Liverpool FC Forum

by **stmichael** » Thu Jul 01, 2004 2:26 pm

I wrote a piece a few weeks back about how I couldn't understand Gerrard leaving this club for a club where he'd have less influence, less chance to run a game etc. I'd accepted he was leaving though as had most on this forum. But my anger at a 'possible betrayal' that seemed to be on the cards was real.

The whole debacle, which would have been another great balls-up by the liverpool board led me to think about the following. What would Shanks have made of all this?

I think Shankly's response would have been the same as many of us, that private anger (or not so private in the age of the forum) and public sadness at the 'dark side' taking one of the good guys. Money over love. But just as professional footballers earn hard currency, we pay in emotional currency and I feel a backlash would've been inevitable if Stevie had left. Some footballers still have emotional currency, or recognise it, some don't. Lawro seems to have spent his on a new reversing opinion machine. See how he changes his mind in a flash...! Hansen wrote he should go, Gerrard recognised it over the weekend and stayed.

And that emotional currency is what makes us revere Shankly so much - a man who knew who to talk the talk we wanted to hear. I don't doubt he believed it for a minute, but Shankly never moved club. Nor my personal hero, Paisley, the greatest manager ever.

If they had, what would we have made of that ? Part of the reason the anger appeared over Stevie when it became apparent that he was thinking of leaving was that we had bestowed on him the same kind of 'Redness' that Shankly had. We felt foolish and conned by his desire to move, whether for trophies or money. The hard professionals said 'it's a good thing for him, to move on' but none of us would or could believe he would possibly want to go... Because of the sentiment that we are always accused of having in bucketloads by everyone else. But when he didn't leave, sentiment proved right tastes a lot sweeter than a wrong realist.

Shankly operated in a professional game, not always in a professional way. He was and is just like every other manager. He was as desperate for a win as Ferguson is, as Mourihno is, as Wenger is. But the fans knew he loved, truly loved his club.

I remember at how hurt I was at Keegan's leaving, I never wondered then, but did over the weekend, what Paisley would've done...

It's not what Shankly would have made of it now though that's the real question but what signal it sends out to other top players - time to open up the heart not the purse perhaps. One can only hope so. Except for Igor.

YNWA

by **DAV** » Thu Jul 01, 2004 2:31 pm

i agree with everything said.
However
being a footballer is a job, for most its lasts 10 years 15 max
and then nothing.
an injury can finish you in a blink of an eye.
So i can see why wages is a big fact for players, Passion doesent pay the bills.
But thank god gerrard stayed.

by **Gareth G** » Thu Jul 01, 2004 5:06 pm

I also agree with everything and its a good post.

Football is a job, correct. But it's an over payed job and player's take it for granted. You say about a career ending injury, isn't that a possibility with not only every job, but with life? You could walk out and get hit by a bus tomorrow. Anyhow, player's should spend money carefully and maybe keep some in reserve incase something did happen, that's the problem with footballers, they live flat out and spend, spend, spend, Beckham is a prime example. Like who need's ten cars? You can't drive them all at once can you? They know it's there so they spend it, if player's had to take a dramatic wage drop they're obviously not going to go mad with money.

Anyway, im very pleased Gerrard didn't go.

Liverpool FC Forum

What would shankly have thought?

Who is online