Debunking Liverpool FC myths: No 7 – Christian Purslow sacked Rafa Benitez

Until recently, a section of Liverpool fans (led by the Pro-Benitez Cult) had been engaged in a vicious witch-hunt against LFC Managing Director Christian Purslow. That campaign was founded on a number of baseless arguments, chief of which was the notion that the scheming, Machiavellian Purslow was solely responsible for ‘sacking’ Rafa Benitez. That is, of course, totally inaccurate, and the available evidence shows that the reality was far less sinister.

I regularly hear the resilient remnants of the Pro-Benitez Cult moaning about how the club is in its current position because ‘Purslow sacked Benitez’.

Rafa Benitez left Liverpool by mutual consent. Deal with it. He was not sacked - he was offered a payoff to leave the club, and he took it. It’s ridiculous to even suggest Benitez was sacked given the grievous financial penalty the club would’ve suffered if that had happened.

In a recent interview, Benitez himself stated:

“I was preparing for the next season but after the meeting with Mr. Broughton and Mr. Purslow I realised that I had to accept the offer they made”.

Key phrase: I had to accept the offer they made.

Does this sound like he was sacked? NO. It’s very clear-cut. The club released an official statement at the time of Benitez’s departure, which stated:

“Liverpool FC today confirmed that Rafael Benitez is to leave the club by mutual consent”.

This is reiterated in public comments made by Purslow, which were published on the official LFC website. In response to the question “Why did the Board sack Rafa?”, Purslow responded:

"The Board didn't sack Rafa. Rafa's exit was about as clear cut a case of mutual consent as I have ever been involved in my life. Both sides thought it was time for a change, both sides said so at the time, if you go back and check, and I wish him all the very best in his future career. He is a key part of our history and we wish him all the best."

For what possible reason would Purslow (and the club) lie? What evidence is there (in terms of past conduct and/or past evidence of lying) to suggest that Purslow is the kind of person who lie publicly about such an important issue?

In any event, Purslow cannot unilaterally sack Managers! For such an important change, the board of Directors would have to be in agreement that removing the manager would be the right course of action.

In another comment on the subject, Benitez said:

“I was on holidays so it was a surprise that everything was going on in this way, but at the end of the day it has to be like this because Christian Purslow now is in charge so he decided to do it in this way, and that's it”.

What did Purslow decide to do ‘in this way’? Benitez is clearly referring to the method by which he was removed from the club, i.e. the offer of a payoff. In such a situation, who else but the MD is going to broker the deal? And again, any deal on the table would’ve been ratified by the Board; it would not have been Purslow’s decision alone.

Ultimately, there is absolutely no persuasive evidence to prove any of the following:

a) Purslow sacked Benitez.
b) Purslow undermined Benitez.
c) Purslow wanted Benitez out more than anyone else.
d) Purslow was some kind of ‘ringleader’ in an insidious plot to remove Benitez.

If there is evidence to suggest any of the above, please post it in the comments section below.

Purslow was the executioner; he was not the judge and jury.

Jaimie Kanwar