Saithip

You are taking yourself far too seriously. If you think that slagging off Man U is indicative of the same mentality that slags off minorities then I'm afraid you're hugely mistaken. Football support and tribalism go hand in hand. Always has been the case, always will be. It really couldn't have less to do with people's attitudes in other spheres of life. For instance, my gay, black, jewish - and Asian, which you don't mention - friends (I do like to embrace diversity amongst our fans!) who support Liverpool cheerily slag off Man U and other teams in the most abusive, vitriolic ways possible and appear to be oblivious to the insidious inner hatred directed towards them that your post seems to imply exists. Do please chill out

Indeed - he completely overlooks the fact that Liverpool FC has a gigantic national - and international - fanbase. Scouse supporters like myself are very much the minority of Liverpool supporters, so the relative wealth of London (don't know why he considers grimy, grey, characterless Manchester as somehow "wealthy") is entirely irrelevant when considering the kind of match-day revenue Liverpool could attract. I recall that when Everton got their own radio station Liverpool considered the idea but dismissed it because the majority of the potential audience lived too far away. Man U do indeed have a large fanbase, but from my many years of living in London I know that Liverpool have the kind of fanbase that utterly dwarfs that of Arsenal, Chelsea and Spurs combined - and that's only in the UK. They are merely big in their own part of London and a portion of the adjacent Home Counties hinterland. Liverpool are way. way ahead of them in universal appeal despite not having won the league since 1990. Imagine how that would increase if we had owners prepared actually to invest in a stadium and top players In fact although he is indeed a t***, he's not a Manc but is Scottish - from Glasgow

I see Liverpool shirts for sale all the time abroad, even in quality sports shops and department stores in places where fake shirts are available everywhere, such as in Thailand. In my regular extensive travels all over the world I've never been unable to buy an official shirt in a good shop, as opposed to fakes. Even in third world countries they often retail at UK prices or higher and they still manage to sell

And yet they never forced a save from Reina worthy of the name and he was only troubled by the penalty. I'd take that kind of alleged "domination" every day of the week. We looked like scoring 5 or 6 goals - they scored a penalty. That sums up the game in a nutshell

Tiki taka??? Tiki taka?? Please elaborate or "wtf" as the youngsters would have it For starters - 2008/9 - played them off the park both games

You clearly saw a different game to the one I saw in 2009. Reina had no saves to make and was only beaten by the traditional penalty they always get awarded. That apart he was a spectator for the whole match and Man U very rarely threatened from their utterly predictable forward moves. Torres's goal was indeed from a punt upfield, but not as a result of a tactical plan to play that way. Skrtel was merely clearing his lines and lashed it forward from near the corner flag. Fortunately it fell near the dozy Vidic who looked as if he didn't know whether to have a s*** or a shave and was brushed aside by Torres. The Gerrard penalty wasn't from a punt upfield. The move started from near the half-way line and developed to Torres putting a ball inside the full-back, who fouled Gerrard. It was excellent build-up play Dossena's goal was similarly not a hopeful long punt out of defence. It was just a bog standard, run-of-the-mill, twenty times a match goal kick. Man U had everyone behind the ball, as is the case with goal-kicks. It just so happened that Man U's defenders decided to play statues and didn't react quickly enough and just watched the goal-kick sail over their heads to Dossena. It's not as if we were on the rack and someone lumped it forward and it luckily fell to Dossena as Man U were committed to attacking us. It was the opposite case. It was a dead ball, a goal-kick, a bounce and a goal. It's not our fault that it was appalling defending We played all the good football in the game, including terrific moves leading to the Gerrard penalty and the Aurelio free-kick (Gerrard being clean through and 99% likely to have scored anyway) and should have scored more - Gerrard's open goal miss from another great move in front of the Stretford End goal being the obvious example So, given that Man U never looked like scoring in that game and Reina had no saves to make I'm at a loss to recall the "serious pressure" you say we were under. We controlled the midfield and broke up their play with supreme ease (with Lucas playing an absolute blinder) and, I repeat, played all the good football in the game. It was an excellent performance on several different levels and we made them look utterly clueless and the completely lacked any penetration when they got within 30 yards of our goal

The point about Kelly is the reverse of what you say. The lad is a centre-back playing at right back, so it wouldn't be a case of turning him into a CB but, rather, that they seem to be trying to turn him into a right-back. For me he's much, much better as a centre-back every day of the week and a RB in emergencies

Speak for yourself. I'm not expecting defeat. It makes great sense to rest players tonight before the weekend's game

Well said. Like any sane person I avoid lager like the plague when at home but out in Thailand where that's about 99% of what's available I still can't bring myself to drink Chang under any circumstances because of its Everton associations and always go for the much more tasty Beerlao where possible, although it's much harder to find

Liverpool are many times bigger than Everton and Sheffield Wednesday combined, so there's no sensible comparison to be made. Personally I'm very sanguine about the situation at the club and losing no sleep whatsoever. The Yanks will be gone fairly soon. We'll have new owners and we can kick on. Don't see why there's all the doom and gloom on here. The current situation is a temporary pause in the club's progress and it'll soon be over

I think you'll find that you wouldn't be allowed to: a) stop people who work there getting in or b) do anything that would make it difficult for people to buy or sell tickets as they see fit At the end of the day we have far too vast a fanbase for any minor protest (even several thousand would be very minor) near the stadium to have any effect. Only a relatively tiny handful would be interested in boycotts of games or merchandise, walkouts or protests. No matter how strongly some fans feel about this, I'm pretty sure that absolutely nothing would change no matter what a section of fans wants to do by way of protest Only on forums such as this and other LFC sites do these subjects seem to get an airing. Speaking to Liverpool fans in real life, there's just a feeling of resignation about the ownership situation, hoping that it will run its course sooner rather than later and we'll eventually have new owners. In the meantime apathy is the order of the day. Most fans will simply carry on regardless - and by that I mean 99+% - no matter what views are put forward on fans' forums, because the majority of fans separates the two entities of the team and the club ownership completely and the desire to be there in person to see games, support the team and also to buy merchandise far outweighs the negative thoughts about the current owners - the team being considered as "the club" with the owners viewed as a short-term irritation that will not put off fans from supporting the club in the slightest You may disagree, but these comment reflect completely the views I've heard from just about every Liverpool fan away from threads like this on the usual LFC forums. It's like they exist in parallel universes, for better or worse

He was indeed. He'd walk into any premier league team today. He was a fantastic tackler, great in the air, had a fantastic engine and had a thunderous shot with either foot and weighed in with plenty of goals. He'd be worth £50m today and I reckon he's probably our most under-rated player ever He was a great bloke. He lived about five minutes from me in Wavertree (in digs with Keegan) in his early couple of years at Liverpool and was always in and out of the bookies in Lawrence Road. He had time for everybody and would spend ages signing autographs for kids. I always remember as a kid that it did annoy me irrationally that he always signed his autograph as just E Hughes rather than his full name. Don't know why it bothered me so much. Anyway I met him loads of times and won't have a word against him

Lucas Kuyt Poulsen

Presumably you watched the game? The shot was clearly wide of the post and never going in. it was obvious at the time and blindingly obvious in the replays. Reina instinctively went for it to cover the post and did get a fingertip to it, but it was not a threat to our goal and was not on target. I tend to only worry about shots on target as those wide of the post don't count as goals

You're right, but I don't think a single fan would be surprised if the new owners - whoever they are - move Hodgson out as soon as possible

Yes but I'm prepared to bet we'd have had a decent chance of getting the ball in the net if one of our shots was a free pot-shot from the penalty spot. City created surprisingly little in open play and Hart was the busier goalkeeper, crap though we undoubtedly played As soon as I saw the 4-4-2 I was convinced we'd lose by at least a couple. My fears when I heard we'd signed Fulham's manager are already being fulfilled I'm 100% convinced that once we get new owners Hodgson will be replaced as soon as possible Yes the shot fro Johnson that was at least two feet wide of the post and so no danger whatsoever

If I were to choose a pairing that played together regularly I would probably go for Hansen and Lawrenson. However, if I were choosing my all-time Liverpool XI on an individual player basis (seeing as someone said Lawrenson would always get in an all-time XI), I'd go for Tommy Smith as one of them and almost certainly Alan Hansen as the other

In your opinion. And I didn't use disrespectful language either. See how easy it is? One position we've always been well blessed in over the decades is centre-back. Lawrenson was an excellent player; of that there's no doubt. And his partnership with Hansen was as good as any pairing we've had at one time. But - in my opinion (and I don't believe anyone who disagrees with me is mental) after watching Liverpool for 50 years - I would put Tommy Smith, to name but one, ahead of Lawrenson every time. Like Smith, Lawrenson was a versatile player who was excellent both at left-back and in midfield, as well as CB. Smith was an outstanding right-back as well as centre-back. The England old boys' club led to Smith being criminally overlooked at international level for the most part, but there was no better centre-half or right-back in the country in Smith's day. Smith's close control under pressure, his immense tackling strength, the timing of his challenges, his thunderous shot, his vision and passing range were all better than Lawrenson's. It was a joy to see him throughout his career. I never saw any top striker get the better of him in any match Interestingly Dalglish seemed to be less impressed by Lawrenson than a lot of people and Gillespie eventually took Lawrenson's CB berth and the team didn't look any the worse for it But there we are. It's all about opinions

I'm sorry but, excellent player that Lawrenson was, to compare him in any way to Beckenbauer is way off beam. Beckenbauer was a genius. His performance for Bayern in the 0-0 draw at Anfield around 1970 or so is easily the best I've seen by any centre-back in my lifetime. Bobby Moore was of course vastly over-rated. We seemingly used to always beat West Ham in the 60s and Moore always looked hopeless in games at Anfield. It's just that he was the Beckham of his day, the golden boy of the media so he was in England's team no matter how well or badly he played. He wasn't a patch on Tommy Smith as a centre-back. Indeed, Bill Shankly said of one of Smith's peers, Geoff Strong, who was quite brilliant from full back through centre-back, midfielder and striker for us, "If Bobby Moore's a better centre-half than Geoff Strong I'll eat the grandstand". Shankly wasn't a bad judge of a player

I'm one of those who saw him in his prime and I wouldn't have him near my all time Liverpool XI

Peter Wall. A left-back we signed from Wrexham I believe. He was in the first team quite a few times in the late sixties and we then sold him on to Crystal Palace. I thought he was a superb full-back and was really surprised we sold him

Jimmy Carter every day of the week. How we got £500K for him from Arsenal (a £300K loss) will remain a miracle. He was so f***ing useless it's untrue. We were lucky to get a penny for him

We paid £10m for Alonso, sold him for £30m so made £20m profit There were rumours about Clemence's privatle life that made it impossible to stay in Liverpool, hence his very swift transfer to the other end of the country. Probably wrong to repeat them here

I tend to watch Countdown to Kick-Off on LFC TV before the game, go for a piss at half-time and open another beer, then straight back to LFC TV after the game for their analysis, thus avoiding the cliche-ridden anti-Liverpool drivel on Sky

Like the way everyone avoided mentioning Wilshere's appalling attempt to remove Mascherano's lower leg, with no attempt to play the ball. In what way was that not as bad as Cole's challenge?