Matthew Cain's blog » Liverpool

Why sacking Rafa Benitez opens a wound that won’t heel

Matthew — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 17:36:49 +0000

There are many sound reasons for the sacking of Rafael Benitez:

the breakdown of his relationship with Xabi Alonso
some poor mid-market signings
Charlie Nicholas could never work him out (although Arrigo Sacchi did)
last season

I’m past caring. Like Paul Tomkins I’m ambivalent – this last season has been tough. And after defending Gerard Houllier’s bunker to the end (in a fashion that would have made Peter Mandelson proud), reluctant to make the same mistake.

But Rafa’s departure has cut a wound in me that will not heel. Because the club, from top to bottom, has not behaved as it should – as it promised. It has treated a dedicated, hard-working, loyal servant in a shabby, underhand manner. In doing so, it has ripped at the bonds of affection I have for the club.

Supporting LFC isn’t a leisure activity for me. I’m not sure I even like football. I’m not from Liverpool. I may never live there. For most of the life I remember it’s been a top 8 side rather than title-challengers. I’ve been the glory hunter with the worst sense of timing ever!

Instead, supporting Liverpool Football Club for me has always been an ideological endeavour. I support it for its values:

Respecting the past but creating new traditions
Maintaining principles based around Shankly’s ‘football socialism’
Remaining loyal and discreet.
Respecting each other, and servants of the club for more than winning silverware

These principles are no longer alive at LFC. Even though many of the fans still hold them dear there are too many in positions of influence and power who do not. For all his failings, David Moores ensured a respectful send-off to Evans and Houllier. Both were dispatched with succession in mind. This board apparently leaked discussions with Benitez whilst he was on holiday. Statements given to fans are now apparently untrue. And he was deprived a dignified send-off. Senior executives, having been brought in to achieve one task and failed at that, have moved on to more sexy tasks: negotiating with prospective staff, briefing journalists, opening up direct lines of communication with players.

This is not the first time the current leadership of LFC has disgraced itself. It is not the first time it has made a mockery of that ephemeral concept, the Liverpool Way. But for me, and perhaps for them too, Benitez’s departure is a new low. And if we can’t treat our own with respect, who are we?

I’ve seen in the Labour Party what happens to people when their levels of pragmatism and compromise are pushed to breaking-point; it’s painful. I make no grand statements for what I will or will not do next season. And I hope to be careful not to act out of spite less it cheapen the memories and be disrespectful to those who remain, loyal to the Liverpool Way. But win or lose, it won’t mean the same. And you can’t place a value on that.

Why Rafa Benitez will never be a media darling

Matthew — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:36:39 +0000

Rafa Benitez will never be a darling in the eyes of the media. He could win the double twice on consecutive seasons and pundits would find reasons to criticise. Why? Because he works hard not to be human.

My Benitez revelation came stood at a bar, feeling smug about a recent up-turn in the fortunes of my own business. I was reflecting on Sir Clive Woodward’s maxim that when things go badly you should go and get piased and when things go well you should organise an early morning autopsy to discover why. The scientific approach (and the large number of Scousers in the pub) helped me draw the parallel.

I was then that I realised both how hard it was to follow success with self-criticism but also how it ran counter-intuitive with the grain of human emotion.

And that’s why Liverpool fans can never expect Rafa to be loved – or even admired – by the media. Like Sir Clive the best he can hope for is a ‘lucky professor’ tag.

Watching lots of historic games of football – and the characteristics of current Valencia manager Unai Emery -I had been wondering: does Benitez’s lack of obvious passion during a match matter? Most definitely – but only as far as gaining media approval. And if that’ a clincher for Liverpool fans, it’s also a litmus test for whether or not you are a proper Liverpool fan.

The Christopher Buchtmann Conspiracy

Matthew — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 07:46:33 +0000

Christopher Buchtmann, a young fullback, transferred from Liverpool to Fulham on transfer deadline day in a move which revealed much about the confidence (or lack thereof) that Liverpool supporters have in their club’s administration. So why did the transfer of an under-18 German defender spark controversy?

The price was a matter of concern to many Liverpool fans. Apparently £100,000 is chicken-feed for such a promising youngster. He did only have 18 months left on his contract and he was picked up on a free transfer. But supporters on forums did not believe that it was value for money, a meaningful contribution to the player budget (even at the Academy) or have confidence that the administrators (still with a small a) would have the expertise to demand performance bonuses if he went on to be a successful adult.

Others saw it as further evidence that Rafa Benitez was wrong to conduct the extensive overhaul of academy staff last summer. They examined the role of Malcolm Elias who was the scout of young talent we had poached from Southampton but has now moved to Fulham. This view was reinforced by rumours (which just won’t go away in Sky Sports parlance) linking striking hotshot Lauri Dalla Valle with a move in the same direction – a transfer for David Amoo was later added in the mix.

For an even more select few it was evidence that Liverpool is failing to nurture promising young players. For them, Dani Pacheco should have been in the first team squad ahead of players like Voronin and Buchtmann should have had more of a chance at reserve team level, after his promotion to Melwood on the summer. Some point to him playing on the right side of midfield for much of this year and conclude that he must have been mis-treated.

Thankfully in this case it could not be used as evidence of the managers blind faith in foreign talent over local lads. The player keeping him out of the reserve team was scouser Robbie Threlfall.

For another group it was proof that there are disciplinary problems at the Academy. They point to the early departure of fellow German Marvin Pourie – who appears to have fallen put with subsequent coaches – and presume Buchtmann must have been on the ale or just showing a lack of determination.

Rumours will always spread around a football community and Liverpool is a fertile city for gossip. But the presumption that there was an intriguing story behind the move reveals much about supporters confidence in the running of the club and the unchallenged rumours of yester year.

These are the same supporters who’ve read (unchallenged) reports that Nathan Eccleston was going to move to Blackburn after being promoted to Melwood only to be sent back to the Academy because the first team base was ‘full’. Rumours also suggested we lost centreback Robert Huth last year because no-one remembered to renew his contract. And we heard of splits in the dressing room and amongst the coaches which demoralised young players.

Appointing Kenny Dalglish to oversee the Academy and taking personal responsibility for the operation may have been a smart move by Rafa but it’s not enough to give fans confidence.

Football, particularly at this level is still an opaque world, where fans see a few YouTube clips, four of five youth cup games and suddenly know the quality of a player. Where the myriad of associates (family members of the 100+ players associated with the young sides) mean that many more people might be ‘in the know’ and where simple explanations are discarded in favour of incompetece and scandal.

What if Christopher Buchtmann just fancied a bit of extra money? Perhaps that’s what brought him here in the first place. Maybe managemet has more confidence in Threlfall and Mavinga and knew his opportunities would be limited. Maybe, as a short-ish full back who’s not much younger than Insua, he didn’t fancy the challenge. And maybe he wasn’t best pleased at having to develop his right peg. Or maybe it’s all the agent / girlfriend / national team’s fault.

But the story reveals important parts of modern football: that £100,000 profit on a teenager is assumed to be bad business; there’s that much interest in an under-18 player who has never played 2 full games at reserve team level. That a little transparency is not enough; if fans don’t know the facts they fill in the gaps.

No related posts.

Liverpool 5 – Leicester City 1 FA Youth Cup: not good enough

Matthew — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:32:07 +0000

Liverpool beating a strong Leicester City side 5-1 away from home in the FA Youth Cup was a fantastic result, and there were many good things to take away from the performance. But in time-honoured Liverpool tradition (albeit slightly tounge in cheek), I’d rather focus on the things that were not good enough.

For a team that won 5-1, Liverpool had a disappointing amount of possession. The first two goals came after Leicester had the reds on the back-foot and both were on the break. That shouldn’t detract from the quality of the moves, or the finishes but it was unbelievable that Liverpool were 2-0, and then 3-0 up.

When Liverpool did have the ball, they didn’t do much with it. They hurried their passing and struggled to string more than 3-4 passes together. As the game openened up, the reds were guilty of losing the ball in important areas of the pitch. A move like that resulted in the Leicester goal but it could have been so much more. They had two 1-on-1s with the goalkeeper and hit the woodwork three times.Even the excellent Andre Wisdom had a tendency to get rid rather than take time and pick a pass.

The passing was often over-ambitious all night and the objective appeared to be catching Leicester for pace rather than building sustained pressure. This meant that when Liverpool had broken up a Leicester attack, too often they found themselves on the back-foot soon after. It would have been better to see the players know when to make the ambitious pass and when to play it simple.

Leicester didn’t make it easy for Liverpool, often by-passing midfield completely. But the holding players didn’t stamp any authority on the game, disappointing for someone with the footballing abilities of Michael Roberts in particular.

Liverpool were also a bit rash in the tackle. Although the second of the two bookings was harsh, Roberts could have seen red at a higher level and Coady dived in too frequently for a player in that position.Coupled with this, the team was particularly effective at closing down Leicester. They didn’t hunt in pairs, as the first team does at its best and rarely hassled Leicester into a mistake in midfield. That left a lot of work for the defenders.

There were also individual things to work on:

It was disappointing to see just how often Michael Ngoo was beaten in the air by the centrebacks
Matty McGiveron was caught out a couple of times, though once rescued it with a brilliant saving tackle
Deale Chamberlain was indecisive coming off his line and this led to a couple of great opportunities for Leicester
Tom Ince often gave up when he lost the ball rather than track back

The point of all these negatives is not to be overly-critical (although I am a grumpy bugger). But when you bring in coaching staff from Barcelona, you aspire to a quality of football that was often missing tonight. Liverpool have assembled some great cup-tie winning teams at this level over the last few years, without developing players who can play consistently at the next level (Darby and Spearing not withstanding). If the new philosophy is to work, it needs to depend less on results and more about the style and ethos of the football.

But at least the team has more confidence and gets to play on in the competition. Next up, Watford or Hartlepool at Anfield.

Why Rafael Benitez should part own the club

Matthew — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 12:00:23 +0000

I don’t think football clubs should be owned by rich individuals. Listing them on the stockmarket doesn’t work either. Some sort of Trust or co-operative model is much more appropriate because it can ensure the business is run for profit but that can be reinvested in the community which sustains the club, and without that profit coming at the expense of that community (grotesque ticket prices, for example).

However, fans owning football clubs is not enough. Any democratic ownership is not without its problems, as people invovled with supporters trusts will tell you. It appears that Notts County fans sold out their stake too cheaply and for a false promise of greater gratification than they could provide themselves.

Any successful organisation needs to be aligned to achieve the same objective. And in modern football that objective isn’t as simple as winning a competition. Competitions must be prioritised, budgets balanced, short term signings balanced against long term development. And style matters, too. Bolton fans never warmed to Gary Megson because they didn’t like the teams he put out. Chelsea fans didn’t care about Mourinho’s awful brand of football because they wanted results. They didn’t care about the long term financial security of the club, because they wanted trophies in the short term. Harry Redknapp got Portsmouth short term success but the club is on the verge of anhiliation. Shouldn’t his interests, and those of the club been better aligned?

The most successful clubs are those with a long term football leader (Wenger, Ferguson, Lacombe – even Dario Gradi in a different way). They have such an investment in the club that a financial stake isn’t so relevant. But a second tier manager isn’t going to be bothered about win bonusses. But shouldn’t Wenger be rewarded for keeping the club’s books balanced? Shouldn’t Rafa’s plans for improving the academy and reserve set-up come with an incentive?

Senior players could also have ‘share options’. Steven Gerrard contributes significantly to the marketing of the club and will contribute a great deal as a former player one day. But he has no obvious incentive to sign autographs in town, give exclusive interviews to the in-house TV channel beyond the contractual requirements. Short term financial incentives won’t work – but literally owning a piece of the club would be very different.

If senior management of any business part owns it, it ensures the short term incentives are aligned with the long term stability of the project. That the harder they work in the short term, the better they will do in the longer term. That they will place structural health over a quick win. Surely football, as much as any other business, needs these traits?