OK, it's easy to sit there and say "Liverpool's signings have been a complete joke, so it's right they sack Comolli - that's his responsibility."
The first thing though is that Dalglish has this to say about it:
So is Comolli a scapegoat? I don't quite understand it because either he is the DoF, responsible for targeting and acquiring players, then why was the manager - according to Dalglish himself - in charge of who the club signed?
If Dalglish is magnanimously deflecting blame from Comolli, taking the hit himself, then does the board not realise that making a scapegoat of Comolli will have no effect on the team's fortunes?
Either way you look at it, those two possibilities suggest there is a fundamental bodge job taking place at the top level. OK, that's not exactly surprising given their handling of Suarezgate and whatever else, but that was about PR. This is about whether the ownership is going to worsen the fortunes of the club, on the pitch.
I mean, if they are making a scapegoat of Comolli, what's the point at this stage? It would just seem to be a signal that they will stand by Dalglish whether the results start improving or not.
The first thing though is that Dalglish has this to say about it:
He has been really helpful in every transfer target we've gone for. Everyone who has come into the club since Damien has been here was of my choice. Once I made the choice who I wanted Damien went away and did a fantastic job of bringing them in.
So is Comolli a scapegoat? I don't quite understand it because either he is the DoF, responsible for targeting and acquiring players, then why was the manager - according to Dalglish himself - in charge of who the club signed?
If Dalglish is magnanimously deflecting blame from Comolli, taking the hit himself, then does the board not realise that making a scapegoat of Comolli will have no effect on the team's fortunes?
Either way you look at it, those two possibilities suggest there is a fundamental bodge job taking place at the top level. OK, that's not exactly surprising given their handling of Suarezgate and whatever else, but that was about PR. This is about whether the ownership is going to worsen the fortunes of the club, on the pitch.
I mean, if they are making a scapegoat of Comolli, what's the point at this stage? It would just seem to be a signal that they will stand by Dalglish whether the results start improving or not.