Ranieri or someone else ; Part XXVII (7 Viewers)

[V]

Sure, but does this mean that Ranieri also isn't picking the players? Poulsen, Sissoko etc... were these players also picked by the board?

If they didn't let Deschamps pick the players he wants i can safely say that they aren't letting Ranieri pick his players either.

But i hear people here blaming Ranieri for rejecting Xabi on order to get Poulsen.
If he really did that then it means that he's the one picking the players, and Deschamps didn't leave because he wasn't given the right to pick his players.

I'm so confused. I wish i could use double standards like others do. It would've been much easier.

There are certainly some deeper reasons as to why DD left, but not agreeing with the boards transfer policy is certainly one of them. I specifically recall DD saying he does NOT want us to sign Iaquinta(he was keen on Saviola at the time). And we signed Iaq.
I don't see this happening with Ranieri. Why? I don't know.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Darkie]

Sure, but does this mean that Ranieri also isn't picking the players? Poulsen, Sissoko etc... were these players also picked by the board?

If they didn't let Deschamps pick the players he wants i can safely say that they aren't letting Ranieri pick his players either.

But i hear people here blaming Ranieri for rejecting Xabi on order to get Poulsen.
If he really did that then it means that he's the one picking the players, and Deschamps didn't leave because he wasn't given the right to pick his players.

I'm so confused. I wish i could use double standards like others do. It would've been much easier.

Good point

 

[Alen]

There are certainly some deeper reasons as to why DD left, but not agreeing with the boards transfer policy is certainly one of them.

DA

 

[BillyG]

There are certainly some deeper reasons as to why DD left, but not agreeing with the boards transfer policy is certainly one of them. I specifically recall DD saying he does NOT want us to sign Iaquinta(he was keen on Saviola at the time). And we signed Iaq.
I don't see this happening with Ranieri. Why? I don't know.

cuz he's...
spineless? gutless? just a douche? a "yes" man? sackless?

 

[Bjerknes]

Sure, but does this mean that Ranieri also isn't picking the players? Poulsen, Sissoko etc... were these players also picked by the board?

If they didn't let Deschamps pick the players he wants i can safely say that they aren't letting Ranieri pick his players either.

But i hear people here blaming Ranieri for rejecting Xabi on order to get Poulsen.
If he really did that then it means that he's the one picking the players, and Deschamps didn't leave because he wasn't given the right to pick his players.

I'm so confused. I wish i could use double standards like others do. It would've been much easier.

This issue is not quite clear, but I would say that the board would ask for Deschamps input and they're certainly doing that with Ranieri.

It's not exactly double standards. Deschamps just wants more control of the proceedings than Ranieri.

 

[Amaurisimo]

This issue is not quite clear, but I would say that the board would ask for Deschamps input and they're certainly doing that with Ranieri.

It's not exactly double standards. Deschamps just wants more control of the proceedings than Ranieri.

how do you know?

 

[JCK]

This issue is not quite clear, but I would say that the board would ask for Deschamps input and they're certainly doing that with Ranieri.

It's not exactly double standards. Deschamps just wants more control of the proceedings than Ranieri.

More control means a larger budget and that was not available.

 

[Bjerknes]

how do you know?

That's what he said himself, and thus one of the reasons why he left.

 

[Bjerknes]

More control means a larger budget and that was not available.

Not at all.

 

[BillyG]

More control means a larger budget and that was not available.

how?! do u read what u type? can't be

 

[JCK]

Not at all.

If the board offers him X million € to work with, he says it's not enough, they tell him that's what available. He says he can't work with these conditions and resigns. This scenario can drive him to say that he wanted more control over the transfers without going into details. He can say that to win the hearts of some fans and come out the winner in the situation.

 

[BillyG]

More control means a larger budget and that was not available.

If the board offers him X million € to work with, he says it's not enough, they tell him that's what available. He says he can't work with these conditions and resigns. This scenario can drive him to say that he wanted more control over the transfers without going into details. He can say that to win the hearts of some fans and come out the winner in the situation.

no u dimwit!!! how would that be wanting more control? control & wanting X amount of money more are 2 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things.

he prob wanted more control over how & who the money was spent on instead of having some cluless bumbling idiot who use to hand over subs papers dictating who is and isn't in his squad

 

[Amaurisimo]

no u dimwit!!! how would that be wanting more control? control & wanting X amount of money more are 2 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things.

he prob wanted more control over how & who the money was spent on instead of having some cluless bumbling idiot who use to hand over subs papers dictating who is and isn't in his squad

:faq1:

 

[Bjerknes]

If the board offers him X million € to work with, he says it's not enough, they tell him that's what available. He says he can't work with these conditions and resigns. This scenario can drive him to say that he wanted more control over the transfers without going into details. He can say that to win the hearts of some fans and come out the winner in the situation.

So basically, you're saying Didier Deschamps is a liar.

More control does not mean more money.

As I said before, knowing how Deschamps loves(d) the club, I find it extremely hard to believe he'd walk away from the job just because the club did not have "enough" money for his standards. It's not like we didn't have any capital when we signed Tiago, Almiron and Iaquinta. And it's not like Deschamps was oblivious to the state of our finances when he took the job in Serie B.

 

[Bjerknes]

control & wanting X amount of money more are 2 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things.

I have no idea how people come up with such things. Comparing the two makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Alen]

Did anyone of you think that the board saw Deschamps' wish list, that other experts with a history in Juve were told about Deschamps' wish list (Lippi, Capello etc) and they all realized that it's a bad list and we can't go with that?

I mean, Boumsong didn't make Deschamps look very good (which can be forgiven. Afterall, we were in serie B, but still, to insist on buying Boumsong, says something). Saviola instead of Iaquinta isn't making him look too good either.

Maybe the board asked him to work together and to choose the transfers together while Didier wanted full control?

You don't know any of this, neither do i, so how on earth can you make accusations?

After all, Didier didn't have much success after leaving Juve, did he? He wasn't even given a job by some other team yet.
And what's more important, he also left Monaco after disagreement with club's president.
Two jobs and twice he leaves the club after fights with the board. No other board employs him after that.
There must be something more here than what we know.

 

[Dostoevsky]

So many questions but no one knows the answers.


Guys, he was sacked because he was not Italian and that's it.

 

[BIG DADDY!!!]

wasnt DD looking to sign the likes of Mavuba,Givet, Saviola and other shit like that

 

[Bjerknes]

I mean, Boumsong didn't make Deschamps look very good (which can be forgiven. Afterall, we were in serie B, but still, to insist on buying Boumsong, says something).

Ahh yes, surely players such as Carvalho and Terry would love to join us in Serie B.

 

[JCK]

no u dimwit!!! how would that be wanting more control? control & wanting X amount of money more are 2 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things.

he prob wanted more control over how & who the money was spent on instead of having some cluless bumbling idiot who use to hand over subs papers dictating who is and isn't in his squad

Remind me not to discuss anything with you anymore. You can start by soaping it now.

So basically, you're saying Didier Deschamps is a liar.

More control does not mean more money.

As I said before, knowing how Deschamps loves(d) the club, I find it extremely hard to believe he'd walk away from the job just because the club did not have "enough" money for his standards. It's not like we didn't have any capital when we signed Tiago, Almiron and Iaquinta. And it's not like Deschamps was oblivious to the state of our finances when he took the job in Serie B.

I didn't say he was a liar. I just presented a situation that you refuse to consider. And even in that situation I didn't say he lied, he just didn't reveal the whole truth. You follow politics and you know how statements can be skewed.