DMCA

I dunno .I still think its that extra quality we lack not the buzzing around stuff. The last 4 years the leagues been won by teams worth 2x to 3x as much as our team. They dont slouch around either. They just have the ball more and can move it around quicker and more accurately. Bit of an obvious statement given the league tables over the last few years but i guess that's it in a nutshell.

I still worry for Torres. What with G & H owing sh1tloads and Torres' value going thru the stratosphere with his skill, marketability and the unlimited Arab money. Those cvnts may just flog him and have done.

i dont think that's the thrust of Cooger's posts. No one argues that he's not hardworking and everybody knows that Rafa likes "little soldiers" and "Duracell bunnies" (as they been called recently) The question is, could a more creative , but less hardworking player open more doors down the right in certain games where teams sit back. Sure , we'd be weaker at the back, but would we stand a greater chance of winning as opposed to drawing? Kuyt's great in games where there's lots of room - ie cup games.And his goal tally in cup games reflects this. Anyway as most have pointed out the points are moot at the moment because we're winning But the big question, over a whole season, can duracells win the championship

I think that would totally f*** up his system.[ I think Wenger would sooner spend the cash on whacking those ingrates Flamini and Hleb] ah well - we disagree. I'll slink off now. Given my prolific posting I reckon I'll be given the bullet on this forum anyway. Have a good day geez.

woaa,i genuinely apologise Anny! just discussing stuff! but i also genuinely think that this team could be more adventurous in the same way that Arsenal/Manu are and, on balance, we'd do better and have a decent chance at the title. Possible that if Wenger had been less adventurous he'd have been less successful at winning the league? yes, we've won knock-out cups but cup and league is a different approach. being a fan, for me anyway, doesnt mean discarding objectivity. i guess the very nature of fan forums discourages it with the guy that criticises our players the most - is the worst fan of all. so i probably am a t** but i'd like to see us play football like arsenal & manu and i wont apologise for that. it hurts me to see them pinging it around like crazy. i fvcken want that i dont come around here often so it looks like i mis-judged the "passion" yours stunned!

Swan, Cara/Agger is analagous to Kuyt/Babel. Cara & Kuyt are great workers, superb against the top teams. Not really all that useful against Stoke et al. In the last decade, Arsenal have won it 3 times, Chelsea twice and Manu 5 times. Arsenal have won it on a comparative shoe-string with awesome football at times, built a stadium and now are valued way beyond LFC. Bookmakers, I'm pretty sure, will back Manu to be above us at the end of the season. I think they're quite good actually. This is not to dis Rafa, who has systematically dumped non-footballers to get us out of the GH era - we just have a bit to go.

its simplistic to say that our manager is above criticism. The inference is that he has never / can never make mistakes. its also simplistic to say we happen to be above manu and arsenal and use this to say everything's rosey in the garden. They are excellent teams and light years ahead of us. Wenger's won the league enough for us to be respectful of his talents. I am anyway. Its patently obvious that our league position is very flattering given the quality of the football. Lots of late goals have saved us. Our main problem is not having enough quailty as an attacking unit. Everybody attacking like the top 3 do. We havent had this facet for years and until its sorted out we wont win the league. Meanwhile Man City are due to knock us out of the top4 in a couple of years - but hey we've got Kuyt "the workhorse" and Jamie C "the character". not v funny actually

bit simplistic this. Rafa thinks Kuyt adds that defensive dimension in the hope that the rest of the team will be creative enough. He's been overly defensive in the past and _probably_ doing so again here. Against Manu he's the perfect fit because they give us room to play. Against Stoke - Babel would be a better fit because we never lost the ball. In short we should play ball players against the weaker teams - the kuyts and carraghers add nothing in the these games apart from slowing down the ball. Deemed a bit of a risk, but if SAF/Wenger were in charge what would they do? Would non-ball players be anywhere near this club?

back in the real world , losers sat around pontificating all day and missed the boat. and then blamed everybody else for missing it.

the key is organisation. it appears that the fans have a union in SoS. Why not use it as an aggressive (but non-violent i might add!) buffer on matchday to educate and try to turn back those who are short-termist? that's what effective unions do after all. the press would be all over it for a start to help increase the message. its so obvious, you'd have to be deaf & blind not to see what's going on. make a fuss and see where it gets us. marching will be a feckin joke to the owners. they have a prime asset, tons of debt and are struggling to service that debt. the only effective pressure is to reduce the value of the asset. that will force their hand.

>>Spirit of Shankly’s open letter to RBS is a poignant drive by loyal match-going fans for something to be done to de-stabilize the current unsustainable situation. Ironic that SoS are asking an organisation that makes money by lending money to come to the rescue when the answer is in this statement; "loyal match-going fans " If the fans are loyal enough for the cause, the only solution to get these cvnts out is to not be "match-going" at all. In cold terms, if the "customers" make it clear to the "suppliers" that they're not going to buy their product then they'll sell up next week. Especially as they're on the financial edge anyway ie just fvcking boycott matches until they go. If Liverpool FC dont get rid now , they'll be 5th place in 2 years. Then its rapidly downhill....

agreed. somewhat ironic that the call to action was completely ignored and ended up as pointless bickering about a freebie (including the spelling of his name!) i wonder if our owners' own constant bickering will get Rafa more than a "lampshade"

good point and well made. too well made. do u have a job? if so thats one in the eye for your shareholders

Of course i imagine this has been debated before but isnt it more economical to have 2 'shops' close to each other as opposed to apart. ie why a shopping centre is a errr shopping centre. is this the main pillar of argument because i dont see "the bluenoses profit from it as well as us" as a very strong argument. cheers

Sorry to get a bit boring - I'm not a huge poster on here so I've missed this; how does long term revenue suffer if sharing with the toffees? Does anyone have any figures for running/maintaining anfield per year?

I'm curious to know how a fax from a private entity to another private entity could be so well publicised. Maybe I'm a tad naive , but isnt this kind of info therefore kinda private and if it gets out then someone been less than honest? Or do football clubs just talk thru the press these days. I think this is what MON is p1ssed at. Not the offer - just the way its been publicised

I read the times article above and the way it reads we did nothing wrong. If you listen to his interview on bbc.co.uk the times are guilty of totally missing the point - its the leaking to the echo that he's annoyed about and the article above doesnt mention it at all! He'd rather keep the negotiations private till the end of the season but some fecker screwed him over. Whether its Liverpool's intent or some mole is immaterial. He's been fvcked over by someone.

correction: one of the best knock-out competition CBs in the game. As a CB for any league game playing a team outside a top 5 team he sucks - cos he can't pass, has no concept of quick-ball. The game's changed and there's no room for traditional stoppers - however good at stopping he may be. Anyway, I object to the thread because it totally over-abuses JAR (whether he is a basically superfit Norwegian who boots the ball very hard occasionally or not) . He probably demands a bit more respect after fvcking up due to his average talents. The point is there is an intelligible chappie in our team who's knocked in a ton of goals at the wrong end because he's also less than average at booting a football - not a whimper from anybody. The fact that he mucks in like a meathead seems to make him immune from any kind of criticism. Annoying as f*** that this all happened, but then how annoying is it watching Cara 20 times a game telegraph that he's going to launch it by doing a little girly skip so that he can connect properly - and then seeing the ball pinged back. Now that aint talent either.

Good call. The word "footballer" is lost on many. Cara is the best anti-footballer I've ever seen. Great at hoofing it, not knowing or caring where or how his teammates are to receive his passes - but the best in the business at stopping creativity from opposing teams As you point out, he's worked out he's crap and plays around this. Personally I can't stand watching him in possession of a football, but I'm all rather appreciative when he hoofs it out when a Drogba's bearing down on us. The fact that a Drogba's got the ball in the first place because Jimbo's launched it 30 seconds earlier is up for another discussion :-) Anyway, to make this post pertinent to the thread in hand; Can anyone tell us the much-loved Liverpool player who scored 2 own goals in one game and an own goal both home and away against Spurs(?). Can anyone tell me if anybody battered a feckin eyelid?

Sounds like everybody else is still gung-ho about DIC being involved but I'm a little concerned that they dont want ( or will get ) control of Liverpool. I was hoping that they would take all the shares and then pump in as much as they wanted. With a nigh-on 50:50 arrangement, DIC will always be hamstrung to put money in - unless they loan the Liverpool entity sh1tloads. Its still an inflexible arrangement IMHO and indicates they wont go crazy. Anyway, this argument about who's got the most $ is immaterial - its who's got the most to throw in without expecting a return. And that is Chelski's oh-so-clean sugar daddy. I guess its pretty unrealistic to get a sugar daddy - they come along once in a lifetime. And Chelski got one that didnt even support them. He just ran his finger down a list of PL teams and took a shot. Spawny fux!

Its an interesting one. The wife seems to think that casting a vote holds value as well and its all very noble and exciting etc. Forgetting the saving of the club, what would you pay to cast one vote in 100,000 every 4 years for life? Would be nice but 5k's a bit steep for me!

I agree its a noble idea but given that investors want returns of either money or influence and given that neither of these are on offer ( no $ returns and 1 vote in 100,000) it is effectively bailing out the club and giving your 5k away. Once the club has been "saved" and you've spent your 5k how much will your share be worth to the next man. Feck all I imagine. Personally I'd cough up the 5k because the upshot of all this is that LFC growth would never be stilted by the free market snaffling 5 to 10% of its value every year. I doubt they can find 100,000 donors/muppets like me

Aye and we wouldnt lose 10% of the clubs value every year - thats a Ronaldino!

I dont think so unless the ownership came with something. Which apparently it doesnt. Who'd want to buy a share when the only thing it gives you is a vote. Its basically a rescue mission

I dont think that's the motivation of this move. The constitution of the club would be changed whereby it cannot be either sold or remit profits to the owners (as opposed to shareholders). No enterprise would be interested in acquiring an interest in LFC. Anybody who buys a share is basically bunging money down the toilet - something which I'm prepared to do as long as G&H go down with it.