Damien Comolli

[Fabio]

[quote author=Ryan link=topic=42566.msg1219570#msg1219570 date=1289946177]
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=42566.msg1219409#msg1219409 date=1289928395]
You're a glorified and overrated fucking Scout, Comolli.

Shut the fuck up and get on with your job. Which is scouting.
[/quote]

He's got it downpat though, this 'Director' of Scouting business.

'He can't be a scout! He wears a suit, has got glasses on, *and* looks pensive.'
[/quote]

he's oncys image of the perfect scout. Swarthy foreigner who wears suits

 

[SaintGeorge67]

You're all overreacting. He's not Director of Football. He's Director of Football Strategy.

 

[King Binny]

Not from the most credible of sources though...

http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2010/11/17/2217695/liverpool-transfer-targets-to-be-decided-by-three-man-panel

Liverpool director of football strategy Damien Comolli is to set up a three-man transfer panel to ensure consensus when the club decides on its targets, Goal.com UK has learned.

The Frenchman wants himself, manager Roy Hodgson and the incoming chief executive to all have equal power when it comes to determining and chasing potential signings.

All three will discuss possible targets and their viability and will each have the right to veto moves so that no deal is done without 100 per cent backing of the main decision-makers at the club.

Comolli’s idea is to ensure the key figures at Anfield take collective responsibility and avoid the internal conflicts that marred his time as sporting director at Tottenham and have led to scepticism over whether the two-tier European model can work in English football.

It is within this proposed framework that Comolli said on Tuesday that Hodgson would have the final say on all transfers, as no player will be signed without the full backing of the three-man panel.

While Reds legend Kenny Dalglish will not be given a 'vote' on the transfer panel, the club ambassador will have some influence in a consultative role. Comolli has also revealed the Scot will play a part in his recruitment policy to convince players to sign for Liverpool.

 

[gareth_thomas]

It is within this proposed framework that Comolli said on Tuesday that Hodgson would have the final say on all transfers, as no player will be signed without the full backing of the three-man panel.

So.... is it like a voting system.. if 2 vote yes and the other no... then the majority wins?? because if it is... its not exactly 'full backing'

 

[mark1975]

I can see that working well.

 

[Akakabooto]

[quote author=gareth_thomas link=topic=42566.msg1219761#msg1219761 date=1289984462]
It is within this proposed framework that Comolli said on Tuesday that Hodgson would have the final say on all transfers, as no player will be signed without the full backing of the three-man panel.

So.... is it like a voting system.. if 2 vote yes and the other no... then the majority wins?? because if it is... its not exactly 'full backing'
[/quote]

All three will discuss possible targets and their viability and will each have the right to veto moves so that no deal is done without 100 per cent backing of the main decision-makers at the club.

 

[King Binny]

Could the key phrase be "each have the right to veto moves"? Maybe reading too much into it but instead of voting for yes, is like someone (most probably Comolli) throws in a name, if none has any objection, then he will go ahead with the bid?

 

[kingjulian]

The above post by Mark may be sarcastic...but

I'm all for not relying on one person to make the ultimate call on issues like transfers.

Concerns from all quarter needs to be addressed.

Player Quality, Fit with the squad, Wage sustainability, Return on investment....etc. When you rely on the coach to make that decision, i don't think all those issues are always addressed.

If we are buying an experienced player who might block a promising player from coming through then it needs to be at least discussed. One person cannot be allowed to possess the deciding authority on all those factors, unless that person is a proven world class manager who has shown that he addresses those issues on a consistent basis. I will only have Mourinho, Wenger, and Fergi wielding that kind of power, and i don't see any of those managers managing us in the near future.

 

[HC]

Didn't anyone play the game 'football director' on the commodore or amiga?

Fucking ace fun.

Subsequently I've got nothing but good things to say about directors of football.

 

[TheBunnyman]

[quote author=Binny link=topic=42566.msg1219760#msg1219760 date=1289983969]
Not from the most credible of sources though...

http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2010/11/17/2217695/liverpool-transfer-targets-to-be-decided-by-three-man-panel

Liverpool director of football strategy Damien Comolli is to set up a three-man transfer panel to ensure consensus when the club decides on its targets, Goal.com UK has learned.

The Frenchman wants himself, manager Roy Hodgson and the incoming chief executive to all have equal power when it comes to determining and chasing potential signings.

All three will discuss possible targets and their viability and will each have the right to veto moves so that no deal is done without 100 per cent backing of the main decision-makers at the club.

Comolli’s idea is to ensure the key figures at Anfield take collective responsibility and avoid the internal conflicts that marred his time as sporting director at Tottenham and have led to scepticism over whether the two-tier European model can work in English football.

It is within this proposed framework that Comolli said on Tuesday that Hodgson would have the final say on all transfers, as no player will be signed without the full backing of the three-man panel.

While Reds legend Kenny Dalglish will not be given a 'vote' on the transfer panel, the club ambassador will have some influence in a consultative role. Comolli has also revealed the Scot will play a part in his recruitment policy to convince players to sign for Liverpool.

[/quote]

If you watch Commoli's interview, that is basically what he says. Given that Henry knows nothing about football, though, so will be looking at the transfers from a purely financial point of view, it presumably comes down to Commoli presenting a list of suggested names and recommendations and letting the manager decide whether these are players he wants and can work with. Commoli did specifically say that there was no point signing a player the manager doesn't like because he would never play him and it would thus be a waste of money. Sounds like common sense, although obviously in Roy's case there's a fair chance that his views will be disregarded because they don't expect him to be there very long.

 

[rurikbird]

[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42566.msg1219767#msg1219767 date=1289985530]
The above post by Mark may be sarcastic...but

I'm all for not relying on one person to make the ultimate call on issues like transfers.

Concerns from all quarter needs to be addressed.

Player Quality, Fit with the squad, Wage sustainability, Return on investment....etc. When you rely on the coach to make that decision, i don't think all those issues are always addressed.

If we are buying an experienced player who might block a promising player from coming through then it needs to be at least discussed. One person cannot be allowed to possess the deciding authority on all those factors, unless that person is a proven world class manager who has shown that he addresses those issues on a consistent basis. I will only have Mourinho, Wenger, and Fergi wielding that kind of power, and i don't see any of those managers managing us in the near future.
[/quote]

I agree with everything in this post.

 

[Avmenon]

Mark is definitely being sarcastic.

I don't see this working either, but I'm not sure what other choice exists.

 

[Buddha]

[quote author=TheBunnyman link=topic=42566.msg1219775#msg1219775 date=1289986224]
[quote author=Binny link=topic=42566.msg1219760#msg1219760 date=1289983969]
Not from the most credible of sources though...

http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2010/11/17/2217695/liverpool-transfer-targets-to-be-decided-by-three-man-panel

Liverpool director of football strategy Damien Comolli is to set up a three-man transfer panel to ensure consensus when the club decides on its targets, Goal.com UK has learned.

The Frenchman wants himself, manager Roy Hodgson and the incoming chief executive to all have equal power when it comes to determining and chasing potential signings.

All three will discuss possible targets and their viability and will each have the right to veto moves so that no deal is done without 100 per cent backing of the main decision-makers at the club.

Comolli’s idea is to ensure the key figures at Anfield take collective responsibility and avoid the internal conflicts that marred his time as sporting director at Tottenham and have led to scepticism over whether the two-tier European model can work in English football.

It is within this proposed framework that Comolli said on Tuesday that Hodgson would have the final say on all transfers, as no player will be signed without the full backing of the three-man panel.

While Reds legend Kenny Dalglish will not be given a 'vote' on the transfer panel, the club ambassador will have some influence in a consultative role. Comolli has also revealed the Scot will play a part in his recruitment policy to convince players to sign for Liverpool.

[/quote]

If you watch Commoli's interview, that is basically what he says. Given that Henry knows nothing about football, though, so will be looking at the transfers from a purely financial point of view, it presumably comes down to Commoli presenting a list of suggested names and recommendations and letting the manager decide whether these are players he wants and can work with. Commoli did specifically say that there was no point signing a player the manager doesn't like because he would never play him and it would thus be a waste of money. Sounds like common sense, although obviously in Roy's case there's a fair chance that his views will be disregarded because they don't expect him to be there very long.

[/quote]

..which is exactly why they need to cut him loose now. Why allow him significant input into transfer policy when he's not going to be around too long? Even if it means Dalglish has to step into a temporary role until a new manager is found, some continuity will be preserved as Dalglish would still have a consultative role at the club post-appointment.

Of course, I'm refusing to even consider the idea that NESV remain open to the idea of Woycorpse being here beyond this season.

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

Having three people deciding signings could bring it's own problems too. Slow decisions, lack of decisions etc...

 

[rurikbird]

[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=42566.msg1219797#msg1219797 date=1289989274]
Mark is definitely being sarcastic.

I don't see this working either, but I'm not sure what other choice exists.
[/quote]

But why not? 3 individuals who share the same vision should be able to work together fine. 3 is better than 2. And the veto power ensures that once a decision is made and a transfer goes through, everyone on the panel will share the responsibility.

 

[King Binny]

Besides, the Chief Executive gotta be a 'football person' too. Else he'll bascially be taking the financial perspective.

 

[rurikbird]

[quote author=Gerry_A_Trick link=topic=42566.msg1219808#msg1219808 date=1289990788]
Having three people deciding signings could bring it's own problems too. Slow decisions, lack of decisions etc...
[/quote]

Yeah, they will have to make sure they are still fast and decisive. Basically it's the owners' job to put together a team of 3 people who share the common vision of what kind of squad they want to build. Then, each one will bring their own perspective in order to decide who to buy. Each potential target will be judged on 3 levels: chief scout will ask if the target represents value for money, i.e. if the target has potential to improve beyond their current valuation, manager will ask if the target is what's needed for the squad to win, chief executive will probably look from financial perspective. If the potential signing satisfies all 3 criteria, then the decision is made.

That's how it should work in theory anyway. Sure, it's far from foolproof. But so is any other system. Whether you have 1 or 2, or 3 people deciding which player to buy, any successful signing will still have to satisfy all 3 of the above criteria. I like the idea of a 3-person system because this way each of those criteria will have its own advocate and if the panel is well-balanced (i.e. no one has overwhelming power over the decision-making process and everyone is equally active and involved), the decisions will be balanced too. Sometimes it's hard for one person to balance all these perspectives in his head and I don't see anyone on the horizon that I believe would have enough wisdom, experience, and objectivity to make such decisions all by himself.

And again, it's the owners' job to make sure that the panel is balanced, shares a vision and functions well. If something goes wrong they can always shake things up.

 

[Buddha]

[quote author=rurikbird link=topic=42566.msg1219822#msg1219822 date=1289992921]
[quote author=Gerry_A_Trick link=topic=42566.msg1219808#msg1219808 date=1289990788]
Having three people deciding signings could bring it's own problems too. Slow decisions, lack of decisions etc...
[/quote]

Yeah, they will have to make sure they are still fast and decisive. Basically it's the owners' job to put together a team of 3 people who share the common vision of what kind of squad they want to build. Then, each one will bring their own perspective in order to decide who to buy. Each potential target will be judged on 3 levels: chief scout will ask if the target represents value for money, i.e. if the target has potential to improve beyond their current valuation, manager will ask if the target is what's needed for the squad to win, chief executive will probably look from financial perspective. If the potential signing satisfies all 3 criteria, then the decision is made.

That's how it should work in theory anyway. Sure, it's far from foolproof. But so is any other system. Whether you have 1 or 2, or 3 people deciding which player to buy, any successful signing will still have to satisfy all 3 of the above criteria. I like the idea of a 3-person system because this way each of those criteria will have its own advocate and if the panel is well-balanced (i.e. no one has overwhelming power over the decision-making process and everyone is equally active and involved), the decisions will be balanced too. Sometimes it's hard for one person to balance all these perspectives in his head and I don't see anyone on the horizon that I believe would have enough wisdom, experience, and objectivity to make such decisions all by himself.

And again, it's the owners' job to make sure that the panel is balanced, shares a vision and functions well. If something goes wrong they can always shake things up.
[/quote]

Good points well put.

 

[manwithnoname]

But why not? 3 individuals who share the same vision should be able to work together fine. 3 is better than 2. And the veto power ensures that once a decision is made and a transfer goes through, everyone on the panel will share the responsibility.

Following this "logic" would 4 be better than 3?

 

[rurikbird]

[quote author=Brendan link=topic=42566.msg1219827#msg1219827 date=1289993372]

But why not? 3 individuals who share the same vision should be able to work together fine. 3 is better than 2. And the veto power ensures that once a decision is made and a transfer goes through, everyone on the panel will share the responsibility.

Following this "logic" would 4 be better than 3?
[/quote]

3 works well for military tribunals, so...

 

[manwithnoname]

3 works well for military tribunals, so...

...what?

 

[Avmenon]

[quote author=rurikbird link=topic=42566.msg1219810#msg1219810 date=1289990943]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=42566.msg1219797#msg1219797 date=1289989274]
Mark is definitely being sarcastic.

I don't see this working either, but I'm not sure what other choice exists.
[/quote]

But why not? 3 individuals who share the same vision should be able to work together fine. 3 is better than 2. And the veto power ensures that once a decision is made and a transfer goes through, everyone on the panel will share the responsibility.
[/quote]

You've answered your own question, actually.

The ideal would be one brilliant manager with a good eye for transfers and who knows exactly what he's trying to achieve with that player, but that's easier said than done.

 

[Insignificance]

So, lets look at the summer signings.

Next: Christian Poulsen
Noone with a sniff of football understanding would have spent a dime on the footballer Christian Poulson. However 1 guy have followed the danish full international for 10 years. Scandinaves also adopt very fast to english footie, so he will be an instant contribution.The other (newly employed MD) would see a full international costing 4,5 mill pounds replacing another full international at DM who will bring in 20 mill pounds as extraordinary good business. What COmolli has to say then wouldnt mean much, as the resale value wouldnt be important given the 15,5 million we gained on him anyway... Closed

Next: Paul Konchesky

 

[localny]

damian, can you get a scouse accent and sign dale jennings please.

 

[zlatan18]

Comolli should tell Henry to sack Hodgson and sign Bielsa as our new coach. He could bring a few players with him. Isla, Vidal, Sanchez

 

[Jack D Rips]

I dont like the idea of 4.

Could end up an X Factor situation 😉

 

[Jack D Rips]

[quote author=zlatan18 link=topic=42566.msg1219938#msg1219938 date=1290007134]
Comolli should tell Henry to sack Hodgson and sign Bielsa as our new coach. He could bring a few players with him. Isla, Vidal, Sanchez
[/quote]

Zlatan is it your target to mention this Bielsa in every fucking thread on the forum? I must have read that opinion about 20 times now

 

[mark1975]

[quote author=rurikbird link=topic=42566.msg1219810#msg1219810 date=1289990943]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=42566.msg1219797#msg1219797 date=1289989274]
Mark is definitely being sarcastic.

I don't see this working either, but I'm not sure what other choice exists.
[/quote]

But why not? 3 individuals who share the same vision should be able to work together fine. 3 is better than 2. And the veto power ensures that once a decision is made and a transfer goes through, everyone on the panel will share the responsibility.
[/quote]

I think we may be looking at this in a cautionary way, because of how badly we've done in some instances with transfers, it's kinda missing the wood for the trees though, even if it is a good concept, it'd be nice to just get a manager who knows his stuff, otherwise it just seems like we're compensating.

 

[spider-Neil]

[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=42566.msg1220024#msg1220024 date=1290019990]
[quote author=rurikbird link=topic=42566.msg1219810#msg1219810 date=1289990943]
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=42566.msg1219797#msg1219797 date=1289989274]
Mark is definitely being sarcastic.

I don't see this working either, but I'm not sure what other choice exists.
[/quote]

But why not? 3 individuals who share the same vision should be able to work together fine. 3 is better than 2. And the veto power ensures that once a decision is made and a transfer goes through, everyone on the panel will share the responsibility.
[/quote]

I think we may be looking at this in a cautionary way, because of how badly we've done in some instances with transfers, it's kinda missing the wood for the trees though, even if it is a good concept, it'd be nice to just get a manager who knows his stuff, otherwise it just seems like we're compensating.
[/quote]

but what do you mean by 'knows his stuff'?
plays in the correct manner?
makes subs at the correct time?
knows how to get the best out of players?
technically a manager could have all not and not have any say in transfers.

 

[Richey]

If this is the system we're going to have its a good job we don't have Benitez anymore. He'd have fallen out with the rest of the panel and slagged them off in the media within about a week.