Richard Hughes

purbeck67 said:
There's a serious point here if Hughes has already acted in any capacity for Liverpool. Let's not regurgitate every old argument. This needs to be addressed by the club.
Click to expand...

We have no idea what his contract entails but this was published by the Liverpool Echo 9 days ago and no media reaction.

'Richard Hughes has already advised Liverpool on huge transfers - and tried to appoint their potential next manager'

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

Inside story of how Richard Hughes became Liverpool's new sporting director

Special report from Theo Squires on Richard Hughes becoming Liverpool's new sporting director - a move that has been 20 years in the making for Michael Edwards
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk www.liverpoolecho.co.uk
 
The second someone from the media praises Huges its all a load of nonsense, the second someone is saying something bad it's taken for gospel. This is getting beyond stupid even after certain retarded posters have been proven wrong and will not admit it for love nor money.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Does it? What difference does it make to AFCB if he's spoken to Alonso's agent?
Click to expand...

Who know if this bit of gossip has any legs .Obviously though this is NOT about him talking to Alonso’s agent but what ever else he’s been involved in and weather or not there is any conflict of interest with AFCB .
 
CherriesOnTop said:
The second someone from the media praises Huges its all a load of nonsense, the second someone is saying something bad it's taken for gospel. This is getting beyond stupid even after certain retarded posters have been proven wrong and will not admit it for love nor money.
Click to expand...
The retard word seems popular today.
 
CherriesOnTop said:
The second someone from the media praises Huges its all a load of nonsense, the second someone is saying something bad it's taken for gospel. This is getting beyond stupid even after certain retarded posters have been proven wrong and will not admit it for love nor money.
Click to expand...
Sounds like your exactly the same only reversed ..it’s a hypothetical discussion on a chat board . The Athletic are a very reliable source of information ..a conflict of interest is a valid discussion if an employee is working for two clubs in the same division ..having said that it could be all bo**cks and will blow over
 
red_house said:
We have no idea what his contract entails but this was published by the Liverpool Echo 9 days ago and no media reaction.

'Richard Hughes has already advised Liverpool on huge transfers - and tried to appoint their potential next manager'

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

Inside story of how Richard Hughes became Liverpool's new sporting director

Special report from Theo Squires on Richard Hughes becoming Liverpool's new sporting director - a move that has been 20 years in the making for Michael Edwards
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk www.liverpoolecho.co.uk
Click to expand...

Interesting to have a bit more detail on this...

"In the case of De Zerbi, Hughes has tried to appoint him before. If not for a delayed takeover at Bournemouth, the Italian was lined up to replace Scott Parker in August 2022."
 
wallmth said:
Who know if this bit of gossip has any legs .Obviously though this is NOT about him talking to Alonso’s agent but what ever else he’s been involved in and weather or not there is any conflict of interest with AFCB .
Click to expand...

I don't know if there are any conflict of interest rules for directors but presumably it's for AFCB and Liverpool to sort his contract and what he is and isn't allowed to do.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Interesting to have a bit more detail on this...

"In the case of De Zerbi, Hughes has tried to appoint him before. If not for a delayed takeover at Bournemouth, the Italian was lined up to replace Scott Parker in August 2022."
Click to expand...

Rank amateur gin drinking chuckle brother. However he's mates with Edwards and as we know nepotism has absolutely no place in football :wagging:.. I mean it never worked for us did it ;)
 
red_house said:
Rank amateur gin drinking chuckle brother. However he's mates with Edwards and as we know nepotism has absolutely no place in football :wagging:.. I mean it never worked for us did it ;)
Click to expand...

Aside from Neil's increasingly desperate attempts to die on his silly hill it does add context to Parker's otherwise inexplicable self-destructive comments. Perhaps he knew they were going to replace him as soon as the takeover went through.

His moaning about lack of signings always seemed odd especially as it became clear that there was a takeover in the pipeline. Surely he knew.
 
wallmth said:
Serious questions would have to be asked if there is any transfer activity between the two clubs in the near future .
Click to expand...
In most other industries there would be a clause in the employment contract that an employee that leaves a business, could not approach an employee of that business, for a set period of time. I dont doubt that business ethics are somewhat murkier in the football world and this could and would be navigated.
 
wallmth said:
Sounds like your exactly the same only reversed ..it’s a hypothetical discussion on a chat board . The Athletic are a very reliable source of information ..a conflict of interest is a valid discussion if an employee is working for two clubs in the same division ..having said that it could be all bo**cks and will blow over
Click to expand...
Absolutely not. Hughes is not the messiah, but he is definitely not what some portray him. I just tend to not believe the media straight away.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Interesting to have a bit more detail on this...

"In the case of De Zerbi, Hughes has tried to appoint him before. If not for a delayed takeover at Bournemouth, the Italian was lined up to replace Scott Parker in August 2022."
Click to expand...

I read that as typical burnishing of a reputation in the build up to him going to a big club. Slightly misrepresent facts to get the Liverpool fans frothing with excitement and sharing the story about the prescience of their new appointment.

From what I remember at the time, it was reported that we had approached De Zerbi during the summer when he was out of work to ask if he may be interested in working with us. He completely rejected the possibility out of hand. It was only a sounding out for the future as Parker was still in situ and hadn't had his meltdown yet.

He was never coming here. The conversation happened before Parker left and before the Foley offer was made and accepted.

You can credit Hughes for having that conversation with a well regarded up-and-coming manager with succession planning in mind. However, trying to paint it as us only missing out due to timing is false. De Zerbi had no interest in us.
 
kirsikka said:
I read that as typical burnishing of a reputation in the build up to him going to a big club. Slightly misrepresent facts to get the Liverpool fans frothing with excitement and sharing the story about the prescience of their new appointment.

From what I remember at the time, it was reported that we had approached De Zerbi during the summer when he was out of work to ask if he may be interested in working with us. He completely rejected the possibility out of hand. It was only a sounding out for the future as Parker was still in situ and hadn't had his meltdown yet.

He was never coming here. The conversation happened before Parker left and before the Foley offer was made and accepted.

You can credit Hughes for having that conversation with a well regarded up-and-coming manager with succession planning in mind. However, trying to paint it as us only missing out due to timing is false. De Zerbi had no interest in us.
Click to expand...

Not sure. Demin was looking to sell, and writing was perhaps on wall with Parker, as he had been making digs/comments about squad/signing players throughout summer.

De Zerbi may have rejected us regardless, but if Foley was in charge at that point, and we painted picture of De Zerbi leading us into exciting new era, fund available to sign quality young players, he may have been interested.

There were too many uncertainties/risks at that point, to make us a valid proposition to De Zerbi.

Managers/players are primarily interested in what suitors/prospective employers can do for them. If De Zerbi was in situation he was back then, and we approached him as we are now, after AI walks in summer, would he be interested.... I'd say most definitely.
 
kirsikka said:
I read that as typical burnishing of a reputation in the build up to him going to a big club. Slightly misrepresent facts to get the Liverpool fans frothing with excitement and sharing the story about the prescience of their new appointment.

From what I remember at the time, it was reported that we had approached De Zerbi during the summer when he was out of work to ask if he may be interested in working with us. He completely rejected the possibility out of hand. It was only a sounding out for the future as Parker was still in situ and hadn't had his meltdown yet.

He was never coming here. The conversation happened before Parker left and before the Foley offer was made and accepted.

You can credit Hughes for having that conversation with a well regarded up-and-coming manager with succession planning in mind. However, trying to paint it as us only missing out due to timing is false. De Zerbi had no interest in us.
Click to expand...

Who is to say that he wouldn't have joined us if Foley had already taken over? He would have had a large transfer budget available.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Who is to say that he wouldn't have joined us if Foley had already taken over? He would have had a large transfer budget available.
Click to expand...

Yes, at that point, we were probably able to say we're in process of new owner, more funds, training ground, stadium etc.

But too much risk, as nothing concrete. He could have come in to a club with nothing to spend, with weakest PL squad on papoer that season.

'That all sounds good, but this could be a pipe dream you're selling, in order for me to join'.

Can't blame him for turning us down at that point. Things vastly different since, evidence all there - nowhere near as much risk for incoming managers. Clear we 're wiling to spend on players and infra. Stature of club has increased.
 
Neil Dawson said:
Thats because we were talking about his relationship with Edwards who we signed them off. If you want more recent examples of wasted money/big wages there’s plenty starting with the three keepers and moving up the pitch…
Click to expand...
If he’s genuinely as bad as you make out, how have we managed to sustain PL for such a prolonged period under his tenure? We are safe with nine games to go with a squad full of players assembled by him (bar Adam Smith.)

Do you genuinely believe that Howe, O’Neil and Iraola are all miracle workers who achieved the impossible with the useless squad that was assembled for them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;