick here, but this take of claiming who would have asked for Klopp's head and who wouldn't is extremely stupid, to say the least. There is literally no room for comparison between Frank and Klopp and I dont know who first started this trend. 

When Klopp first arrived at Liverpool, his starters were the likes of Mignolet, Lovren, Skrtel, Joe Allen, Lallana, Benteke, etc. The only world class player he had at the time was Coutinho and, arguably, Sturridge and Firmino just being brought in. No one, not even the mightiest glory hunters in our fan base would have been calling for the axe on any manager if they had to count on Marko Marin, Piazon, Lewis Baker, Baba Rahman, Begovic and Pato as our starters with only Hazard being the star player now would they? I am not denying Klopp's management or qualities as a coach but he got a serious financial backing on the market to get they are now. Its not like he just cast Avada Kedavra and won the PL and UCL, right? But if we are to take the comparison approach, the moment Klopp got the players he wanted, his team started performing and only bad luck prevented him from having 2 UCLs, 2 PLs and an Europa League.

The point I am trying to make here is that comparing a proven manager with an inexperienced one is idiotic to say the least and there is no way we can tell whether people would be calling for his head or they would have been pro on backing him. I still think that if we backed Conte the following his championship season and got him some of the players he wanted rather than Danny D and Zappa, he would have taken us some places high. 

1 hour ago, RMH said:

I was replying to a specific comment by @Slojo who decided that Klopp is good but Frank not because Klopp delivered a PL and CL within 5 years and Frank hasn’t in one and a half. But this same poster would have never given Klopp the chance at Chelsea because he got a horrid start and he’d be asking for his head as he is doing with Frank now. I was just pointing the incongruence.

We can discuss wether Frank has more or less experience, but let’s not kid ourselves, if Klopp had started at Chelsea as he did at Liverpool, those same posters would have got on his back pretty quickly.

"because Klopp delivered a PL and CL within 5 years" 

He also got into a CL final with Dortmund, built an amazing team there despite losing his best players to Bayern, won 2 German Cups and 2 Bundesligas. He was already considered a very underrated and top manager before he got the Liverpool job. Another point many people seem to keep missing but it doesn't stop them making the same silly comparisons. 

Did Klopp come from Derby after just a year in management and got the Liverpool job? No. If Lampard had the CV Klopp had before he came here, yes, I and many others wouldn't be so hard on him. When you come here with little experience it's hard to back yourself up when sh*t hits the fan, why is that so difficult to grasp for people on here? 

23 minutes ago, Hensi said:

I am sorry but allow me to disagree with you on this. I am not trying to be a prick here, but this take of claiming who would have asked for Klopp's head and who wouldn't is extremely stupid, to say the least. There is literally no room for comparison between Frank and Klopp and I dont know who first started this trend. 

When Klopp first arrived at Liverpool, his starters were the likes of Mignolet, Lovren, Skrtel, Joe Allen, Lallana, Benteke, etc. The only world class player he had at the time was Coutinho and, arguably, Sturridge and Firmino just being brought in. No one, not even the mightiest glory hunters in our fan base would have been calling for the axe on any manager if they had to count on Marko Marin, Piazon, Lewis Baker, Baba Rahman, Begovic and Pato as our starters with only Hazard being the star player now would they? I am not denying Klopp's management or qualities as a coach but he got a serious financial backing on the market to get they are now. Its not like he just cast Avada Kedavra and won the PL and UCL, right? But if we are to take the comparison approach, the moment Klopp got the players he wanted, his team started performing and only bad luck prevented him from having 2 UCLs, 2 PLs and an Europa League.

The point I am trying to make here is that comparing a proven manager with an inexperienced one is idiotic to say the least and there is no way we can tell whether people would be calling for his head or they would have been pro on backing him. I still think that if we backed Conte the following his championship season and got him some of the players he wanted rather than Danny D and Zappa, he would have taken us some places high. 

It isn't an argument about who has had it harder. It's an argument about experience and achievements. Klopp already had that before he came to Liverpool, Lampard is untested and very new to the job. That's ultimately what makes the comparisons stupid. 

So you can't really start with these mental gymnastics that somehow Chelsea supporters would be calling for Klopps head if it was the same position, people would instead be saying "Guys, look at what he did at Dortmund, it took some years but he got players through the ranks and he was winning things, just give him time", what can we say for Lampard? Nothing, that's the point. People will take that as me insulting Frank but I'm not, I'm just stating a fact, he is very new to this job. 

1 hour ago, RMH said:

And yet you would have asked for his head within the first 6 months if he’d come to us instead of Pool and got the same results he did in his first season with the scum, as you’re doing with Frank. Who’s to tell that Frank will not deliver the big ears within 5 years if you guys are not even willing to give him one season after a month of bad play?

Uhm how about his lack of experience and no resume? Considering I backed all our previous managers to stay, you're talking out of your ass if you think I would treat every other manager this way. 

@Slojo I completely agree with you on your point about Klopp, he had a body of achievement behind him which offers him benefit of doubt when things go south.

The point a lot of people backing Frank are making is that if a Club legend like Frank cannot be afforded an opportunity to turn things around following a rough 6 week period then who else are we likely to back whether it's Klopp or anyone else. You as a fan might back someone like Klopp if he was going through a rough phase but a number of our fans will not back our Managers and will ask for change. 

This is mainly due to our history with Managers, our fans have been programmed to believe that a Manager change can equate to success and its a difficult mentality to shake due to how our past changes have reaped rewards. 

2 minutes ago, Slojo said:

It isn't an argument about who has had it harder. It's an argument about experience and achievements. Klopp already had that before he came to Liverpool, Lampard is untested and very new to the job. That's ultimately what makes the comparisons stupid. 

So you can't really start with these mental gymnastics that somehow Chelsea supporters would be calling for Klopps head if it was the same position, people would instead be saying "Guys, look at what he did at Dortmund, it took some years but he got players through the ranks and he was winning things, just give him time", what can we say for Lampard? Nothing, that's the point. People will take that as me insulting Frank but I'm not, I'm just stating a fact, he is very new to this job. 

There had been managers that started in a bigger team and that still delivered, specially in the most recent football history.

Klopp isn't one of them but Zidane, Pep, S.Inzaghi are good examples. Conte also started in a few lower league teams and after he managed to secure a promotion in one of them he took over Juventus, that is similar to Lampard because Lampard was very close to secure a promotion for Derby.

But even Klopp started as a manager in his own club Mainz, the fact that the club is simply smaller than Chelsea isn't something that he could choose, he had first a good run and then a bad run as they were relegated so he took over Dortmund and the fact remains that it took him several years to challenge Bayern for the title.

Conte is one of the very few that could simply turn a club into a title winning one so fast, Ancelotti for example did well in Parma one season but then worse in another and got sacked, then failed to win with Juventus and got sacked again but won the CL with AC Milan against Juventus and he was finishing second in the league while the calciopoli was happening and while someone as influential as Berlusconi was against him he was still able to do his job, a good manager is a good manager regardless of the circumstances.

You would think that it's infair to compare someone with more experience than Lampard if you look at the big picture. Is Lampard doing worse than the managers that also started recently loke Pirlo, Areteta or Olle? Not really.

Lets not compare apples and oranges, experience often means better results, if Klopp wasnt a decent manager he wouldn't have had the experience.

 

football.London has a different perspective on Frank and Abramovitch.

it's written by StamfordChidge , a CFCUK contributer

1 hour ago, Slojo said:

"because Klopp delivered a PL and CL within 5 years" 

He also got into a CL final with Dortmund, built an amazing team there despite losing his best players to Bayern, won 2 German Cups and 2 Bundesligas. He was already considered a very underrated and top manager before he got the Liverpool job. Another point many people seem to keep missing but it doesn't stop them making the same silly comparisons. 

Did Klopp come from Derby after just a year in management and got the Liverpool job? No. If Lampard had the CV Klopp had before he came here, yes, I and many others wouldn't be so hard on him. When you come here with little experience it's hard to back yourself up when sh*t hits the fan, why is that so difficult to grasp for people on here? 

You're harder on Frank because he doesn't have the experience or CV  that Klopp had on  joining Liverpool ?

 

44 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

You would think that it's infair to compare someone with more experience than Lampard if you look at the big picture. Is Lampard doing worse than the managers that also started recently loke Pirlo, Areteta or Olle? Not really.

 

Well, I wouldn't want any of those 3 to be our manager. Chelsea is a top club with certain standards. There isn't a lot of time for a relative novice to learn on the job. If you don't deliver, you're out. And Lampard knew that going in. And he definetley knew he was under a lot of pressure to do well after our summer spending spree. 

Also in order ro get more time even if results are bad, he would need to show something else that suggests he's up to the job. With the way we're playing you can't even say that he's trying to instill a system that's going to be successful in the future.

Yes, he did reasonably well last season but he was also helped by the fact that our opposition was even worse than us. When was the last time 66 points were enough for top 4? 

I love Lamps and I would have loved for this to work out, but as of now I don't believe he's up to the job (yet). Maybe he can go and coach elsewhere, develop his ideas and then come back at another time.

1 hour ago, Gol15 said:

There had been managers that started in a bigger team and that still delivered, specially in the most recent football history.

Klopp isn't one of them but Zidane, Pep, S.Inzaghi are good examples. Conte also started in a few lower league teams and after he managed to secure a promotion in one of them he took over Juventus, that is similar to Lampard because Lampard was very close to secure a promotion for Derby.

But even Klopp started as a manager in his own club Mainz, the fact that the club is simply smaller than Chelsea isn't something that he could choose, he had first a good run and then a bad run as they were relegated so he took over Dortmund and the fact remains that it took him several years to challenge Bayern for the title.

Conte is one of the very few that could simply turn a club into a title winning one so fast, Ancelotti for example did well in Parma one season but then worse in another and got sacked, then failed to win with Juventus and got sacked again but won the CL with AC Milan against Juventus and he was finishing second in the league while the calciopoli was happening and while someone as influential as Berlusconi was against him he was still able to do his job, a good manager is a good manager regardless of the circumstances.

You would think that it's infair to compare someone with more experience than Lampard if you look at the big picture. Is Lampard doing worse than the managers that also started recently loke Pirlo, Areteta or Olle? Not really.

Lets not compare apples and oranges, experience often means better results, if Klopp wasnt a decent manager he wouldn't have had the experience.

 

You've missed my point. I've not denied that managers can have success at their first club. Everyone has to start from somewhere, but like I said before, top level is rarely a job where you learn your trade. Most of the time it doesn't translate into success. It's very rare you get your Pep's and Simeone's. 

But a manager with limited achievements and experience is going to have more doubters, and that's perfectly reasonable. If you have more experience and achivements to your name you can provide more evidence that you can turn this around and win things. 

Edited January 23, 20215 yr by Slojo

3 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

You're harder on Frank because he doesn't have the experience or CV  that Klopp had on  joining Liverpool ?

 

Of course you're going to be harder on a Person who hasn't shown he has the capacities to be an elite manager than on a person who has proven that he can take a football club to the highest level. That's simple logic.

Edited January 23, 20215 yr by True Blue23

3 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

You're harder on Frank because he doesn't have the experience or CV  that Klopp had on  joining Liverpool ?

 

I have more doubts about a manager who has limited experience and no managerial acheivements (silveware). Is that unreasonable? The reason why the Klopp comparisons don't work is because before he went to Liverpool he was already highly rated due to his CV. 

1 hour ago, Slojo said:

"because Klopp delivered a PL and CL within 5 years" 

He also got into a CL final with Dortmund, built an amazing team there despite losing his best players to Bayern, won 2 German Cups and 2 Bundesligas. He was already considered a very underrated and top manager before he got the Liverpool job. Another point many people seem to keep missing but it doesn't stop them making the same silly comparisons. 

Did Klopp come from Derby after just a year in management and got the Liverpool job? No. If Lampard had the CV Klopp had before he came here, yes, I and many others wouldn't be so hard on him. When you come here with little experience it's hard to back yourself up when sh*t hits the fan, why is that so difficult to grasp for people on here? 

What we see on the pitch is more important than previous track record in my opinion (what did BVB have to go on when Klopp started slow there?), we had a world cup winning manager in 2008 but it was clear by Christmas he simply wasn't cutting it.

2 minutes ago, Argo said:

What we see on the pitch is more important than previous track record in my opinion (what did BVB have to go on when Klopp started slow there?), we had a world cup winning manager in 2008 but it was clear by Christmas he simply wasn't cutting it.

And what have you seen on the pitch that makes you believe Lamps is capable of turning this around?

Edited January 23, 20215 yr by True Blue23

3 minutes ago, True Blue23 said:

Well, I wouldn't want any of those 3 to be our manager. Chelsea is a top club with certain standards. There isn't a lot of time for a relative novice to learn on the job. If you don't deliver, you're out. And Lampard knew that going in. And he definetley knew he was under a lot of pressure to do well after our summer spending spree. 

Also in order ro get more time even if results are bad, he would need to show something else that suggests he's up to the job. With the way we're playing you can't even say that he's trying to instill a system that's going to be successful in the future.

Yes, he did reasonably well last season but he was also helped by the fact that our opposition was even worse than us. When was the last time 66 points were enough for top 4? 

I love Lamps and I would have loved for this to work out, but as of now I don't believe he's up to the job (yet). Maybe he can go and coach elsewhere, develop his ideas and then come back at another time.

I agree that he must deliver but the question is then why wouldn't he have the chance to do it till the season finishes?

Just now, Argo said:

What we see on the pitch is more important than previous track record in my opinion (what did BVB have to go on when Klopp started slow there?), we had a world cup winning manager in 2008 but it was clear by Christmas he simply wasn't cutting it.

Of course, but a track record also means something. The reason why I put a lot of faith in managers like Mourinho, Ancelotti and Conte to turn things around is because I already knew they had success elsewhere before they came here. Mourinho did wonders here, Inter and Madrid, why wouldn't I believe he could've taken us back to title contenders in his 4th season? I'm not saying he would've done, but I did believe he could get us out of it. With Lampard I can't belive that because I've not seen him do it, and it doesn't help when we're not playing well and the performances look like absolute dross. 

If you've got no CV to fall back on, you're going to get judged more harshly, and it definitely doesn't help when the results aren't coming in. 

2 hours ago, Argo said:

Klopp is a mere one point down on Lampard in his first 38 league games (65 to 66) and got to two finals to Frank's one. Klopp also inherited a weaker squad. 

So Lampard did actually have a similar "horrid" start to what Klopp did yet the minority which includes "those same posters" were fully behind him at that point.  

And yet they/you are not willing to give him the 5 years, even though we all know that Frank overachieved by reaching 4 position in his first season v Klopp being 8, 4, 4. Even with the same horrid start, which I do not agree with, he hasn’t been sacked and you guys are asking for his head after one month of bad play. We can laugh at Liverpool fans, but you are not showing to be better in this matter.

1 hour ago, Slojo said:

"because Klopp delivered a PL and CL within 5 years" 

He also got into a CL final with Dortmund, built an amazing team there despite losing his best players to Bayern, won 2 German Cups and 2 Bundesligas. He was already considered a very underrated and top manager before he got the Liverpool job. Another point many people seem to keep missing but it doesn't stop them making the same silly comparisons. 

Did Klopp come from Derby after just a year in management and got the Liverpool job? No. If Lampard had the CV Klopp had before he came here, yes, I and many others wouldn't be so hard on him. When you come here with little experience it's hard to back yourself up when sh*t hits the fan, why is that so difficult to grasp for people on here? 

So basically you want a seasoned, proven champion manager, yet a twat, rather than give time to a CFC legend who overachieved in his first season. With the same reasoning, let’s give up on the academy and buy proven players for the first team, who cares about giving time to prove the youngsters that are worth our time? We want titles and we want them now!

Just now, RMH said:

So basically you want a seasoned, proven champion manager, yet a twat, rather than give time to a CFC legend who overachieved in his first season. With the same reasoning, let’s give up on the academy and buy proven players for the first team, who cares about giving time to prove the youngsters that are worth our time? We want titles and we want them now!

Di Matteo says hello. 

1 hour ago, Slojo said:

Uhm how about his lack of experience and no resume? Considering I backed all our previous managers to stay, you're talking out of your ass if you think I would treat every other manager this way. 

Because they had a f**king resume? Excuse me, but the one talking out of the arse it’s you. As I said before, Let’s sack all the youngsters because they have no resume and hire proven players.

3 minutes ago, Slojo said:

Di Matteo says hello. 

And Mourinho, what’s your point? 

Just now, RMH said:

Because they had a f**king resume? Excuse me, but the one talking out of the arse it’s you. As I said before, Let’s sack all the youngsters because they have no resume and hire proven players.

What a great analogy that is. Youth players on scraps compared to a senior managerial role that's practically the pinacle of a clubs success. 

I guess a CV doesn't matter anymore in football? f**k it, I bet the richest owners in the world now pick out a random name from a basket and hire whoevers name they picked up. 

1 minute ago, RMH said:

And Mourinho, what’s your point? 

It went over your head, clearly. 

Di Matteo was a legend. Talk about Frank having a great season, Di Matteo won a Champions League and an F.A. Cup in 5 months here. How long did he last the next season? About 3/4 months? And what's he doing now? We definitely regretted that one didn't we.