FSG are not shit

[moof]

That's why I say "benevolent decline".

 

T'was the board that saved the club from H&G. Henry and Co shouldn't get much praise for balancing the books, that's the bare minimum one should expect from any owner. What they have done for the team on the pitch is to allow us to fall behind teams that used to be our peers or lessers.

Where’s the ‘decline’ aspect in all of this?

 

I’m talking about Liverpool Football Club. Where we were at the end of cancer & aids, to where we are now. In what way have we regressed?

 

On the pitch? Better.

Transfer market? Better.

Stadium? Better.

Financial solvency? Considerably better.

Coaching/backroom staff and academy? Better.

 

Winning trophies is the next step, and ultimately on what everyone will be judged. We’ve come close but now we have to get over the line. I think we’ve got a pretty decent chance of winning stuff over the next couple of years.

 

They’re not perfect, they’ve got plenty wrong and there are still areas that can be improved. Overall we aren’t doing too badly.

[Pureblood]

So, essentially you're arguing for Hicks and Gillet as owners? Hmn. Interesting. Possibly having Rafa and loads of good players, like Carra, Gerrard, Alonso, Garcia, Hyypia, Reina, Torres, Hamann, et al., for next to nothing might have helped them... nah, probably not. It's all down to ownership. Well job, Hicks and Gillet. Very well job.

 

You're better than this, mate.

[Ranxerox]

It's a bit rich that you're a johnny come lately who is having a go at someone for destroying the history of the club when you wouldn't have heard of it 10 years ago.

 

Ha ha what should I do with all that rent free space I occupy in your head?

[Numero Veinticinco]

You're better than this, mate.

Negative, skippy. This is my level. I enjoy using people's arguments against them, what can I say.

[Pureblood]

Negative, skippy. This is my level. I enjoy using people's arguments against them, what can I say.

 

Yeah, but that was straw man nonsense.  Nobody was happy with Hicks and Gillett, which is why they were forced out in an epic swindle.

[RobbieOR]

Ha ha what should I do with all that rent free space I occupy in your head?

 

What?

[Ranxerox]

Yeah, but that was straw man nonsense.  Nobody was happy with Hicks and Gillett, which is why they were forced out in an epic swindle.

Is correct

[Numero Veinticinco]

Yeah, but that was straw man nonsense.  Nobody was happy with Hicks and Gillett, which is why they were forced out in an epic swindle.

It wasn't an actual argument I was making, TK. It was an illustration of why the argument he was making is daft. It's the same logic as the fake Hicks and Gillet one I just offered.

[Ranxerox]

Negative, skippy. This is my level. I enjoy using people's arguments against them, what can I say.

Yes logical fallacies are definitely your level

[Numero Veinticinco]

Is correct

Oh dear. It appears that reading comprehension amongst the Canada's branch of the Chelsea supporter's club is well below standard.

[Pureblood]

It wasn't an actual argument I was making, TK. It was an illustration of why the argument he was making is daft. It's the same logic as the fake Hicks and Gillet one I just offered.

 

Fair enough, I am finding the whole thing a bit dull!

[Numero Veinticinco]

Fair enough, I am finding the whole thing a bit dull!

Yes, dull is the right word. This 'look at the finishing position in the league, aren't the owners good/bad' is fucking retarded.

[Pureblood]

Yes, dull is the right word. This 'look at the finishing position in the league, aren't the owners good/bad' is fucking retarded.

 

I don't think it's retarded at all.  We did put more trophies on the table in the pre-FSG era.

 

Until they start delivering some substance it's only fair to question their approach.  They were the ones who came out with all the "we will do whatever it takes to win" hubris when they took over the club, nobody forced them to say all that stuff.

[TheHowieLama]

 

Let's look at that shall we....

 

Before FSG

 

02-03 - 5th - League cup winners

03-04 - 4th

04-05 - 5th - Champions League winners / UEFA Super cup winners

05-06 - 3rd  - FA cup winners

06-07 - 3rd - Charity shield winners

07-08 - 4th

08-09 - 2nd

09-10 - 7th

 

Average league position - 4.12

Average trophies per season - 0.62

 

After FSG

 

10-11 -6th

11-12 - 8th League cup winners

12-13 - 7th

13-14 - 2nd

14-15 - 6th

15-16 - 8th

16-17 - 4th

17-18 - ?

 

Average league position - 5.85

 

 

Average trophies per season - 0.14

 

 

 

Good sample set -- would have looked even better if you included the 01 season though.

 

The club have won the League Cup three times, the FA Cup twice and the CL and UEFA once in the last 25 years.

[Ranxerox]

Yes, dull is the right word. This 'look at the finishing position in the league, aren't the owners good/bad' is fucking retarded.

Owners shouldn't be judged on where the club finishes?

[Numero Veinticinco]

I don't think it's retarded at all.  We did put more trophies on the table in the pre-FSG era.

We did. Does that mean the ownership was better? Or that us not winning makes the ownership worse? Is it down to the ownership or might there be other factors involved. I think the owners should be there to run the club on a business and sign the cheques. The rest is for the football manager. Making 700m available for transfer didn't result in anything. That's not an ownership issue, that's a manager issue.

[eeyore]

Every January when we desperately need strengthening in vital areas when trophies are up for grabs - they have never, ever invested for us.

 

How do you defend that numero?

[Hand Shandy]

[TheHowieLama]

The decline this club had was between 92 and 99 for obvious reasons. That is where we went from odds on to win anything we played in to punching above our weight.

It is also where we lost massive ground off the field.

[dockers_strike]

 

Let's look at that shall we....

 

Before FSG

 

02-03 - 5th - League cup winners

03-04 - 4th

04-05 - 5th - Champions League winners / UEFA Super cup winners

05-06 - 3rd  - FA cup winners

06-07 - 3rd - Charity shield winners

07-08 - 4th

08-09 - 2nd

09-10 - 7th

 

Average league position - 4.12

Average trophies per season - 0.62

 

After FSG

 

10-11 -6th

11-12 - 8th League cup winners

12-13 - 7th

13-14 - 2nd

14-15 - 6th

15-16 - 8th

16-17 - 4th

17-18 - ?

 

Average league position - 5.85

 

 

Average trophies per season - 0.14

 

 

All very interesting reading but fails to take into account a number of factors. Such as Steven Gerrard in his pomp, Manchester Uniteds dominance the rise of Chelsea and latterly Manchester City and there are 2 ownership regimes prior to this lot. One who were a complete disaster and took the club on a bankruptcy strategy while Moores was on a downwards spiral.

[Pureblood]

We did. Does that mean the ownership was better? Or that us not winning makes the ownership worse? Is it down to the ownership or might there be other factors involved. I think the owners should be there to run the club on a business and sign the cheques. The rest is for the football manager. Making 700m available for transfer didn't result in anything. That's not an ownership issue, that's a manager issue.

 

Yes, it does mean the ownership was better.  Clearly we were in a better position to compete with our rivals and take the final step of winning before this lot showed up (if you ignore the anomaly of the Hicks and Gillett years).  The landscape may have changed since then but tough shit.  If you say stuff like you want to win at all costs, then back it up.  Actions speak louder than words.

 

You make it sound like they've made £700m available without anything being recouped the other way, which you know is not true.  £700m, wow.  Does their benevolence know no bounds?  How lucky we are.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Owners shouldn't be judged on where the club finishes?

Their impact upon the club is what they should be judged on. Scott, being serious for a second, there's lots of factors influencing where the club finishes. I put the 2005 Europe Cup win down to Rafa and his team, I don't think it was down to David Moores. Saying 'FSG' are responsible when we finish seventh, and responsible for if we win, is silly. If we win, it'll be down to Klopp. FSG need to be judged on the things they are in control of. They are there to make sure that the club is in a health position (it is, there's no denying that. It's a clear verifiable fact), they're there to ensure money is available for the manager (we've had 700m worth of new players, regardless of how it was funded), and they are there to run the club. The last thing, I think there's some issues with. The ticketing, some of the senior leadership, etc, these have been questionable or just bad at times. I've no issue slagging these people off, but putting the blame for everything, all the time, no matter their involvement or lack of it, is just stupid. It's indicative of somebody without the ability for rational thinking, and it bugs me. I don't give a fuck about FSG, they mean nothing to me. I would like John Henry to actually be more involved, he's a clever guy. But as long as the money is there for our manager to spend, and it appears to be, then I'm not going to start losing my shit about it. But no, league position is not a reliable way of judging ownership. Had the footballing management done what Klopp is now instead of buying a raft of shit players, I've no doubt we would have won more and finished higher; that wouldn't have made FSG any better. Judge them on fair measures, if they fall short of those then I've no issue with the boot being shoved into their arse.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Yes, it does mean the ownership was better.

Fair enough, mate. I think they were horrendous.

[Pureblood]

Fair enough, mate. I think they were horrendous.

 

Who?

[Numero Veinticinco]

Who?

Moores and Hicks and Gillett. Especially the latter of the years listed under Hicks and Gillett. I think we've had more than enough money to compete. I really do.