30 Jan 2019 02:41:03
Ed001 as redeka asked about Ferguson. I'd like to know your opinion. very briefly don't worry ha. I seen Roy Keane said he wasn't tactically good and employed the best assistant manager he could (I remember he interviewed Martin jol before he took spurs job) as he was lacking on the training ground. was he just a good motivator that knew his shortcomings unlike some managers these days and seeked help. thanks for everything this site is about. I love the info but also the discussion prompted by all the eds but I especially love what Ed002 brings to the table ie an impartial view of Liverpool and everything else football related.

{Ed001's Note - he was a manager, the coaches coached and he managed. Bob Paisley was very much the same. It was not about not being tactically good, it was about putting the right people in the right places. He would pick the best assistant to coach the team into the tactics best suited to their coaching methods. It was a way of keeping it fresh, put a different man there when things were getting stale, with new methods and an up to date approach. To be honest, very few of the old school managers did any coaching, there are many, many stories about Paisley, who would spend training sessions in the office at Melwood reading the Racing Post a lot of the time. Redknapp only appeared on the training ground if cameras were around. They were not coaches, which is why the FA's coaching badges are such a joke - they were set up by a bunch of old school managers, including Ferguson and Redknapp, who never did any coaching at all!}

1.) 30 Jan 2019
30 Jan 2019 07:30:54
ed001 do you think that is where Keegan let him self down not getting the right men round him. He to seemed a good motivator but defensive wise was not up to the job. I think when King Kenny came back are defence was shipping goals all over the place and he appointed Steve Clarke who was a very good defensive coach and we was so much better at the back.

{Ed001's Note - yes mate, Keegan was too old fashioned and never moved with the times and just let players play.}

2.) 30 Jan 2019
30 Jan 2019 08:23:02
ed001 I did like that Fergy and Paisley left the coaching to the coach's. And they managed the team then they had more time to look at signing players now the managers coach and let DOF sign players. we have all heard the stories of Shankly talking to players like Ian St john and convincing them to join us and Fergy doing the same for Utd. Now they say they don't have time to do this in this era but it should be easier. I would rather a manger have more control over players coming in as the buck stop with them. A lot of clubs pay the mangers a lot of money then get people in that no less about football than them and they choice the players then when they don't work out its normally the managers the get the boot.

{Ed001's Note - directors of football are usually well paid on the continent, as they are seen in the same way as English footie views managers (correctly). The head coaches are usually picked by the dof as well.}

3.) 30 Jan 2019
30 Jan 2019 09:47:18
In your opinion Ed, if we didn't have the whole Suarez debacle and king Kenny had hypothetically stayed on as manager, do you think he/ we would've been successful?

{Ed001's Note - no because Comolli was there.}

4.) 30 Jan 2019
30 Jan 2019 13:41:58
In comparison to the two managers that followed him, KK was succesful. Most successful LFC manager in the last decade.