They Call Us Murderers

[Guest Cisse's mate]

I was sent this blog address in an email from a fellow Red see what you think.

 

Can imagine some Evertonians going blue chocking on their toffees

 

http://they-call-us-murderers-you-know.blogspot.com/

[johngibo YPC]

"but let them quietly remember how the rest of football and Everton, above all, paid for their folly at Heysel."

 

Thats right the biggest victims in all of this were Everton, not those that died, or the families they left behind. But another football club who had nothing to do with it. Just about sums them up

[Guest shankers]

Whats new from the Blue ba*tards!

Same old s*ite will they never let it rest.

Please god Relegation cant come soon enough

For them blue bitter Bast*rds.

[Ste M]

Whats new from the Blue ba*tards!

Same old s*ite will they never let it rest.

Please god Relegation cant come soon enough

For them blue bitter Bast*rds.

 

Have you actually read it?

[Guest Cisse's mate]

"but let them quietly remember how the rest of football and Everton, above all, paid for their folly at Heysel."

 

Thats right the biggest victims in all of this were Everton, not those that died, or the families they left behind. But another football club who had nothing to do with it. Just about sums them up

 

It is written by a Red who blows a hole right through thier arguments over being the victims it's a bit long but a good read.

[Guest Cisse's mate]

If I remember rightly many a team has won the European Cup without winning the league that season, am I right?

 

Yes but the Evertonians claim they would have won it without a shred of evidence to back it up. It's like saying we would have won it every year, and with the team we had that has more credence than Evertons shout.

 

Nothing new in there.

 

Got as far as some bitter b*****d moaning about how we are scared stiff of them getting into the G14 and had to stop as it was getting too ridiculous.

 

The tragedy of Heysel was that people died - nothing else comes into it. If they want to whinge about their European ban, and pretend that their own fans' conduct over the years had nothing to do with it, then let them.

 

Heysel will always be a shameful moment in our history as despite the factors beyond our control that meant it could have been fans of any club responsible had circumstances been different, it was, at the end of the day, fans of our club and nobody elses who were to blame.

 

Better to just take our punishment on the chin, try to offer an apology, and move on - as we have done. Getting into a speculative debate about the effect that Heysel had on a another club is both pointless and an insult. As someone said, you'll never convince some of them that they wouldn't still be sweeping all before them now 'if it wasn't for the reds****', so f*** it. They don't matter.

 

If you finished at the quotes at the start how do you know there is nothing new in there. in fact there is a lot you won't know, Like Everton being find by UEFA that year for fans throwing missiles at the Bayern Munich Bench, like the club not selling tickets to an away game that year in case the fans went on a riot, or the riot that did take place on the ferry to Dublin in the first round. I know this guy and he has put some work into this at lest read the f***ing thing before you dismiss it.

 

We have taken our punishment on the chin as you say but we do not have to go around dragging Evertons guilt over the ban with us. During the fight for the 4th spot in the CL in 2005 the press were fed lies about Everton being denied greatness through no fault of their own, this guy has nailed those lies.

 

Just go and read the piece

 

 

The most salient point that youcan make against them is that 2 years after Heysel, they were champions again, by a wide margin; we looked poor, only getting as near as we did because of Rush - who was about to leave for Italy. The ban being lifted was up for discussion, except for us, whose punishment wa s to be longer. SO at that point, we were in danger of going into terminal decline, they were strong; yet it was their mismangement that allowed potentially the next English Manager to go to a moderate Spanish club, and good (not great) players like Steven leave for the European success of, urm, Rangers. Lineker had already gone - but he joined AFTER Heysel anyway. What did LFC, facing an uncertain future, do? Bought Barnes, Beardsley and Aldridge DESPITE the ban, and created one of the finest teams to grace the English League.

 

It is also worth reminding any Bitter that not only was the old EC NOT the moneyspinner it is now, but ALL the previous English Winners except us had followed their success by being RELEGATED within 5 or 6 years. So perhaps them 'winning' the EC would not have been so bad after all...

 

Spot on, I have read a draught of part two of the blog and DannyD raises these issues, details the success Rangers had (not) before and after Steven & Stevens joined, Kendall supposed to be going to Barca and doing a season with Bilbao, Adrian Heath at Espanyol.

He also deals with the finances and how Everton didn't replace Lineker who was sold by Kendall, he did not leave over the ban.

 

Did you learn anything from the blog you didn't know anyway?

[smithdown]

They blew the money they had on the likes of Cottee and Nevin, while we were buying the likes of Barnes, Beardsley and Aldridge.

 

But then thats our fault as well, I suppose.

[The walters step over]

The most salient point that youcan make against them is that 2 years after Heysel, they were champions again, by a wide margin; we looked poor, only getting as near as we did because of Rush - who was about to leave for Italy. The ban being lifted was up for discussion, except for us, whose punishment wa s to be longer. SO at that point, we were in danger of going into terminal decline, they were strong; yet it was their mismangement that allowed potentially the next English Manager to go to a moderate Spanish club, and good (not great) players like Steven leave for the European success of, urm, Rangers. Lineker had already gone - but he joined AFTER Heysel anyway. What did LFC, facing an uncertain future, do? Bought Barnes, Beardsley and Aldridge DESPITE the ban, and created one of the finest teams to grace the English League.

 

It is also worth reminding any Bitter that not only was the old EC NOT the moneyspinner it is now, but ALL the previous English Winners except us had followed their success by being RELEGATED within 5 or 6 years. So perhaps them 'winning' the EC would not have been so bad after all...

 

Absolutely bang on. Ive had many an argument with bluenoses whereby I've said much the same thing. They broke the British transfer record on Cottee 3 years later (enough of a time for the economic implications not being in europe to kick in) and through the 90's although they hated "agent" Johnston they were consistently the highest spenders in England during his stewardship. Remember, the only club that competed with us for the record signature of Collymore was Everton, and they were even willing to shell out £10m plus on Shearer during this time.

 

They just spent the money on s*** players, and appointed the wrong managers - a bit like us, really. As a result of bad management their finances inevitably suffered but I suppose instead of facing up to these problems it's easier to blame us. I can understand the anger at the time (I was spat on by Norwich fans when we played them in that ridiculous f***** "super cup" competition) but for evertonians to blame us for all their problems since just ignores all of the facts.

[trowie]

Yes but the Evertonians claim they would have won it without a shred of evidence to back it up. It's like saying we would have won it every year, and with the team we had that has more credence than Evertons shout.

If you finished at the quotes at the start how do you know there is nothing new in there. in fact there is a lot you won't know, Like Everton being find by UEFA that year for fans throwing missiles at the Bayern Munich Bench, like the club not selling tickets to an away game that year in case the fans went on a riot, or the riot that did take place on the ferry to Dublin in the first round. I know this guy and he has put some work into this at lest read the f***ing thing before you dismiss it.

 

We have taken our punishment on the chin as you say but we do not have to go around dragging Evertons guilt over the ban with us. During the fight for the 4th spot in the CL in 2005 the press were fed lies about Everton being denied greatness through no fault of their own, this guy has nailed those lies.

 

Just go and read the piece

Spot on, I have read a draught of part two of the blog and DannyD raises these issues, details the success Rangers had (not) before and after Steven & Stevens joined, Kendall supposed to be going to Barca and doing a season with Bilbao, Adrian Heath at Espanyol.

He also deals with the finances and how Everton didn't replace Lineker who was sold by Kendall, he did not leave over the ban.

 

Did you learn anything from the blog you didn't know anyway?

An interesting article.

It's easy to forget the violence that was occurring all over football throughout Europe at that time.

I may, as a lot of other Reds may have done, was go into shutdown from the whole events during that period. There was a certain amount of shame felt for what had happened att Heysel and really didn't want to hear or read about anything connected to hooliganism from that day or even before it.

Brought it all back reading that.

[smithdown]

Lets face it though, anyone prepared to scream murderer at his neighbour and, as others have said. to see himself as a victim of Heysel cos he's bitter about his team (or more likely OUR team) is unikely to be persuaded by logic or history. I can understand them still being bitter over Mr Clive Thomas Esquire but these are dead football supporters they are singing about.

 

Its like that post about last years derby where a blue was singing murderers, told to feckin shut up and responded that 'they started it, they were singing Five Times'.

 

F'kem.

 

There are some decent blues about who would agree with us on this issue, by the way.

Edited September 14, 2006 by smithdown

[Billy Talbot]

I had a dream last night that Daniel Agger was shot dead in a police terrorist raid. I remember thinking "I bet that copper was a bluenose, the murdering b*****d...".

[Guest Cisse's mate]

Absolutely bang on. Ive had many an argument with bluenoses whereby I've said much the same thing. They broke the British transfer record on Cottee 3 years later (enough of a time for the economic implications not being in europe to kick in) and through the 90's although they hated "agent" Johnston they were consistently the highest spenders in England during his stewardship. Remember, the only club that competed with us for the record signature of Collymore was Everton, and they were even willing to shell out £10m plus on Shearer during this time.

 

They just spent the money on s*** players, and appointed the wrong managers - a bit like us, really. As a result of bad management their finances inevitably suffered but I suppose instead of facing up to these problems it's easier to blame us. I can understand the anger at the time (I was spat on by Norwich fans when we played them in that ridiculous f***** "super cup" competition) but for evertonians to blame us for all their problems since just ignores all of the facts.

 

Part Two has just been posted deals with the claim Everton would have won the European Cup the next year.

 

http://they-call-us-murderers-you-know.blogspot.com/

Edited September 14, 2006 by Cisse's mate

[JRC]

 

Spot on, I have read a draught of part two of the blog and DannyD raises these issues, details the success Rangers had (not) before and after Steven & Stevens joined, Kendall supposed to be going to Barca and doing a season with Bilbao, Adrian Heath at Espanyol.

He also deals with the finances and how Everton didn't replace Lineker who was sold by Kendall, he did not leave over the ban.

 

Did you learn anything from the blog you didn't know anyway?

 

A great, well-rersearched and presented read. I think the 'Murderers' chanters would never read/accept/understand this, but there is a whole apparently reasonable revisionist position ('No Fault Of Their Own') that HAS to be countered.

 

I realised that there was more to come, and appreciated the detail and research DannyD had already done, so assumed some - probably all - of my points would get covered, so it was a mixture of getting my long-held opinions aired first AND perhaps adding some more that DannyD can use if I mentioned anything he wasn't going to - I particularly like the fact about subsequent prompt Relegation for the other English Winners.

 

The detail on the FA/UEFA positions etc is excellent, and new to me, although I was well aware at the time of the fact that it was English Football in general that was on trial - if Heysel hadn't happened, then another incident would have been the one that broke the camel's back.

 

What I would have avoided is the Urchins stuff - not that it isn't true, but it's a bit close to 'lovable cheeky scouser' territory, which we sometimes get accused of - just that we also had some nasty hard b*stards; I know because, attending games in London from a College location, I had to go unidentified, so just as often got chased by our own. I recall tales (by fellow Reds) of a vicious crew called the Anny Road Apaches (whilst acknowledging the mythological nature of much of these tales), and oppo fans stories of Stanley usage being not too far from the truth. I would agree though, that around town at the time, it was the Bluenoses who had - and enjoyed, and took pride in, and boasted about - the reputation for having 'soldiers' and well-organised Firms.

[Coyler]

University College Dublin.

[Guest Cisse's mate]

University College Dublin.

 

Christ so they wheren't even a football club, just a crowd of students.

[Guest Damo1980]

Why are the bluesh**e convinced that they would have won the '86 european cup??

 

If Heysel hadn't happened, there was every chance that WE would have won the match and had number 5 wrapped up 20 years early, therefore making us favourites in '86.

 

But ultimately Heysel happened, so there should be no "What if's".

[JRC]

Why are the bluesh**e convinced that they would have won the '86 european cup??

 

If Heysel hadn't happened, there was every chance that WE would have won the match and had number 5 wrapped up 20 years early, therefore making us favourites in '86.

 

But ultimately Heysel happened, so there should be no "What if's".

Their argument is more that WE should have been banned, but not them - and all other things being equal, we wouldn't have been in the 85-6 European Cup anyway. Juventus were though, and had a significantly stronger claim to being potential winners - but they didn't even reach the final. There is little reason to suggest Everton would have won in 86.

[Cobs]

exactly.

 

 

Bayern who they just got by in the CWC semi in 85 got knocked out in the quarters in 86.

[uppsala]

Spot on

 

A great read that was.

[kop205]

 

If you finished at the quotes at the start how do you know there is nothing new in there. in fact there is a lot you won't know, Like Everton being find by UEFA that year for fans throwing missiles at the Bayern Munich Bench, like the club not selling tickets to an away game that year in case the fans went on a riot, or the riot that did take place on the ferry to Dublin in the first round. I know this guy and he has put some work into this at lest read the f***ing thing before you dismiss it.

 

We have taken our punishment on the chin as you say but we do not have to go around dragging Evertons guilt over the ban with us. During the fight for the 4th spot in the CL in 2005 the press were fed lies about Everton being denied greatness through no fault of their own, this guy has nailed those lies.

 

Just go and read the piece

 

Just to clarify, I exgaggerated slightly when I said I stopped reading at that quote. I got quite a bit further but the initial fears that quotes like that prompted, vis a vis whereb the debate was going, were only confirmed by what came after, or at least what is hinted at.

 

The hooligan stuff you refer to is not 'news' to me, I was well aware of it - certainly the incident on the ferry to Dublin is almost 'legendary'. I'm just not that interested in it in some ways. If they want to rant on about how Heysel unfairly denied them greatness, then let them. All they are doing is making themselves look insensitive fools, and to even dignify their arguments with counter arguments is to be guilty of equal insensitivity. I don't doubt that the lad put a lot of work into it and the one thing that is worth reminding people of is that the notion that their ban was 'unfair', totally undeserved and without reason is an utter myth. Granted, that is one lie he does nail as I suppose there are people who are unaware of their hooligan track record. It is a lie worth nailing, in the same way as teh S*n's lies about Hillsborough are worth nailing.

 

The rest of the stuff hinted at in the piece (that actually they wouldn't have won the European Cup and therefore weren't denied anything) is what I can't be arsed with. It is hardly likely to change the opinions of the bitterest of the bitter and in fact it would probably do the opposite and rile them even more and shift the focus even further away from what it should be on when Heysel is discussed - the people who died. By all means nail the lie that thier fans were angels at the time - but don't even get into the debate about what they would/wouldn't have done if Heysel hadn't happened.To try and prove that actually they wouldn't have won the European Cup the year after is to completely and utterly miss the point. Them being allowed into Europe but not winning it wouldn't make Heysel any less of a tragedy, because it isn't and never has been in any way 'their' tragedy to begin with. Hillsborough probably cost us the League in 89 but winning the League would hardly have diminished the tragedy.

 

What does it f***ing matter if Everton were 'denied greatness' by Heysel? Maybe they were, maybe they weren't, nobody will ever know for sure.

 

They are sick f*****s for prattling about what it alledgedly 'cost' them. We are making a mistake if we get sucked into that debate.

Edited September 14, 2006 by kop205

[Guest Cisse's mate]

Just to clarify, I exgaggerated slightly when I said I stopped reading at that quote. I got quite a bit further but the initial fears that quotes like that prompted, vis a vis whereb the debate was going, were only confirmed by what came after, or at least what is hinted at.

 

The hooligan stuff you refer to is not 'news' to me, I was well aware of it - certainly the incident on the ferry to Dublin is almost 'legendary'. I'm just not that interested in it in some ways. If they want to rant on about how Heysel unfairly denied them greatness, then let them. All they are doing is making themselves look insensitive fools, and to even dignify their arguments with counter arguments is to be guilty of equal insensitivity. I don't doubt that the lad put a lot of work into it and the one thing that is worth reminding people of is that the notion that their ban was 'unfair', totally undeserved and without reason is an utter myth. Granted, that is one lie he does nail as I suppose there are people who are unaware of their hooligan track record. It is a lie worth nailing, in the same way as teh S*n's lies about Hillsborough are worth nailing.

 

The rest of the stuff hinted at in the piece (that actually they wouldn't have won the European Cup and therefore weren't denied anything) is what I can't be arsed with. It is hardly likely to change the opinions of the bitterest of the bitter and in fact it would probably do the opposite and rile them even more and shift the focus even further away from what it should be on when Heysel is discussed - the people who died. By all means nail the lie that thier fans were angels at the time - but don't even get into the debate about what they would/wouldn't have done if Heysel hadn't happened.To try and prove that actually they wouldn't have won the European Cup the year after is to completely and utterly miss the point. Them being allowed into Europe but not winning it wouldn't make Heysel any less of a tragedy, because it isn't and never has been in any way 'their' tragedy to begin with. Hillsborough probably cost us the League in 89 but winning the League would hardly have diminished the tragedy.

 

What does it f***ing matter if Everton were 'denied greatness' by Heysel? Maybe they were, maybe they weren't, nobody will ever know for sure.

 

They are sick f*****s for prattling about what it alledgedly 'cost' them. We are making a mistake if we get sucked into that debate.

 

 

 

DannyD posts a lot on RAWK and he was asked similar questions on there maybe his reply COPIED OFF RAWK might answer some of the questions you raise.

 

That was one of the reasons for writing it ( badly or otherwise) what stuck me during the fight over the CL place in 2005 was the media were coming out with the "through no fault of their own " slogan, and I wasn't hearing any counter argument.

I got to thinking Christ doesn't anyone remember what happened in the 80s and what the ban was all about?, I tried to find a book that dealt with Heysel but there is nothing out there. If you search the Net you get the same old same old "After a riot by Liverpool fans blah, blah, blah" If something isn't done we will be forever tagged as the club that got English football banned from Europe.

 

Generations of Blues have no one stopping them from spreading their bitter version, The Mancs. have taken to singing about not killing anyone, all we need is for Norwich , West Ham, or Southampton fans to jump on the bandwagon and blame us for their demise. If that is not a good enough reason then reading some of the posts on here and other Liverpool fan sites tells me there are young Reds out there who have never read an alternative version based on historical facts. We have many supporters around the world have they ever gotten into a dialog over the ban? Do they hold to the version of it was us and only us who were to blame? Christ have they been thinking all this time we did get England banned from Europe.

 

 

I have tried to point out that that is far from the case and Heysel was the final straw that even the ostrich like idiots running world football could not ignore. I have used as many quotes as possible to direct the argument into an objective forum, all the none tagged quotes are from the local Echo or Post and can be tracked in the local library I did have a diary with the dates and times of all the quotes but this was mislaid in a taxi and it took an age to research, but believe me they are all out there if you want to check for yourself.

 

The Blog is not an excuse for Heysel. It deals with the aftermath and the way Everton's present hierarchy have hidden their and their predecessor's short comings behind the tragedy.

 

The Blog is not about the rights and wrongs of Heysel either, as a club we have admitted our fans were guilty; our detractors like to say the club hasn't but that's another myth. As an individual I believe that in spite of there being mitigating circumstances if our lads hadn't charged that night the 39 would not have perished.

 

I apologise for the faults in my grammar, if you knew how hard I have worked to get it right then maybe you will understand, but I am sure most of you are like myself and believe the message more important than the package it comes in.

[kop205]

There are 2 issues for me:

 

1 Were Everton fans blameless?

2 How much success were they denied?

 

I have no problem with him addressing the myth that the behaviour of Everton fans was exemplary as it is clearly b******s, as is the suggestion that it was Heysel and Heysel alone that was taken into account when the ban was dished out.

 

What I'm not comfortable with is when he starts going off into the debate about how much success they were actually denied becuase for me their whinging about that shold not even be dignified with a response. It just doesn't matter and anyone who tries to 'prove' that they may not have won the EC the next season is dangerously close to buying into the notion that if Everton were denied success, then that wold somehow make the tragedy worse (or at least in some sense 'theirs').

 

Fair play to the lad for the effort he took, I just think there is a fine line that at times he strays across.

[R A Softlad]

I'm waiting for the ill-informed retort of www.they-call-us-bitter.com... that'll be a class read.

[JohnnyH]

There are 2 issues for me:

 

1 Were Everton fans blameless?

2 How much success were they denied?

 

I have no problem with him addressing the myth that the behaviour of Everton fans was exemplary as it is clearly b******s, as is the suggestion that it was Heysel and Heysel alone that was taken into account when the ban was dished out.

 

What I'm not comfortable with is when he starts going off into the debate about how much success they were actually denied becuase for me their whinging about that shold not even be dignified with a response. It just doesn't matter and anyone who tries to 'prove' that they may not have won the EC the next season is dangerously close to buying into the notion that if Everton were denied success, then that wold somehow make the tragedy worse (or at least in some sense 'theirs').

 

Fair play to the lad for the effort he took, I just think there is a fine line that at times he strays across.

 

I totally agree with that.

 

The lad has done good work and I think he should be commended and I would love to see more on the trouble they have caused, just to push home that the myth of Hysel resulting in everyone been banned is so very wrong.

 

However, he should leave the success stuff alone. That should be left to the deluded bitters. We never go on about how if 1st-4th were always allowed in the European Cup then we would probably be playing for number 8 or 9 at this stage, so leave those moronic toffees to spew their deluded wibble as no one buys into it bar them in their Fred Flintstone stadium.

[Guest Cisse's mate]

There are 2 issues for me:

 

1 Were Everton fans blameless?

2 How much success were they denied?

 

I have no problem with him addressing the myth that the behaviour of Everton fans was exemplary as it is clearly b******s, as is the suggestion that it was Heysel and Heysel alone that was taken into account when the ban was dished out.

 

What I'm not comfortable with is when he starts going off into the debate about how much success they were actually denied becuase for me their whinging about that shold not even be dignified with a response. It just doesn't matter and anyone who tries to 'prove' that they may not have won the EC the next season is dangerously close to buying into the notion that if Everton were denied success, then that wold somehow make the tragedy worse (or at least in some sense 'theirs').

 

Fair play to the lad for the effort he took, I just think there is a fine line that at times he strays across.

 

 

I think he takes the points they use to argue that without the ban they would have been bigger than us and United and uses logic to say it is nonsense, he says nobody can be sure but looking at Evertons past history the make up of the club & team their finances and the one major factor they choose to ignore Liverpool FC and the side Dalglish built Everton would be no better than Villa or Forest. good shout when you consider that three years after Heysel they were a spent force.