Gerrard and the players he didn’t want to sell

G

greggakd

Well-Known Member
The footage of his interview after the sheep game in 55 season is surfacing again. Plenty of folk saying about how he didn’t want certain players sold. How is that known, and who are the players he didn’t want to lose?

Are people just assuming cause there was no sales or is there proof he didn’t want to sell anyone, and if so who were they?

Assuming it is true, from the main players involved in getting us 55, my guess would be Kamara, Kent and probably aribo. I can’t imagine goldson or tav would have wanted to go, Davis and McGregor were too old to be sold for any kind of fee, and I don’t think he would have had an issue with selling Alfredo given the whole Colombia and overweight things from the past.
 
Trafalgar said:
Unfortunately he never stayed to cement his legacy and chased cash instead of staying at the biggest managerial job he will ever have.
Click to expand...
Look at the transfers we made in the summer after 55 - is it any wonder Gerrard left at the first chance he got?

Ofoborh (free)
Sakala (free)
Lundstram (free)
Bacuna (2m ish)

Going the other way:
Barjonas
Greg Stewart
Bongani Zungu
Edmundson
Jordan Jones
Middleton
Hastie
Itten
Katic
Kieran Wright
 
audiorealis said:
Look at the transfers we made in the summer after 55 - is it any wonder Gerrard left at the first chance he got?

Ofoborh (free)
Sakala (free)
Lundstram (free)
Bacuna (2m ish)

Going the other way:
Barjonas
Greg Stewart
Bongani Zungu
Edmundson
Jordan Jones
Middleton
Hastie
Itten
Katic
Kieran Wright
Click to expand...
you think Gerrard had no say in these?
Lets remember of the ones leaving he signed the majority
 
audiorealis said:
Look at the transfers we made in the summer after 55 - is it any wonder Gerrard left at the first chance he got?

Ofoborh (free)
Sakala (free)
Lundstram (free)
Bacuna (2m ish)

Going the other way:
Barjonas
Greg Stewart
Bongani Zungu
Edmundson
Jordan Jones
Middleton
Hastie
Itten
Katic
Kieran Wright
Click to expand...
What does he expect when he point blank refuses to sanction the club bringing in money from selling players.

Was he really that nieve to the financial realities of Scottish football?
 
audiorealis said:
Look at the transfers we made in the summer after 55 - is it any wonder Gerrard left at the first chance he got?

Ofoborh (free)
Sakala (free)
Lundstram (free)
Bacuna (2m ish)

Going the other way:
Barjonas
Greg Stewart
Bongani Zungu
Edmundson
Jordan Jones
Middleton
Hastie
Itten
Katic
Kieran Wright
Click to expand...

Something had to give given the club lost £15m the season before then £23m the year we won 55. He could have sold Alfie and/or Kent he didn't and wanted to continually add to a squad that was at 35 or 36 players. He lost to Malmo despite playing a full half against 10 men so with no champions league money, no major player sale in his time with us and the loss of £23m due to COVID where was the cash coming from?
 
uneasydaz said:
Going by his interview after we won the league he was obviously made promises by the squad that weren't kept
Click to expand...
I think it was maybe based on player sales and CL money, the club don't have a bottomless pit of cash. Very few of his overall signings were a success. the rotation of players was frightening
 
greggakd said:
The footage of his interview after the sheep game in 55 season is surfacing again. Plenty of folk saying about how he didn’t want certain players sold. How is that known, and who are the players he didn’t want to lose?

Are people just assuming cause there was no sales or is there proof he didn’t want to sell anyone, and if so who were they?

Assuming it is true, from the main players involved in getting us 55, my guess would be Kamara, Kent and probably aribo. I can’t imagine goldson or tav would have wanted to go, Davis and McGregor were too old to be sold for any kind of fee, and I don’t think he would have had an issue with selling Alfredo given the whole Colombia and overweight things from the past.
Click to expand...

How is it known, plenty of people know players, coaches or other staff within Rangers, then there is journalists who have the same contacts and people talk.

Itten has said after leaving that he was told Morelos was being sold and that’s why him and Roofe were being bought.

The players to be sold any that someone offered an acceptable bid, Morelos had quite a few offers, then you have the likes of Kent, Aribo, Patterson.
 
W_72 said:
I don't really blame him for leaving. The board never matched his ambitions after 55. Nobody knows who made the decision not to sell our assets.
Click to expand...
Most of the footballing world were cutting cloth that summer because of covid. Absolutely off your head if you think a football club (in Scotland ffs) is spending much money after a global pandemic and losing to Malmo. He got to keep his players, when most have been looking to sell assets to make up for the shortfall. He would have even got money to spend if we had qualified for the CL.
 
Met someone a couple of years back who knew and lived near him and he suggested that Gerrard himself realised that he might have left too soon
 
W_72 said:
I don't really blame him for leaving. The board never matched his ambitions after 55. Nobody knows who made the decision not to sell our assets.
Click to expand...

He pushed for Lundstram and he cost us the Malmo game which, had we got through it, would have provided funds for other players.

Gerrards far from innoncent in the post 55 summer transfers.

He can't, at a club with our resources, just demand we keep everyone and don't bring cash in.

His stance on that stopped any sort of trading. The Malmo debacle compounded it all.

The board can't just spent millions on end with no incoming fees. He'd already been more than backed by bringing in the players we did the summer before AND not selling players of note at that point either. That got us 55. At that point, there had to be compromise...or at least CL football to balance it.
 
EIAFF said:
He pushed for Lundstram and he cost us the Malmo game which, had we got through it, would have provided funds for other players.

Gerrards far from innoncent in the post 55 summer transfers.

He can't, at a club with our resources, just demand we keep everyone and don't bring cash in.

His stance on that stopped any sort of trading. The Malmo debacle compounded it all.

The board can't just spent millions on end with no incoming fees. He'd already been more than backed by bringing in the players we did the summer before AND not selling players of note at that point either. That got us 55. At that point, there had to be compromise...or at least CL football to balance it.
Click to expand...
If you believe the lack of investment was due to failing to qualify for the champions league. What's your opinion on the lack of investment Gio got as he did qualify for the champions league?
 
GBY74 said:
If you believe the lack of investment was due to failing to qualify for the champions league. What's your opinion on the lack of investment Gio got as he did qualify for the champions league?
Click to expand...

It covered losses from the previous year of not getting there. It's all in the accounts.

We still posted a loss after not giving Gio cash too.
 
Paparay said:
Met someone a couple of years back who knew and lived near him and he suggested that Gerrard himself realised that he might have left too soon
Click to expand...

Dodn't seem the same man after 55 and whatever was the catalyst he'll regret it.
His desperation to sign Lundstram was a mistake though and a big one.

Had we beaten Malmo and he stayed on he may well have been waiting to succeed Klopp now and he will know that.
 
EIAFF said:
It covered losses from the previous year of not getting there. It's all in the accounts.

We still posted a loss after not giving Gio cash too.
Click to expand...
Would that have meant if Gerrard beat Malmo he still wouldn't have got backing as we had losses to cover then.
 
GBY74 said:
Would that have meant if Gerrard beat Malmo he still wouldn't have got backing as we had losses to cover then.
Click to expand...

It seems not. Finances weren't as bad at that stage. The season following 55 compounded it all.

Gio position was at different point financially and the comments about backing him if we got through shouldn't have been made, knowing what they did about the general funding required at that point.

It's hard, though, to come out and say "we're not spending a penny even if we get through as we're in the mire" and have the fans be positive though.

We overspent to secure 55. Gerrard stopped any big sales the summer after it and when he left, the board were in a very difficult position. Gio suffered from that to a fair degree but the situation needed clawed back. We're very lucky he managed to get us past PSV that year or things would have been even worse now.
 
We accumulated massive losses winning that title. Yet every other month on here, I read threads about a failure to back Gerrard after he won the title, being a big reason as to why we're in the position we are in now, which is just patently false. The underlying stats that season, were all trending upwards for them and downwards for ourselves, that's before Gerrard left to go to Villa.

We didn't sell any assets during Gerrard's time at the club, no big sales whatsoever, all of that came after he left the building. People like to blame the covid depressed market, yet continually overlook the fact that they sold Edouard and Ajer that summer and basically rebuilt their entire first team with the dosh they made. To say that we couldn't do the same with one or two of our players, is outlandish.

I think that we also, collectively, completely and utterly underestimated how much stronger they were financially than us post 55. They had the reserves to go out and buy an entire new team pretty much, and they've spent the last several transfer windows adding to that. They're adding to their team, we're on our third rebuild in as many summers. Likewise, they're stable and set up to succeed, and we are not. They can swallow a bad summer transfer wise, and we can't.
 
ronadamus_prime said:
We accumulated massive losses winning that title. Yet every other month on here, I read threads about a failure to back Gerrard after he won the title, being a big reason as to why we're in the position we are in now, which is just patently false. The underlying stats that season, were all trending upwards for them and downwards for ourselves, that's before Gerrard left to go to Villa.

We didn't sell any assets during Gerrard's time at the club, no big sales whatsoever, all of that came after he left the building. People like to blame the covid depressed market, yet continually overlook the fact that they sold Edouard and Ajer that summer and basically rebuilt their entire first team with the dosh they made. To say that we couldn't do the same with one or two of our players, is outlandish.

I think that we also, collectively, completely and utterly underestimated how much stronger they were financially than us post 55. They had the reserves to go out and buy an entire new team pretty much, and they've spent the last several transfer windows adding to that. They're adding to their team, we're on our third rebuild in as many summers. Likewise, they're stable and set up to succeed, and we are not. They can swallow a bad summer transfer wise, and we can't.
Click to expand...
It always amazed me that given how well Morelos played against genuine top opposition in Europe we never sold him and they sold Ajer for big bucks after a season he performed pathetically.
 
Gerrard's perceived role in our post 55 collapse, outside of the memorable European run, is minimal. The finger can be pointed at him for Malmo but thats it really.

Its OK a manager saying he doesnt want to sell anyone but its not really the managers decision anymore. Of course he will have an input and can express his concerns but its not the 1970s anymore when the manager basically runs the full club. He was a head coach working under not just a board of directors but a director of football as well. Stewart Robertson was a weak managing director who probably appeased the manager due to his profile and what he was beginning to achieve with us and I mean more in terms of what he was doing in Europe rather than the trophies although I have no doubts more would have followed had he not left for Villa when he did.

Ross Wilson in my opinion though is the main reason that we are in the mess we are just in now and I hope more than anything that Koppen is the man that can sort this mess out. The early signs for me are positive, based on the profile of Diomande and Cortes and I really hope he can pull another couple out as well.
 
EIAFF said:
It seems not. Finances weren't as bad at that stage. The season following 55 compounded it all.

Gio position was at different point financially and the comments about backing him if we got through shouldn't have been made, knowing what they did about the general funding required at that point.

It's hard, though, to come out and say "we're not spending a penny even if we get through as we're in the mire" and have the fans be positive though.

We overspent to secure 55. Gerrard stopped any big sales the summer after it and when he left, the board were in a very difficult position. Gio suffered from that to a fair degree but the situation needed clawed back. We're very lucky he managed to get us past PSV that year or things would have been even worse now.
Click to expand...
I think it be fair to state both Gerrard and Gio both expected backing, Gerrard after winning league and Gio after getting us to the champions league. The fact we didn't invest after winning 55 has resulted in where we are now.
 
Wordy_Rappinghood said:
It always amazed me that given how well Morelos played against genuine top opposition in Europe we never sold him and they sold Ajer for big bucks after a season he performed pathetically.
Click to expand...

Failure of the sporting director/director of football, if we had made it known that he was available for purchase, we'd have got money in the door for him. Maybe not the fantasy numbers people had fixed in their heads, but we'd have got something meaningful for him. Why didn't we?

I don't think we pushed the sale of many players under Gerrard, which is bewildering to me, because we clearly needed the money and that stance contradicted the supposed strategy the club was aiming to achieve. We didn't make a single big sale during Gerrard's tenure at the club, that's despite massive improvements in performances and stand out European campaigns. It really does beg the question, what the hell was actually going on?
 
GBY74 said:
I think it be fair to state both Gerrard and Gio both expected backing, Gerrard after winning league and Gio after getting us to the champions league. The fact we didn't invest after winning 55 has resulted in where we are now.
Click to expand...

Gio had more grounds to expect backing. He actually facilitated the sale of two key players from his squad and overachieved in Europe. Gerrard on the other hand, didn't want us to sell his best players and yet still expected to keep adding to an already bloated wage bill.

Why we didn't sell players under Gerrard, has always sat weirdly with me. Who was calling the shots on that front, because it clearly wasn't Wilson. We made three big sales, in a very short span of time under Gio and under Gerrard, I think our biggest sale was Windass. Which was right at the beginning of his tenure.
 
ronadamus_prime said:
Gio had more grounds to expect backing. He actually facilitated the sale of two key players from his squad and overachieved in Europe. Gerrard on the other hand, didn't want us to sell his best players and yet still expected to keep adding to an already bloated wage bill.

Why we didn't sell players under Gerrard, has always sat weirdly with me. Who was calling the shots on that front, because it clearly wasn't Wilson. We made three big sales, in a very short span of time under Gio and under Gerrard, I think our biggest sale was Windass. Which was right at the beginning of his tenure.
Click to expand...
The three big sales that got reasonable money, who signed them.
 
Think about how much money we've spent on transfers and wages since Gerrard came in. Every manager has been backed. Some more than others. Its not been the backing, it's been the recruitment. Case in point, Celtic spend less than us and get far more. Think about every significant signing since 2018. How many have been genuine successes?
 
I've never been sure what happened.

The one question I was asked afterwards was "If Gerrard didn't want to sell certain players and then left, why didn't the Board actively tout those certain players for sale (after Gerrard's departure) ?"

Or did they ? Did I miss the Board taking that belated opportunity to try & flog those players off ?
 
ronadamus_prime said:
Failure of the sporting director/director of football, if we had made it known that he was available for purchase, we'd have got money in the door for him. Maybe not the fantasy numbers people had fixed in their heads, but we'd have got something meaningful for him. Why didn't we?

I don't think we pushed the sale of many players under Gerrard, which is bewildering to me, because we clearly needed the money and that stance contradicted the supposed strategy the club was aiming to achieve. We didn't make a single big sale during Gerrard's tenure at the club, that's despite massive improvements in performances and stand out European campaigns. It really does beg the question, what the hell was actually going on?
Click to expand...

I reckon the board were "scared" that if they pressured him to selling players, he'd walk.

The issue was he went and did it anyway even after getting to keep them all.

I get their thinking and it's really only with hindsight, knowing he left anyway, we can say they should have called his bluff.

Very close to being "no man bigger than the club" territory but undestandable given how much he'd done for them and us.
 
bkerr72 said:
Something had to give given the club lost £15m the season before then £23m the year we won 55. He could have sold Alfie and/or Kent he didn't and wanted to continually add to a squad that was at 35 or 36 players. He lost to Malmo despite playing a full half against 10 men so with no champions league money, no major player sale in his time with us and the loss of £23m due to COVID where was the cash coming from?
Click to expand...
The only thing I would add to this is there was still a level of Covid uncertainty in summer 2021.

Friendly games and even the first fixture (Livingstone?) were played in front of restricted crowds.
 
RossS1872 said:
Think about how much money we've spent on transfers and wages since Gerrard came in. Every manager has been backed. Some more than others. Its not been the backing, it's been the recruitment. Case in point, Celtic spend less than us and get far more. Think about every significant signing since 2018. How many have been genuine successes?
Click to expand...
It's not it's whether the manager shows them too much respect or treats them with contempt. Gerrard done the latter and beat them regularly.
 
Brookfield Bear said:
The only thing I would add to this is there was still a level of Covid uncertainty in summer 2021.

Friendly games and even the first fixture (Livingstone?) were played in front of restricted crowds.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the sentiment, but our title rival sold two of their best players, in the last year of their contracts, for a massive profit. It's not a point which stands up to scrutiny. If we'd actively tried to sell a few assets, Gerrard would have had extra funds to spend on the team.
 
Slipshod said:
This was the start of the shambolic player trading model.
The Club had reported a loss of £23m.
We simply had to sell one or two assets.
Gerrard had spent his entire career at an elite EPL club where finances were never really an issue.
Click to expand...
This. I loved Gerrard, and as a fan wanted to keep 55 players and build on that. The reality is that our board needed to be stronger and make a better decision for the long term future of the club. What we had was unsustainable spending. We’re already on the ‘watch list’ for FFP. Gerrard probably spat the dummy as well to be honest, and that led to Malmo (on him), and failing to win 3 games in a row at Ibrox. If we had won those, I don’t think Postecoglu gets to Christmas and life for us changes. Sliding doors moment and all that.
 
The blank cheque was sitting there if only he had qualified for the Champions League.

Gerrard sh@t the bed in the qualifiers, he was already whoring himself across England had hardly been at the Training Centre the whole summer our preseason was a disgrace. We got beat off Tranmere Rovers, we walked off the pitch in Malmo looking like an unfit Sunday Pub Team compared to them. We got ourself level in the tie by halftime at Ibrox had 45 minutes even extra time against 10 men to score one goal. We conceded 2 and that was that. Not only was there no cash injection, our targets weren’t coming to Scotland with no Champions League prospect.

Gerrard inherited a squad containing Foderingham, Tav, Wallace, Jack, McCrorie, Dorrans, Candeias, Morelos

He signed Arfield, McGregor, Murphy, Katic, Goldson, Flanagan, Barisic, Lafferty, Grezda, McAuley, Firth, Kent, Defoe, Davis, Polster, Kamara, Hastie, Jones, Stewart, Edmundson, Aribo, Helander, Barker, Hagi, Bassey, McLaughlin, Balogun, Roofe, Itten, Simpson, Wright, Ofoborh, Bacuna, Sakala, Lundstram,

Brought in Loans of
Worrall, Ejaria, Coulibally, Sadiq, Ojo, King, Kamberi, Zungu,

Anyone saying Gerrard wasn’t backed is delusional. Gerrard point blank refused to sell any first team pick. He was told we have to sell before we can buy. There was this thing called UEFA Financial Fair Play regulations that we made the watch list for.
 
EIAFF said:
He pushed for Lundstram and he cost us the Malmo game which, had we got through it, would have provided funds for other players.

Gerrards far from innoncent in the post 55 summer transfers.

He can't, at a club with our resources, just demand we keep everyone and don't bring cash in.

His stance on that stopped any sort of trading. The Malmo debacle compounded it all.

The board can't just spent millions on end with no incoming fees. He'd already been more than backed by bringing in the players we did the summer before AND not selling players of note at that point either. That got us 55. At that point, there had to be compromise...or at least CL football to balance it.
Click to expand...

Who cost us the Malmo game ?

Lundstram was an unused sub at Ibrox where we shat the bed v 10 men.

Tie all square after 18 minutes, they had a player sent off in first half injury time, Colak battered 2 in in 4 minutes, 10 minutes in to the second half. Just like they had battered 2 in in two minutes within 4 minutes of the restart in Malmo.
 
GBY74 said:
It's not it's whether the manager shows them too much respect or treats them with contempt. Gerrard done the latter and beat them regularly.
Click to expand...
Seriously, you think the difference between winning and losing is the manager treating Celtic with contempt? It’s really not that simple. If only. They are very well run with finances that dwarf ours based on an excellent recruitment strategy. They buy better players and sell for much more than us. Even after the debacle of their 10 in a row attempt, they sold players that summer to the value 37.6 million euros.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top