Wow, so me assuming you haven't changed your mind about Valverde is lying. Odd definition you have there my friend. I simply worked with the most recent information I had about your evaluation of Valverde.
No, lying is intentional misrepresentation of somebody's position and putting words in people's mouths, which is something you've done several times. And which you've done again here. Because I will not accept the idea that you do not read my posts in the manager's thread since Anfield when you barely ever the thread alone much less stop arguing with people you disagree with and talking about the man whichever thread it is you happen to stumble into.
I never said anything about the situation being irrecoverable. Takes no genius to figure out that me saying he's doing a good job at a given moment is, as anybody would know, something that can change day to day or month to month.
And unlike you, I don't assume your views on a daily basis. Or I don't automatically write about it. For the simple purpose that views do change and it's absolutely sensible for them to change if circumstances permit it.
A question I posed to the other crusader that went unanswered - how were your moods before Anfield? Hm? Feared the Rome repeat much? Or did you reckon thunder doesn't strike twice? Because you'd be the rare case that did if you thought you'd get handed the beating you got. Which means there was a good part of you that allowed the idea that this same shitty, negatively setup Barcelona was going for the treble. Mr Richard Lionheart even said - he'd prefer a treble while playing poorly than playing well and ending up empty handed (
http://www.barcaforum.com/showthread.php/14423-Ernesto-Valverde-V1?p=2057258&viewfull=1#post2057258), so yeah, EV or no EV who cares if trophies are coming in for some people I guess! Or not?
Would you be campaigning to have him sacked if he followed a double with a treble? Nah, don't think so. So who's the one willing to bend their holy standards here if pragmatism does prevail in several circumstances?
So basically the collapse is a trait of character that happened to recur, but nobody seriously thought it would. 0-0, 1-1, 2-2, all reasonable predictions back then. All favoring the scenario where this 'useless' human does everything to outdo his critics. And because the collapse did happen, it's all on him. But of course. Who wouldn't say that
Funnily enough, I think he's no good for you after this not because you mongoloids were right about him all along. Because you weren't. He's no good, because the current contract and relationship with his team is predicated upon nepotism and nothing else. That's not the same as giving him a second chance after Rome, a chance that he literally nearly took, arguably was an Anfield away goal away from it, because you bet your ass you were beating Valencia if Anfield doesn't happen.
So yeah. Stick your simpleton explanations where the sun don't shine my man. And stop lying about other people's opinions when they don't want to put up with your weird obsessionism.
PS
And yes, recruitment matters in the context of Fati's development. An area which in your club model the manager doesn't play a significant role in and never will until you hire an exceptional manager. Which you won't, because even your legends want to wait out this sorry period of slow Messi-era rot before they touch the club job again.
Oh no, now you're changing your mind again. All of that worthless fancy exposee to arrive at the same retarded conclusion.