Liverpool Banter Archive September 26 2014

 

Use our rumours form to send us liverpool transfer rumours.

26 Sep 2014 22:55:10
Do you know where I can stream the game?

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Google > wiziwig

Agree0 Disagree0

VIPBOX.Tv

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 19:53:55
Unexpectedly my dog of 9 years (who I loved like no other - well except from his dog sister and my human partner - in the event that anyone thought all were related) - died in my arms today.

At this moment in time football isn't more important than life or death for me; i'm still hoping Troy's spirit has an influence on tomorrows game in a positive way for us - but would've preferred for him to bark at me when i suddenly scream at the TV when we has scored!

Believable4 Unbelievable0

{Ed007's Note - Aw I'm really sorry to hear that mate. Google 'The Rainbow Bridge' and take care, I can't imagine anything happening to my Yoda.

By the edge of a woods, at the foot of a hill,
Is a lush, green meadow where time stands still.
Where the friends of man and woman do run,
When their time on earth is over and done.

For here, between this world and the next,
Is a place where each beloved creature finds rest.
On this golden land, they wait and they play,
Till the Rainbow Bridge they cross over one day.

No more do they suffer, in pain or in sadness,
For here they are whole, their lives filled with gladness.
Their limbs are restored, their health renewed,
Their bodies have healed, with strength imbued.

They romp through the grass, without even a care,
Until one day they start, and sniff at the air.
All ears prick forward, eyes dart front and back,
Then all of a sudden, one breaks from the pack.

For just at that instant, their eyes have met;
Together again, both man and pet.
So they run to each other, these friends from long past,
The time of their parting is over at last.

The sadness they felt while they were apart,
Has turned into joy once more in each heart.
They embrace with a love that will last forever,
And then, side-by-side, they cross over… together.

Mate, the day my dog passes away I'd hope to be at uni and looking to get with a girl at night while playing the big I am, but I would break down in inconsolable pain in front of everyone. I'm so, so sorry. There is no friend as true as your dog, nowhere. Maybe every cloud does have its silver lining and fate has it that Raheem will win the Labron D'Or in his memory ;) stay strong mate

Agree1 Disagree0

27 Sep 2014 00:09:47
The only time I've cried, like really cried, in as an adult was when we had to put down my 10 year old rottie, please bare in mind I have lost 2 grandparents in this time lol.

Sorry for your loss,

Agree1 Disagree1

My dog of 14 years was euthanised in my arms a year ago, absolutely heart breaking, my condolences to you and your partner.

P.s. We'll beat the blue rubbish 4-0 tomorrow.

Agree1 Disagree0

Thanks all - appreciate your comments

Agree0 Disagree0

27 Sep 2014 07:44:32
My cat toto recently just went awol. No sign of him anywere. There's signs up, he's on the radio, called all cats protection and I've done everything to find him but nothing. I miss him.

So sad.

I feel your pain mate it really is horrible.

Agree1 Disagree0

Just out of curiosity what breed was your dog mate? Only asking as my German shepherd is called Troy also.
PS sorry for your loss.

Agree1 Disagree0

27 Sep 2014 09:30:47
RIP troy it's really is like loosing one of the family and you feel that he can't be replaced I would miss my Yorkshire terrier Shankly if anything happens him.It's my first dog in 25 years couldn't get over my collie Rasta dying.

Agree1 Disagree0

Sorry to hear that mate. One of the worst days of my life the day we had to get my dog of 15 years put down! Had him since I was 5 so he was always there in my life since I could remember. I hope the lads play well and get a win

Agree1 Disagree0

Feel for you I had to put to sleep my 9yr old rottie and it broke my heart, I've got another rottie now and at first I nearly had to take her back because I couldn't bond with her now I treat her better than SWMBO

Agree1 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 17:22:56
Dear Eds and esteemed posters. Why is it that do you think Brendan Rogers puts his reputation on the line and keeps picking an increasingly ineffective Steven Gerrard? Nobody is doubting Gerard's contribution to Liverpool Football club he is disputably our second greatest player ever but he is not worthy of a starting place on current form. I think he's been fortunate with untimely injuries to Can and Allen and it would have been interesting if Rogers would still pick him had it not been for those injuries. It pains me to see Gerard stifled out of the game resulting in us being labored and predictable. We were sensational last season winning the game in the first 30 minutes and creating a plethora of chances in which gerrard was instrumental. This season if we make one clear cut chance in a game it would be a surprise. I think it's time for a change of system and personnel. But has Brendan got the kahunas? I think the next few weeks will be frustrating results wise but interesting from a strategic point of view. Apologies for the longish post

Believable3 Unbelievable8

You think SG is responsible for either the change in style or laboured play?!
I'd suggest its the manager that dictates our style and tactics and blaming SG is yet another person having a cheap dig in order to validate their argument!
I'd also suggest the laboured style is not the responsibility of SG either. It's as a result of the terrible form of most of the players, the confusing tactics and the total lack of any movement of those in offensive positions, particularly compared to last year.
SG can only make the pass if someone makes a run, they are not which makes him less effective.
Yes, he is playing poorly, but very few aren't!

Agree4 Disagree1

26 Sep 2014 15:29:12
i would just like to ask a question: are we really in danger of violating ffp? i read an article and it says that we are in no danger of violating any rules. Could this be cleared up please?

thanks

Believable0 Unbelievable0

{Ed002's Note - Done to death - read the posts. Liverpool has already been identified as a club to be investigated.}

We're certainly in danger of getting some sort if sanction but honestly it's probably best just to wait and see what UEFA has to say.

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 12:05:50
Greetings all,

I just wanted to ask the Eds about the FFP investigation .

I have heard that the club are confident that they will have a number of exemptions from the overall calculations such as academy spending and homegrown players & stadium development .

Not being an expert, I was wondering if you have a view on whether we are in real danger of receiving a sanction ?

I have to say that I will be gutted if we have not learned the lessons of the ( very recent past ) .

That being said a rather large dose of reality is needed in the game .

Believable1 Unbelievable1

{Ed002's Note - I need to read thru this again - but this may help:

The Demystification of the Financial Fair Play Rules (FFPR)
Introduction
I will try and simplify and summarise the FFPR and give examples where I can.
Putting aside all of the “mother country” fluff, the fundamental purpose of the FFPR is to:
(1) Ensure that clubs are operating within their means with transparent financial reporting. Example: Arsenal has debt which they can manage from the money they make as a club (good). PSG has a very low turnover given the amount of money they spend on players through donations from wealthy owners (bad) and sponsorship deals well beyond the norm..
(2) Protect creditors. Example: When Portsmouth went bust they owed money for players (the extreme case being Glen Johnson who had moved to Liverpool but Portsmouth still owed Chelsea for), money to local businesses (tradesmen who had worked at the ground, newsagents etc.), utility companies, the police et al (bad).
(3) Encourage responsible spending. Example: Liverpool under Hicks and Gillett borrowed money against the value of the club in order to buy players (bad).
(4) Protect the long-term viability of European club football. Example: They want to avoid the scenario of clubs entering administration or going out of business.
The FFPR apply to all UEFA club competitions and will actively come in to force from the end of June 2014 taking account of the financial monitoring period (the season just finished) and the two prior reporting periods. So when they first start, the FFPR will look at the 2013/2014 returns, and they will give consideration to the 2011/12 and 2012/13 figures.
I should make clear that it is not the full accounts of a club that are being considered, but just the “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses. “Excluded” expenses are critical to the FFPR calculations. To this end, all clubs will need to effectively produce two sets of accounts. An audited set which are provided to Companies House and the relevant revenue organisations, and a second audited return laying out the “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses for the purpose of the FFPR.
Relevant Income
(1) Match day gate receipts. Example: The money made by the club from paying fans attending games. This includes income from cup games when played away from home where a proportion of the gate money goes to the away side.
(2) Broadcasting rights. Example: Television income for games, money provided for radio broadcasting.
(3) Income from commercial activities. Example: Sales of bobble hats and rattles, club shop income, licensed income (e.g. DVD sales). In the future you can expect to see income from other media (e.g. streaming of games on a pay-per-view basis to the web and phones) increase.

(4) Prize money. Example: income from the Premier League, Champions League etc..
(5) Sponsorship. Example: Shirt sponsors (Standard Chartered, Samsung etc.), shirt manufactures (Adidas, Warrior etc.).
(6) Advertising. Example: Companies who buy time on video screens during games or hoardings at the stadium.
(7) Other operating income. Example: Payments made to a club for playing friendly matches in the Far East.
(8) Income from transfers: Example: All income from the sale of a player regardless of payment being due to previous clubs, the player himself etc. as they are allowable expenses which will later be deducted.
(9) Excess proceeds on the sale of tangible fixed assets. Example: The money Arsenal from converting part of Highbury in to apartments and selling them.
(10) Other income: Example: Interest on investments.
Relevant Expenses
(1) The costs of running the business (confusingly referred to as “the cost of sales” by accountants etc.). Example: Wages, ground maintenance, lighting, telephones, IT equipment, travel costs, policing costs etc..
(2) Employee related benefits and associated costs. Example: Costs of providing insurance, dental care, medical, employer NI contribution, housing, loyalty bonuses etc..
(3) Other operating expenses. Example: Payments for advertising, legal fees, agent fees, accounting fees, payments to players in relation to transfers, payments to player’s previous clubs, etc..
(4) Amortisation or transfer costs. Example: The total amount of money paid to another club to transfer a player or, if a club decides to do so, the amortised cost for that year (where a club is spreading the cost of the transfer out over the length of his contract for accounting purposes).
(5) Finance costs. Example: Bank charges, interest on loans etc..
(6) Dividends. Example: The owners may take a dividend from the profits a club makes as income.
Excluded Expenses
(1) Depreciation of tangible fixed assets. Example: The loss, if any, in value of the stadium, cars, IT equipment etc..
(2) Costs associated with the intangible fixed assets (other than player registrations). Example: goodwill, franchises, trademarks, copyrights etc..
(3) Expenditure on youth development activities. Example: All youth development expenses (housing, schooling, travel, medical etc.) are excluded from the calculations.
(4) Community development activities. Example: Outreach programmes, donations to the local community and charities, provision of equipment etc..
(5) Tax expenses. Example: Monies paid to the Inland Revenue, VAT etc..
(6) Finance costs related to construction of tangible fixed assets. Example: The interest on the £300M loan to build a new stadium.
(7) Interest payments on old loans (pre June 1, 2011). Example: Any interest due on a loan taken out for whatever purpose before June 1, 2011 is excluded from the calculations.
(8) Certain expenses from non-football operations. Example: This does not really apply to British clubs, but in other European countries clubs are often “sporting clubs” and have basketball, football, hockey team etc. all under one business.
The Calculation
FFPR calculates from a club’s “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses whether the club is running at a surplus (profit) or deficit (loss) within a Monitoring Period (e.g. 2013/14). From this the FFPR decides if a club has met the “break even” requirement or not. This is not met if the “relevant” expenses exceed the “relevant” income by more than 5M euros (an acceptable deviation).
If the club exceeds this acceptable deviation, the owners of a club may contribute toward correcting it to a maximum of 45M euro over a rolling three year period (30M euro from 2015/16 on). Example: If Club X made a loss of 50M euro in 2013/14 due to the purchase of players, the calculation will ignore the first 5M euro and assume an owner contribution of 45M euro and there would not be an issue. However, for the two years following, there would be no allowable owner contribution as the full allocation had been used. If Club Y made a loss of 30M euro in 2013/14 due to the purchase of players, the calculation will ignore the first 5M euro and assume an owner contribution of 25M euro and there would not be an issue. But in this case, for the two years following, there would still be 20M euro allowable as owner contribution to cover further losses.
The Punishment
The Threat: If a club has been determined to have violated the “break even” requirement for a season it may be excluded from the next season’s UEFA competitions.
Likely Situation: If a club can show it has been moving in the right direction and doing what it can to overcome financial issues, perhaps brought on by a recession (e.g. in Spain) then I would expect a strongly worded letter as a warning. If a club has strayed a significant distance for the rules, then a fine and cap on number of salaries of players in UEFA competitions may be imposed. Perhaps by then end of the 2016/2017 season, If a club has been determined to have violated the “break even” requirement for several seasons then it may be excluded from the next season’s UEFA competitions.
UEFA are willing to make some exceptions to the rule and have already said they will consider:
(1) The quantum and trend of the break even result. Example: Chelsea spent a lot three years ago summer rebuilding an aging squad, so even with considerable additional income from winning the Champions League it could violate the “break even” requirement. However, spending less the next season will show the club moving in the right direction. Expect a strongly worded letter in a couple of years time.
(2) Debt situation. Example: A possible “get out” for Barcelona, Real Madrid and Manchester United should they have a bad season and need to violate the “break even” requirement. Consideration will be given to the existing debt and the ability of the clubs to service that debt. The trend of the debt reducing and an excuse of “one bad season” and “need to rebuild the team” would likely result in a slapped wrist.
(3) Fluctuating exchange rates. Example: All non eurozone countries need to report the FFPR figures in euros which could fluctuate due to the exchange rate, whereas a number of the UEFA figures are fixed amounts (e.g. the 5M euro acceptable deviation).
(4) Projected figures. Example: UEFA will allow clubs to show that they are moving in the right direction if they provide projected figures showing that the “break even” requirement will be met in the following season.
(5) Force majeure. Example: Any extraordinary events or situation arising that is beyond the club’s control will be taken in to account.
(6) Until then end of 2014/15 only - Ongoing reductions in wage costs. UEFA will be flexible over the “break even” requirement if a club can show that their wage bill has been reducing and with the exclusion of wages of players signed before June 1, 2010 they would have met the “break even” requirement. Example: An escape route for the likes of Chelsea with Cech, Terry, etc. wages excluded from the calculations. A possible future escape route for the likes of Barcelona.
The Issues
There are a number of matters that UEFA still need to figure out and a number of concerns that certain clubs and certain national associations have. Off the top of my head:
(1) Loopholes: Whilst UEFA has done what it can to block any potential “loopholes” it is well aware that exclusion of wages for players signed before June 2010 is one it has introduced itself, and one that will be popular with the higher paying clubs as a short term escape route through to the summer of 2015. The matters of excessive sponsorship will be addressed via a cap to thwart the concerns over the likes of Manchester City abusing the rules. The cap has yet to be finalised but will require ratification. It was discussed without UEFA present at the end of March at a meeting of a number of clubs in Monaco and again in August 2015. No agreement was reached.
(2) Soft Sponsorship: UEFA are concerned at the aggressive approach to obtaining sponsorship some clubs are taking. Questions are being asked about the ethics in clubs having airline travel partners, photocopier partners etc.. The Spanish clubs have raised this as a concern.
(3) National Sponsorship Variations: As we have seen tobacco sponsorship leave Formula 1 UEFA would like to see alcohol sponsorship out of football. We already have a situation where sponsorship by alcohol related businesses are forbidden in certain countries. Wealthy breweries are now focussing their sponsorship in other countries thereby creating a perceived imbalance in what income clubs are able to obtain in sponsorship. The French and Russian clubs have raised this as a concern.
(4) National Financial Distribution Variations: Concerns exist in countries where different models are used for distributing prize money, contributing to the grassroots game and distributing income from television and other media broadcasting. This led to an original request (rejected) from a number of clubs to restrict the FFPR to only the wealthiest of clubs, those with a turnover in excess of xM euros.
(5) National Taxation Variations: There is a considerable difference across UEFA nations in taxation, and this is seen to be reflected in the wages paid to players. The Spanish clubs have raised this as a concern.
(6) Third Party Ownership: Countries that allow third party ownership of players are seen to have a distinct advantage in being able to keep the costs of transfer fees low as they are only paying for a proportion of a player. The English clubs have raised this as a concern.
The Great Fear
Without going in to too much detail: (a) A number of clubs take the opportunity a once or twice a year to discuss various issues including changes in rules, television rights, the power of UEFA, exploitation issues for new technology streams, etc.. These discussions, the last of which were in late August, also always turn to the possibility and structure of a breakaway pan European league. Several are ex-G14 clubs, several are not, and some clubs decline involvement in such discussions. (b) The plan is that at some point a number of clubs would break away from their national leagues and UEFA. They accept that they would be banned from all existing club competition and the players would initially be banned from all FIFA competitions as well, but know that FIFA would be looking to negotiate in any case. It would be the end of UEFA in all probability and UEFA are very aware of this. It would also result in a restructuring of many of the national leagues. (c) The clubs would renegotiate their television rights, rights of distribution via other streams etc.. (d) It remains the greatest fear of UEFA and all major national authorities that one day this will happen.
}

Sorry ed can you repeat that please.

Agree9 Disagree0

27 Sep 2014 08:23:08
What's with the little martini at the bottom there?
I think you deserve a drink after that Ed002. Well done.

Agree1 Disagree1

29 Sep 2014 07:34:25
Ed002
Thank you again

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 16:39:18
Eds, looking for your expertise. Who do you think has more potential Suso or Markovic?

Believable0 Unbelievable1

{Ed001's Note - different types of players, you can't really compare them.}

26 Sep 2014 16:27:34
Prediction time. What do you all think tomorrows' score is going o be?

LFC 2-1 EFC.

Believable3 Unbelievable0

I will take any sort of victory. A goal of Sakho's backside will do me until we find some real confidence.

Agree5 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 17:13:00
LFC 1-1 EFC

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 17:13:21
Seeing both our teams defense
I'd go for 11-10

Agree4 Disagree0

Depends on which Liverpool shows up for me. If it's the fast attack/high press version, I think we'll win. If it's the slow build up, control possession side we'll be in trouble.

Agree2 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 18:10:54
Seeing as Everton's defence appears to have been Martinezed, I'm going 3-2 to us. It won't be at all comfortable though.

Agree1 Disagree0

4-4 I would not be shocked if our Centre backs turned up on the program Disappeared.

Agree0 Disagree0

4-0 :)

Agree1 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 22:23:19
7-4 to us and I'm not kidding brutal defences.

Agree0 Disagree0

3-2 think Balotelli may well score. Really. Hope Lallana kicks off from midweek because he looked quality, and hopefully the 120 minutes won't have taken too much out of either him or Raheem
Don't see us losing but a draw seems a distinct possibility too.
I'll keep 3-2 and go Balotelli, Gerrard (penalty) and Sterling for us and Mirallas and Lukaku for them

Agree1 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 13:22:26
I can't understand people who want standing in stdiums again.

For me, if there is even a remote increase in danger to the spectators it is not a decision that can be made by any one individual. And I'm all for democracy but sometimes, people don't know what is best for them and need to be protected.

Just because one fan wants to go in absolutely steaming with the freedom to dance around, jump about, shout, swear, sing, push, be pushed etc does not mean you inflict upon those who do not want it or whom are physically unable to cope with it.

I'm sorry but any standing inside of Anield would be met with massive protest from myself and no doubt others. You'd do well to go outside the stadium and take a look at the Hillsborough memorial before taking a long hard look at yourself in a mirror.

I am one of your 'daytrippers'. I've only been to one game sadly because unbelievably, living 250 miles away and working for less than minimum wage (apprentice) makes things a bit difficult! The game i went to was a home friendly against Bayern Leverkusen (we won 3-1, Sterling, Lucas, Sidney Sam, Carroll). I did not stand up once during play (out of respect for the family behind me). Only to celebrate goals or to get a burger at half time. I sang just as loud as anybody else though and went home barely being able to talk. A lot of the time it was just me and my (then) 6 year old cousin singing around us. Did i feel silly? A bit. Did i care? Not even slightly. Sitting down does not stop you chanting. Personally, I think the season ticket holders just use this 'daytripper' and 'sitting down' rubbish as an excuse because they're just not as passionate about the game as they used to be. They take it for granted. Keep pointing the fingers at the inanimate chairs you're sitting on though. It must be the back rest growing arms and cupping your mouths whenever you try to sing! It's the only logical explanation.

Mickey taking aside, standing had it's chance and it absolutely bombed in this country. Fans just can't behave themselves because frankly, we have a serious drinking problem in this country. You do not have the right to put other peoples children in danger just because you're a sheep and need to be in a stand full of drunks to sing. End of discussion.

P.S. I'm not accusing all season ticket holders of being like this. The select few just tend to shout louder than the silent majority.

Justice for the 96.

Believable6 Unbelievable4

27 Sep 2014 00:18:31
I totally agree with the sentiment EMS, but there are safe ways to implement it now. It has been extremely successful in the Bundesliga. There were several reasons for the tragedy that occured on that day, one of them was standing, but a lot of it come from complete and utter mismanagement of traffic in the stands, as per the official report.

One must also not neglect to consider the state of the Hillsborough stadium. It's a very precarious subject, but it's one that must be met with a level head.

Safe standing will allow:

- Greater capacity stadiums

- Either cheaper tickets or greater profit margins for clubs (FFP)

- Generally the atmosphere will improve

Agree0 Disagree0

How do you know it is safe?

Agree0 Disagree0

"Its only safe until its not safe." (Donald Rumsfeld 1991)

Agree0 Disagree0

27 Sep 2014 12:38:48
Because it has been more than successfully implemented in other countries, most prominently Germany!

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 16:38:51
Very quiet on here today that too on a derby eve.
Is everyone worried or what ?

Believable2 Unbelievable0

Ryder Cup!!

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 16:32:21
So far this season, teams have countered us by putting someone to "mark" Gerrard and it has worked well for the opposition. Maybe BR is aware of this and will tweak the system a little, perhaps play Henderson deeper?

Believable2 Unbelievable0

26 Sep 2014 16:59:54
Whether we are playing bad or good i am worried and nervous.malta

Agree1 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 13:55:23
eds reds people talking about new players in january, i still think we need a midfield dictator and maybe a top class mobile striker, but i have to come back to what and others, boom for one, said the other day, we knew for months this is what we needed so why wasnt it done? i understand its hard when your first choice dosent want the move, (sansez) but we shouldve had someone else lined up anyway!! i know it wouldn't happen, fee wges etc but would love pogba!! i'm sure others would have there own ideas. hopeing the derby can kick start our season come on redmen.

Believable0 Unbelievable1

26 Sep 2014 12:02:38
i want to make remark on the ffp rules.
if Uefa gives a club a fine it should be private, let's say they fine us and we would have to sell a player in order to generate money the buying party will know all our problems, that could hurt the transfer sum.
Just a thought of mine maybe i am wrong.
Malta

Believable3 Unbelievable3

But the fines being so public means it might put off other clubs going into dept.

Agree2 Disagree1

I agree entirely. I think everything financial in football should be 100% confidential. Wages, sponsorship deals, transfer fees, takeovers, stadium costs etc. It just fuels the desire throughout the game to outspend one another. Sadly, It's an impossible idealogy.

Agree2 Disagree1

Personally I don't agree with fines at all as what are they to city PSG etc.
Uafa had a rare brilliant ides when they put forward the threat of new signings not being eligible for that seasons champions league, making progress in the CL and attracting new players more difficult
Hurts rich and poor the same and clubs in serious OTT beaches of the rules should not be allowed in that years competition at all.
Either enforce it properly or do away with the rule completely imo

Agree3 Disagree0

I hope the FFP rules are deemed illegal tbh, I think the hearing on that is very soon. If an owner has virtually unlimited resources, I don't see how uefa can say they aren't allowed to use them to grow their club, just as they might any other business.

It just supports the status quo and leads to a boring inevitability that the biggest teams now will always be the biggest teams.

There should be some restriction, maybe put against the owners wealth and ability to cover losses rather than the club breaking even, would seem fairer while still preventing 'a Portsmouth'.

Agree1 Disagree0

Getting fines for losing money, makes sense.

Agree1 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 17:34:38
Getting fines for losing money, makes sense.
=============

This is what I was thinking , there is a certain irony to fine origination for loosing money .
The question is: will this fine count towards the accounts when calculating for ffp, for example we turned it around and made 10m profit, but we were fined 20m for the previous 3 years losses, will their calculation conclude 10m loss ??

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 17:38:46
maybe put against the owners wealth and ability to cover losses
=============
The first thing most owners do is put a huge barrier between their own wealth and the club. When Roman put money into Chelsea , the club is borrowing from him, maybe as 0% interest, maybe in return for shares or dividend etc . Its not pocket money, here children here is 100m go spend and enjoy your selves.

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 11:12:51
Should be a tough test against Everton this weekend. As of yet it is the only Liverpool game I have managed to attend almost 3 years ago when Stevie gave me a night to remember sitting in the kop end, getting a perfect hat trick. It was even worth sleeping in the train station waiting for the morning train back south.
What I'm trying to say, even though our team has not had the best of starts to the season, we'll get through it like we always do. And even though Stevie hasn't been up to scratch, I think this is one game he should start no matter what, who knows it may well be his last against Everton at anfield?
Cheer up lads, we'll beat the bitters! We always do!

Believable6 Unbelievable1

Walton Red, he was talking about this season in entirety, not just one particular game. I think after going through a number of statements he has made over the course of this season and last summer, I can conclude that much safely.

The statements are contradictory; You don't need to highlight it to understand that.

The "core" he talks about is just Suarez and the statement concerns this years squad, instead of this weekends' or last weekends' squads available to him.

Look up "contradictory" if you fail to understand what it means.

Believable7 Unbelievable4

He says core 'players', plural, look it up if you need to. You are surmising that he meant Suarez, you are passing off opinion as fact.

You say 'the core he talks about is Suarez' How do you know?

When asked about Suarez he said we are missing 'core players', which we have throughout the season, Suarez will be included in this but he was obviously talking about the others as well. How clear does he need to be?

You obviously feel that you have to align yourself with those on here who use his press conferences as a stick to beat him with. I fail to see the motivation or merit in that, but if you are going to do it at least call it right.

Agree5 Disagree7

26 Sep 2014 16:24:46
BR -

‘I think at this moment in time we are re-focusing and reintroducing principles into our game that has brought the win ratio we’ve had in the last 18 months. Apart from the Tottenham game (won 3-0) we have moved away a bit from that. Our game is based on fast pressing, a real high intensity and also the speed of our football. We put a lot of hard work in during the first six months that we were here and a lot of those processes became natural - the consequence of that is winning.

When you introduce a raft of new players and lose the CORE OF PLAYERS, that’s obviously a factor and then it becomes a little bit broken. That’s how our game has looked for me for a big part of the season. Where I am fortunate is that I have a group of players here that identify with that. We are all in this together and we need to get back to re-focus on what has allowed us to win games consistently over the last 18 months to two years. That has been about the way we play and imposing our style and strength on our opponents.’

From the above, it is pretty clear that he was delineating about this season and contrasting it with last season. So, the core is really, a comparison with last seasons' core. That is not me surmising an opinion and trying to pass it off as fact; it is just fact.

We were missing a number of players through injury and suspension last season in the league too.
Counitho: 5
Suarez: 5
Sakho: 9
Enrique: pretty much the entire season
Lucas: 8
Allen: 8
Sturridge: 9

So, if he was talking about this seasons' core players as you say, missing through injuries, how does it make his statement look now? Even more dumb?

I have no inclination to align myself with anyone. My opinions have always been my opinions. What this is turning into is a personal vendetta and I would like to put an end to this debate, because in my previous post, I did mention I was being harsh on BR and apologized for making such a rash comment.

Don't be so quick to "surmise" what my motivations are for posting my opinions, slick.

Eds, I do hope you post this as I really need to make Walton Red see where I am coming from.

Cheers.

Agree4 Disagree2

AG, I think you're confusing yourself now. You're backtracking and forgetting what you originally posted, which was that the core of players he referred to was Suarez and Suarez only. That is what you stated, that's what I had an issue with.

This is clearly not the case.

Also, how his statement looks now is neither here nor there, it has nothing to do with the point I was making, you clearly stated something which I felt was incorrect, and rather than justify it, or admit it was wrong, you have just changed the argument.

Please post this Ed's as AG seems to think I misunderstood or misinterpreted him in some way.

Thanks.

Agree0 Disagree1

Walton Red, in the above BR quotes, he talks about trying to integrate a raft of new players into the team while at the same time, having to deal with the lose of a core players. From his quotes above, it is clear that he is talking about this season so far, where we have struggled, and comparing it with how we were last season. I hope that much is clear?

My problem with BR is that only Suarez (I would count Agger, but BR himself sold Agger because he didn't like him as a player) are part of the "core" that he keeps talking about. Therefor, the core really is, just Suarez.

I mention all the other players and their absence just to point out that, IF BR WAS TALKING about injuries this season and comparing it with last season, it looks rather dumb as we have been missing Sturridge for just 2 games in the league, and Allen, Skrtel and Johnson for a couple of games. Now, BR has openly admitted his squad is much bigger and stronger and has no problem dealing with injuries, when compared to last season. IF this was the case, doesn't it make him look contradictory? (keep in mind that my original post was aimed at what a motor-mouth BR actually is. He says contradictory things.)

I hope it is clearer?

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 01:58:50
I thought the Hillsborough disaster was caused by incompetent policing, the police losing control allowing too many people into too small an area and there being no escape, i wasn't at the game that day but i was there 2 weeks before for the league game and there was no problem then, except with the police attitude to our fans, there has been standing at football grounds for a hundred years and as far as i know never a disaster like that one, i understand some fans getting very worked up about it and being upset by the suggestion, but the original question was "does the atmosphere suffer because of all seat stadiums?" I think it does, and with safety paramount and the advance in computer planning and attitudes changing why can't it be considered? it works in Germany as someone pointed out, i don't think it can be blamed on just having standing areas, with the right safety precautions it "could" work was my answer, a closing thought, an all seat stand could collapse and become a disaster just as easily, being in such huge crowds their is always a risk. p.s. i know it's an emotional topic i cried same as everybody else, please don't jump on me for trying to be objective.

Believable1 Unbelievable3

{Ed001's Note - you might want to check, there have been numerous deaths around the world caused partially by people being stood. It was not a one off at all.}

26 Sep 2014 08:13:33
Basically your argument hinges around 'there is no point making it safer because you never know what will happen'. Yes you're right - you might have an all seater stand and a helicopter gets into trouble and falls on it. But playing the odds, safety and accessibility is far better in an all seater stadium. There is an allocation which once filled is filled, there are obstacles to stop any form of crushing, troublemakers can't blend into a crowd because they can't really move. everything in terms of safety improves, nothing practical is left up to the competency of others.

If you have a problem with the atomosphere in it, stop sitting there quietly moaning and start singing. You'll be embarrassed for it a bit but it'll catch on.

Agree9 Disagree1

The atmosphere does not suffer. Were you at the home matches against Chesea or Juventus in 2005 CL?
All seater stadium, no problem with atmosphere.

It's an excuse. Of course a bigger density of people will make it noisier, but there is no reason why there can't be a good atmosphere.

It's multifactorial and this is one factor that should not be changed

Agree5 Disagree2

Hjikle, brilliant answer mate, well done.

Agree1 Disagree0

I think you hit the nail on the head there hjikle. Embarrassment is the reason fans aren't singing. It's nothing to do with standing or sitting, it's about opening your mouth. I can understand it though, when everyone around you is silent it is sometimes difficult to be the first one to start singing.

Red Rum

Agree2 Disagree0

How do you pronounce "Hjikle"?

Agree1 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 12:49:03
Hjikle was a name invented by a cat walking over a keyboard when I was midway through registering for a website and left the keyboard unattended. The name was free and I have chosen to keep it as a tag. I have chosen to pronounce it hu-ji-kle. I think an argument could be made to pronounce it however seems right to you, as only the cat truly knows for sure.

Agree6 Disagree1

26 Sep 2014 16:25:30
Brilliant.

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 01:04:12
Although we lost (U21's) Adam Philips scored twice and appeared to have a good game; he was also on the USA pre season tour - have any of the Ed's or other posters got any thoughts on him - appears to be a v good player!

Believable1 Unbelievable0

He is a very good player. Won academy player of the year last season. I actually prefer him to Rossiter but they are different players.

Agree0 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 00:01:04
January will be about getting in 1 or 2 experienced players who are able to perform at the top level

======================

We already in trouble with Uefa and under FFP investigation, I would guess Jan is all about selling and not buying . I'll buy shares in Coutinho . Its not panic stations, but would guess adjustments will start as soon as possible

Believable3 Unbelievable2

Roy, we will be in even more trouble if we stick with what we have. A quality GK and CDM are must buys in January, the club can raise money by selling the likes of Borini, Johnson, possibly Lucas. We need UCL football next season, and with the way our team is performing right now, i would not think that is possible so i hope BR improves our squad ASAP.

Agree1 Disagree5

Why? We already have a problem of trying to "gel" all these players together according to BR. So we need to buy more to 1. get screwed by FFP. 2. To consummate in another transition?

Agree4 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 08:15:19
Buying in Jan (hopefully) won't be so easy for us this season either as we actually care about things like being cup tied for the CL. Wait till players like Allen, Can and Sturridge are back, then see what we need. It's more likely loans/sales will take place than purchases though

Agree1 Disagree1

26 Sep 2014 10:56:41
Buzzer, I agree we need 1 or 2 better quality players, but we should 've spent better in the summer. You need to accept Mingo will be our number one for the next few years, and although he is not the best in the world, he is decent, and the boy have pulled some super saves; all keepers have phases with a dip of form and all keepers make mistakes, there are few Neuers around. For the CDM, I think its a waste of Gerrard playing him in that deep role, but we already have Can, Lucas and even Allen who can do a decent job in that position.
I know we are not performing well, but we are not the only one; If you see other teams and results , it shows we are still in safe place , and top 4 is very achievable.

Agree1 Disagree0

26 Sep 2014 11:17:07
I would like to see a creative centre midfielder brought in for years we had Gerrard doing this job without strikers of top class ability now stevies in the Autumn of his career there is no Stevie r xabi in midfield with that ability to open up the defensive set up we face especially at home.

Agree0 Disagree0

 
Change Consent