IT started how it finished. It ended how it began. It has done so for 23 years.
Kenny Dalglish’s second coming came after a cancelled holiday, with his first day back at work an FA Cup defeat. 18 months later, an FA Cup defeat preceded a holiday cancelled in what would prove to be his last day. The King was now relieved of his duties; long live the King.
Dalglish’s reign feels defined by its cyclical nature. Two cup final appearances; two long, laborious treks up the steps at Wembley. One saw Dalglish bound up and down them, slapping hands of fans and owners with every step, his bench coat unable to contain the enthusiasm inside. The other saw a slow, morose traipse of resignation; every one of the 107 steps one step closer to his usurpation. Even Andy Carroll could not manage to save him. John Henry couldn’t even manage a smile.
The two cup finals resulted in cyclic arguments – arguments over definitions of progress and transition; arguments on whether an eighth-place finish, six home wins and 52 points negate the two finals at Wembley and Liverpool’s first trophy in six years.
The football had improved from Hodgson, especially at its optimum level – but most important was what his return signified off the pitch. He strode out at Old Trafford and immediately united a fan base shattered by deceit and disillusion from the previous regime. It not only felt the club’s league position of 12th was at its lowest, but also the self-esteem of everyone involved with it. The Liver Bird’s head was bowed. Dalglish returned to pick up the pieces.
He soldiered on, soldering together players like Maxi Rodriguez and Dirk Kuyt; new signing Luis Suarez, akin to watching a Minotaur perform Swan Lake, helped liberate them. But then was the summer of their discontent, made inglorious by some poor decisions in the transfer market, with little knowledge of who exactly to blame.
Some argued Liverpool’s failed buys were the fault of Damien Comolli, while others focused on Dalglish – if not for the purchases themselves, then for not building the mental strength of Downing, fitness of Charlie Adam or intelligence of Jose Enrique.
Liverpool’s issues didn’t just end there. Nor did the blame game. Most attacking players regressed over the course of the season, the midfield was a muddle and there didn’t seem to be a certain clear thought-process behind how Liverpool wanted to play. Every time, those points were countered. The Suarez debacle disrupted the squad more than can be imagined, the midfield missed Lucas and Gerrard for large parts of the season and Lady Luck didn’t just refuse to shine down upon Liverpool – it covered Anfield in a woodwork-induced cloak of darkness.
And so the circular arguments continued. Dalglish defenders were right to point to his unfavourable working conditions, with the summer bloodletting from FSG hindering him; his detractors were right to question the purpose of signing the players that were signed in the first place, especially at the prices paid. His defenders, rightly, pointed to success in the cups; his detractors, rightly, asked whether top four was achievable under his reign. It was a tug-of-war with no end in sight, until FSG decided to cut the rope themselves. Half the backroom staff fell face-first into the mud.
It started how it finished. It ended how it began. It has done so for 23 years.
Liverpool Football Club is a club that’s travelled in circles, both on and off the pitch, for a generation. Clubs that have failed to win the league championship since 1990 tend to do that.
The archaic Boot Room slowly eroded and transformed into a more technical, continental set-up under Gerard Houllier. Rafael Benitez followed and, with a European Cup and FA Cup in the trophy cabinet, sought to revitalise and redefine it even further. He never had the chance to finish it. The club brought in Roy Hodgson who started the cycle all over again. The good work from 1999 onwards from two astute thinkers of the game undone by Moores, Hicks, Gillett, Purslow and Hodgson.
To sack Kenny Dalglish was viewed as foolish by many; the cut rope from the tug-of-war serving as a noose around the neck of FSG. The rope wasn’t the only thing severed – his departure scythed the last tiny thread left connecting Liverpool with the values that’s made it such a global institution.
The mantra around Anfield was that the club don’t sack managers. The new appointment will be the fourth manager since June 2010, with the three previous incumbents all sacked, irrespective of terminology. Sacking Dalglish defies the Liverpool Way, a mythical phrase used to strengthen viewpoints about how the football club should be run. But what’s forgotten is how the Liverpool Way was compromised when the club became the first in England to have shirt sponsorship; how it was bruised when McDonald’s golden arches were erected upon the Kop; how it died the moment it become a multi-million dollar softball tossed between multi-millionaires across the Atlantic in front of a captive audience. Strike three – you’re out.
If sacking Dalglish was an exhibition of stupidity, it was also a display of bravery. Instead of watching the perpetual tug-of-war going around in circles, FSG decided to act. Their next move will dictate the direction of the football club for the next decade, generation and possibly lifetime.
The fallout from Dalglish’s sacking will reverberate around Anfield long after his successor is appointed as people mourn the death of the fabled Liverpool Way, but there is some consolation in that it wasn’t personal. FSG’s actions make Dalglish a victim of ruthless circumstance, so too Damien Comolli, Ian Cotton and Peter Brukner amongst others. FSG know they dallied on sacking Roy Hodgson who, in their first game as owners, described a 2-0 defeat to Everton as the second-best performance of the season. They were not going to do it again.
FSG have now made their bed – but before there’s any contemplation of lying in it they must choose their bed mates, and there’s a lot of seduction to be done. The club has suffered a jarring fall in recent years. Some of its best players have either left or forced moves, all passing up the chance play in a stadium that doesn’t seem to be getting built. The club went through an embarrassing and damaging battle at the High Court; they also went through a damaging and embarrassing battle with the FA over Luis Suarez. Lessons are still to be learnt.
There’s a lot of seducing to be done with the fan base, too. Sacking Dalglish and the seemingly non-existent stadium steal the headlines, but FSG’s tenure has been littered with mistakes and miscommunication throughout. Their absenteeism and lack of leadership, so prevalent during the Suarez case, is cause for concern; so, too, any time when Ian Ayre opens his mouth. Ayre, like a corporate hydra, seems to spout three new heads every time his is on the chopping block. Each new mouth is formed with a foot firmly placed in it, denouncing Dalglish and detaching any importance to cup competitions. The self-congratulatory tone of his post-season interviews were delusional at best, egomaniacal at worst.
But the vision might be starting to take shape; the bible has its first chapter. On the first day, it appears likely Louis van Gaal will join as a director of the sporting or technical kind, with a young, progressive man as head coach. Ajax’s Frank de Boer and Borussia Dortmund’s Jurgen Klopp were not seduced; instead, Brendan Rodgers and Roberto Martinez have been lured by FSG’s apple. Both fit a certain profile: intelligent, good records with developing youth and an acute tactical astuteness. Most importantly, both have a clear philosophy regarding football. It is now FSG’s job to marry that philosophy throughout the club, from top to bottom.
The last man who attempted to do similar is a name conspicuous by its absence on FSG’s shortlist, but it does not fit their hope for year zero. The removal of Roy Hodgson was prompted by intuitive calls for a former manager to restore former glories. FSG acted upon them. Dalglish had barely touched down from Boston with his P45 and those calls came back; this time, though, it was Rafael Benitez who was asked to replicate the victories of yesteryear. FSG have ignored them. They will have to live or die by that decision; time will tell whether it’s the correct one.
But the direction of the club extends far beyond who is appointed to sit in the dugout. There must be the realisation that the club is not a mere piece of paper in the filing cabinet, nor is it a party-piece for the portfolio. The appointments of Jen Chang as Director of Communications and Bill Hogan as Commercial Director are the first steps, but giant strides still have to be taken. There must be more communication; there must be a presence within the city and a genuine attempt to understand and connect with the supporters of the club and the people and culture of the city itself. That must be ingrained into their vision for the football club above any formation or fanciful Director of Football.
Whatever route is chosen for Liverpool Football Club, the ownership now must be fully committed. To wipe the slate clean, begin at year zero and look to end the endless circling is bold; to not follow through with it properly would be barmy. It’s not something successful businessman would do. Whether they prove to be successful is another matter.
FSG have not simply dedicated themselves to applying a new lick of paint to the Liverpool squad, it’s an entire renovation. The role of head coach isn’t as important as it has been in the past. To reduce the man in the dugout to a mere cog in the machine is sacrilege to a club like Liverpool, who have routinely forged an emotional attachment with the manager. That lasting image of Shankly, arms outstretched before his adoring disciples after the 1971 cup final defeat to Arsenal, encapsulates so many ideologies about the club. It is another change from familiarity, one of the most difficult to adjust to. Nobody said the renovation would be an easy sell.
No one said it would be easy for Barcelona, either, in 2003 . When Joan Laporta wrestled the club presidency from Enric Reyna, he promised David Beckham; what he would deliver would be much more important. The club had finished sixth in 2002/2003, 22 points behind Real Madrid and – most importantly – a lack of direction both on and off the pitch. FC Barcelona were not producing a football team worthy of the city’s pride. Laporta looked to change that. He looked to install a culture throughout the club both on and off the pitch; a culture that would be present from the first-team to their ‘Cadete A’ team – a team which included 16-year-old Lionel Messi. It was a culture, most importantly, that reflected the Catalan people.
The old guard were removed and replaced with purchases such as Ronaldinho, Deco, Ricardo Queresma, Rafael Marquez and Ludovic Guily. Youngsters such as Iniesta, Xavi and Victor Valdes were also promoted. Most were comfortable on the ball. Most enjoyed to press up the pitch. All would learn to abide by Barcelona’s mantra. The man charged with introducing this new philosophy was Frank Rijkaard, who had experienced relegation in Eredivise with Sparta Rotterdam the year previous. But the cog worked fine, winning two La Liga titles and a Champions League. Once he stopped working, Pep Guardiola slotted in. The rest, literally, is history.
FSG have drawn similarities between Barcelona’s travails in 2003 and the current state of Liverpool Football Club. It would also explain why Johan Cruyff has been named as a potential advisor to the ownership given he was pro-active with Laporta in changing the entire culture of the club. But imitation will only get so far – FSG must also learn to innovate. Whether they are willing to spend big like Barcelona did in the summer of 2003 remains to be seen, while the trio of Suso, Sterling and Belford are not at the level of Xavi, Iniesta and Valdes – but it took six years for Laporta to see the full fruit of his labours with the treble of 2009.
The argument will forever remain whether Dalglish could have been a successful cog in FSG’s new machine, so too whether sacking him and exorcising the famed Holy Trinity was a risk worth taking. The answer will only come over an indeterminate period of time. If successful, the club will have re-written the rulebook for English football; if unsuccessful, the club and FSG could head towards mediocrity or, even worse, ruin – the Liver Bird reduced to a guinea pig, poisoned by an antidote too strong to stomach.
FSG have taken the risk. The tug-of-war has ended. The circular arguments have stopped. This is Liverpool Football Club, but not as you know it. They’ve tossed the King to the wayside – it’s now time to see whether there’s an ace up their sleeve or a mere joker. Sit back, you could be waiting a while. Check.
Good article Kristian, full of sense in regard to the sacking of Dalglish – even though for most of us the act of dismissal was an act of treachury, undeserved by such a legend, and a great manager.
Now we have had a few days/weeks to assess where we are left, our thoghts are rightly toward owners and our own culture, where indeed we are left with shaking heads and a great deal of heart ache tinged with that empty feeling we had with Rafa.
When dealing with LFC I think FSG need to understand that they are CUSTODIANS of not only our club, but also our heritage, it should be about LFC rather than FSG, that is where I think they have failed us – perception.
Souness tinkered with our clubs very foundations, destroying them in the process & 20 odd years later, this is where we find ourselves – I hope FSG are not making a very,very similar mistake.
This is quite a good piece. I disagree with a fair few points but it is refreshing to have this kind of article written in a measured way.
Here we go again with the 5 year plan/Year Zero baloney. The thing about 5 year plans is … they never work.
Barcelona, Barcelona. What Kristian is choosing to elide over here is that *that* relatively disastrous 2000-03 period at Camp Nou was primarily caused by a certain Louis Van Gaal (!) having ripped up the Barca blueprint of Johann Cruyff.
It’s a matter of record that Cruyff invented tiki-taka, using the young Pep Guardiola as his pivote. No 5 year plan BS, but this is how we play, do as I say, now let’s go win. And they did.
Once Van Gaal left for good in 2003 and the Cruyff way was restored, success returned with knobs on. (Laporta ‘installed’ nothing new; neither did Rijkaard. They re-installed Cruyff’s ideals. Of course, credit due, Laporta did sign Ronaldinho, who for a while was the best player in the world.)
FSG can’t spend “big” – if by big is meant investment in a game-changing degree like that at City, due to Uefa’s new FFP rules. City are the last club ‘in’ before those rules start to limit what money can be thrown at a team via the owners’ wealth.
Those ‘inglorious’ summer transfers – no mystery. Both Comolli and Dalglish have stated that Kenny chose the players he wanted and Comolli arranged the fees necessary to get them in.
Adam and Enrique are peanuts signings over duration of their contracts; seasons 2 and 3 (of their 5 season deals) will tell pretty much if Downing and Carroll were worth the money spent on them, for young Henderson the same if not longer.
Carroll was ‘junk’ less than three months ago; now there are calls for him to start for England next month. Things change quickly in football. Opinions are very fickle; so are Flavour of the month managerial appointments.
Lovely piece Kristian. Your take on the machinations of FSG and the cutting-loose of The King is in sync with the hopes/fears of most right-thinking Redmen. Well in, fella.
Really enjoyed reading that. I liked the reference to the circular direction the club has been going in. Never really looked at it that way. Particularly liked the comparison with Barca in 2003.
This piece has got me full of optimism for the future but for the first time in decades my optimism is not for next season. Although I’m sentimental for the past as well as understanding the need to build and develop, I’ve thought for a long time that unfortunately Liverpool FC needs a cataclysmic change if they’re to become great again. As well as looking at managers, you can also look at the owners and say we were never going to compete with the last two owners in charge for different reasons.
This FSG era may completely fail but I’m ready to give it a go. I’m excited (as well as slightly worried) about the future. My biggest concern is will the Liverpool fans cause the whole FSG plan / vision to implode due to their impatience. Every Liverpool fan should be made to read this article primarily to appreciate what happened at Barca over 6 years after a new vision / plan was implemented. Something tells me FSG will not be afforded that time to build and develop which may be a real shame and confine us to a circular direction once again.
Highly enjoyable piece, I agree with most of your points. I’ll just highlight one aspect I disagree with, not to take away from the rest!
I feel that the ‘head coach’ position will be rather more important than has been given credit in much recent debate. At the end of the day, he’ll be the face of the club throughout the season. I know replacing Dalglish is quite a challenge, but it will still be possible to build an affinity with the new man if he proves to be endearing and all the rest! I think the cult of manager/’head coach’ is not borne out of the boardroom structures, but from the supporters affection. To revisit your Barcelona analgy, see the esteem with which Guardiola is held amongst the Barca faithful.
I think with Dalglish it is very easy for emotion to cloud the issue, which is perfectly fine, he’s deserved to create that anomaly, but when looking ahead, I feel it conrtibutes to creating erroneous interpretations of the future.
Nicely written piece. This is undoubtedly the most important managerial appointment in the club’s history since God knows when – which makes it all the more important that FSG get it right. Ironically, at a time when the new ‘model’ might actually diminish the central role of the manager, we still need a galvanising force, a lightning rod, a messiah figure. Rogers has potential, Martinez too, although I still believe he talks a better game than that delivered on the pitch. But the more I think about it, the more I see the economic and emotional sense in breaking the bank to try to get Guardiola – either now or in a year’s time. As a statement of intent it would be staggering. It would unite all supporters – how could it not? – and instead of trying to sell LFC to players who are zoned in only on the CL and our absence from it, I believe having Pep in charge would attract top calibre players purely for the chance to work with him. He seems like someone who would cherish the history and tradition of the club while trying to establish a new order. Am I stupid to even think it’s possible? Why shouldn’t we? LFC should be nothing if not ambitious. In a worst case scenario they could try Van Gaal for a year and then move him upstairs. But then again, I’ve been told I’m a dreamer….
This is purely my own opinion of the whole matter but ever since KK’s departure, I believe that FSG used his tenure as a way to test the waters, a practice run at the EPL. They followed the advice of the people who were at LFC already, followed the general direction of what the fans wanted. But as bad as this sounds, it did fail. I am a supporter of KK I wanted him to stay for one more season and I did like that we won a trophy. But FSG’s goal from the very beginning was Top 4 and eventually challenging the league. I think they saw that KK was not going to be able to do that and through this season, they learnt from their practice run and were going to start completely afresh, filled with the wisdom from their mistakes and listening to more advisors of the game. Whether this is true and whether anything will come into fruition only the future can tell.
I think though that I am one of the few that aren’t irritated by not knowing anything that’s going on. I have faith that FSG have surrounded themselves with people that know what they’re doing but more importantly, are using this time that they have to really figure out which roles require what leaders. I like the idea that they are splitting up the roles and maybe that comes down to the fact that I am still a very new fan and I haven’t had the experience of the history that most Liverpool fans have had. But I’m looking forward to the future and I don’t think it is as bleak as some people have claimed. FSG saved us from disaster, I don’t think they’re going to throw us back in again.
“The argument will forever remain whether Dalglish could have been a successful cog in FSG’s new machine”
Doesn’t the fact FSG didn’t want him anymore make this argument done and dusted right now? I think so, anyway. How is Kenny supposed to have succeeded in an environment where he doesn’t even have enough juice to get invited to the first meeting?
“FSG have taken the risk.”
The risk of what, not finishing 8th again? The risk of not completing more of the worst British transfers of all time? Of having a manager work for you who actually listens to you and puts his focus on the objectives you clearly lay out for him?
Certainly much the LFC fan base is like a psycho ex-girlfriend right now, ready to pull out the kitchen knives and start screaming at the drop of a hat. I think I get the over-the-top sentimentality about Kenny, but on the footballing side the risk is very small.
We finished 7th, 6th, and 8th the last 3 seasons and took 18 points in our last 19 games. That’s the standard against which a new manager should be judged, not the standard of whether or not he is Kenny Dalglish. Results.
Nice article Kris laa.
I seem to remember you tipping Liverpool for the league title under Dalglish this time last year. So I’ll take any predictions from you with a huge pinch of salt.
Liverpool Football Club is an international brand. It’s worldwide. It’s based in Liverpool and it has a “Liverpool” culture but the fact is that today, the international fan base is much more valuable than the Liverpool city fan base. It is important to remember this because it makes financial sense to ensure that the Liverpool brand is not damaged worldwide. And with the club’s global reputation taking a major plunge this season, there was no way the people in charge would remain silent.
You say that the owners showed a lack of leadership. But wasn’t it the job of the communications person to handle the Suarez affair properly? Regarding transfers, Comolli was brought in to handle them and it doesn’t matter if Dalglish had too much a say—what matters was that Comolli didn’t use the money well enough. The owners employed those people to do a job and you can expect them to actively show “personal” leadership.
I agree that what the owners now want to do is like a revolution. And this is exciting. We shall see if it works or not but if it does, LFC will have a great advantage over other teams. Their plan is the future of English football in the sense that all other teams will eventually follow that model. They are already starting to use it in other leagues.
This model is looking at a football team like a business and running it like a business. It would be extremely interesting to read what an MBA thinks about the handling of Liverpool by the current owners. The MBA may not be very surprised at all.
The club’s reputation was damaged considerably this season due to the Suarez affair in particular.
Nice article.
It has always struck me that the ‘Liverpool Way’ used to be one of promoting internally and unearthing unknown talent. Every now an again Bob would unveil somebody I had never heard of and we would carry on crushing the rest of Europe. With so many of our fans calling for a Big Name Manager ™ it seems so un-Liverpoool like, what ‘Other Clubs’ used to do as the flailed around trying to knock us of our perch. It’s like outsourcing your football soul to an external management team. Because Ronnie Moran didn’t fancy it we bring in Souness because he’s an ex player and has done well with Rangers. We bring in Ged because France are a bit good. Then we bring in Rafa because we want to play like Valencia. Rafa had the right idea in developing the academy and instilling a consistent style of play but we were still Rafa FC. Once he left it was always likely the next man was going to do things ‘his way’ and there’s yet another re-building job to be done. With a DOF type strategist there’s no way we would have hired Hodgson, we don’t play 4-4-2 big ‘un little ‘un and you can’t buy 30-something has-beens on expensive contracts. Thanks but no thanks. Harry Redknapp is always held up as an example of why ‘The English Way’ is superior. I would look at the state of the clubs he has left them before asserting that, likewise Mourinho. I choose to be optimistic.
brilliant article,
Joan Laporta i think will be a perfect advisor to FSG, not listening to the fans regarding Rafa could be a masterstroke or the begining of the end, I think this may go bloody as well!!
Good article mate. Keep up the good work. Personally I cant see Liverpool spending as much money as Barca did in 2003 considering the money spent last summer but we have some promising youth on the sidelines so it will be interesting to see what happens.