Saithip

...and have only scored 12 goals in 11 league games, still have a negative goal difference and still play a turgid two banks of four sitting deep and surrendering most of the pitch to the opposition. It's horrible to watch, the worst formation, tactics and style of play I've seen from Liverpool in half a century. The sooner Hodgson goes the better

You last point hits the nail squarely on the head. We got a good two goal lead and then parked the bus in the second half, Fulham-style, surrendering two-thirds of the pitch to Chelsea and making only sporadic forays upfield. Horribly negative tactics that epitomise the man

I'm not sure he'd be aware of it as he was playing rather than standing on the terrace taking the piss, like the fans around me. Anyway I am indeed that corroboration, as I was at the games in question and heard it myself with my own ears rather than second hand

I liked the nickname of former Sheffield Wednesday Belgian player Gilles De Bilde. He was, inevitably, nicknamed "Bob" I also remember Phil Thompson when he first got into the team. A lot of our younger fans seem unaware that Thommo was in fact originally a midfielder and was converted to centre-back, where he flourished. I remember him playing in midfield at Norwich away in one of his very first appearances and he was very skinny and seemed all arms and legs, so he was duly nicknamed "Spider" by the fans and I heard it used at subsequent games. However once he filled out physically and got a regular berth at CB where his gangly running style was less evident, the nickname just faded away

Well you might like to see this clip about how Arsenal fiddle their attendance figures so it looks like they get 60K http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2007/feb/15/sport.comment I'm intrigued as to what you consider Arsenal's "...old, old days of success..." to be. Their most successful pre-Wenger era is surely when they won the League and Cup double in 1971. However, despite having a (pre all-seater) capacity at Highbury of about 56,000, I vaguely remember it being - perhaps it was 55K - their average attendance after that amazingly successful season was just 41,000 in 1971-72. So when we they averaging 55K? I've been to Highbury many times and the only times they got gates like that were against the likes of Liverpool or Man U - and Spurs of course

In the 1960s when I started going we had capacities of 54K and then 56K, mostly standing and therefore dirt cheap, so it's obvious that we'd have fewer people going to matches now.

I remember Man U getting gates of only 38,000 or so in the mid-70s and I believe Highbury was down to below 40,000 when all-seater stadiums came in and they didn't fill the ground for every game only a few years ago, so taking a snapshot of attendances at one point in time and deciding that that's all the fans who are likely to turn up to a bigger stadium is bonkers. Every club that's increased its capacity or built a new stadium has increased its attendances whether that's Man U, Newcastle, Sunderland or Stoke. Liverpool have immeasurably more fans than Arsenal who now get 60,000 a week, so it's obvious that we'd fill a bigger stadium. Having lived in greater London for a few decades I know that Arsenal are only locally a big club too, not nationally and internationally like Liverpool. I routinely see more people in Liverpool tops than Arsenal on a daily basis around where I live and that's on the London-Surrey border around 20 miles from the Emirates Stadium, so our pool of potential match-goers is way, way more than Arsenal's

I thought I'd read that there's a clause in his contract whereby the owners only need to pay him one year's salary if they give him the boot within 28 days. So we've still got hope that he'll get the push in the next couple of weeks

He's been on the downgrade for a couple of seasons now. Apart from being as slow as continental drift, he's a rash challenge and a penalty kick waiting to happen. He's long past his Best Before date and should be a squad player rather than a first-team regular

Man U can't afford Torres. They'll get a modest fee for Fatboy - if he doesn't buy his contract out for £5m - as he'll only have a year and a bit left on his contract Or perhaps he's playing in a team where the f***ing useless manager plays two banks of four defending the defensive third, with occasional hoofballs for him to chase with no team-mate within 20 yards, so he can't really make an impact

By George I think you've got it!

That's quite a pathetic and unworthy sentiment about anybody really. Please grow up

I very much doubt it. I imagine that 99% of their customers buy the papers rather than read online, so the online thing will have zero bearing on readership

I enjoyed 1979 too. A lot of younger fans seem unaware of how good that team was. Our league record that year was: P42 W30 D8 L4 GF85 GA16 GD 69 Pts 68 It was the record number of points under the 2 points for a win system and a record goal difference - 32 greater than the next best GD that season. We were unbeaten at home and only conceded 4 goals in 21 home games (so only 12 conceded in 21 away games). Notable scores that season were the 7-0 thrashing of Spurs at Anfield and a 3-0 thumping of the mancs away. Personally I think that was our best ever team

That was a crazy result as he was arguably not even the third best player at Chelsea at the time, much less the world

An interesting article - with one major flaw. Absolutely no Scouser has an inferiority complex about Manchester. In fact the reverse is true. We feel -rightly - superior in every way. Actually there's another error. Anfield's not the smallest stadium of the big clubs, being bigger than Stamford Bridge But I do like Boston a lot. Was in downtown Boston once at the crack of dawn when not many people were about and the cries of the seagulls echoing around the empty streets was eerily reminiscent of downtown Liverpool, a sound you just don't get in the likes of London. It's definitely one of my favourite cities in the USA. I almost made it to Fenway Park once to watch a game. Unfortunately a bar directly opposite the stadium had some excellent microbrewery beers on tap, so we decided to watch the game in the bar enjoying the beer. No contest really!

I also don't believe that a majority has turned against him, as a majority of fans positively didn't want him in the first place. The only thing is that now people are being more vociferous about it and want him removed pronto because he's actually more clueless and out of his depth than we feared he would be

On the other hand since I started going to Anfield every single part of the stadium has been rebuilt so it bears absolutely no resemblance in any way, shape or form to the stadium I used to attend. Therefore I know from personal experience that one's spiritual home can change dramatically and beyond recognition, so moving across the road to Stanley Park would be no different from going to Anfield in the early 60s, going to live abroad and turning up this season. It would still be my club's home as will the new stadium be, even if it sits in a different location. The Anfield you say is who we are is nothing remotely like the Anfield of days gone by, apart from a rectangle of grass, so I'm very happy for us to relocate Tell that to the "community" around Anfield when me and my mates and thousands of others were nicking milk from their doorsteps when after sleeping overnight outside the stadium to get tickets for the first home game against champions Manchester City in 1968. The "communty" complained long and hard so much that overnight queueing was banned

...and the stereotype has been massively reinforced by the laughable formations and tactics employed by the utterly hopeless Hodgson.

Exactly. I agree 100%. Hodgson is actually a very embarrassing appointment and a stain on the record of Liverpool Football Club

Well many of us could see that Hodgson was nowhere near good enough for us and were utterly convinced that we'd go backwards. The only thing most of us got wrong was just how fast and far Hodgson would take us backwards. The fact that he would do was never really in doubt

Arsenal won't be debt-free for 20 years and that depends on their qualifying for the CL every year

Homophobic's not really a proper word though is it? It's roots would suggest it means a fear of man, but it's a silly word no doubt cobbled together by a humourless Californian and it's use really shouldn't be encouraged

I think you mean callow - unless he really does have a sickly yellowish complexion

Lucas is incomparably better than the ponderous Poulsen