-
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
-
Who's Online 60 Members, 9 Anonymous, 197 Guests (See full list)
- Harry's Lad
- J-V
- Jenson
- Talismanic
- M_B
- Colonel Kurtz
- Kevin D
- bigthrusts
- The Midnight Rambler
- Marko121
- woodylfc
- TheHowieLama
- Remmie
- Jose Jones
- mgw100
- Alex_K
- TheBitch
- dockers_strike
- Nelly-Torres
- tokyojoe
- Bobby Hundreds
- TheDrowningMan
- rustychops
- rafaisgod
- Bjornebye
- Section_31
- Reds4Life
- John102
- Geoff Woade
- Stickman
- kemskem
- Simbo
- Strontium Dog™
- Jennings
- scottthecanuck
- Grinch
- etho
- Jockey
- Jarvinja Ilnow
- Plev
- Edward.
- Skidfingers McGonical
- stringvest
- janmolby
- morourke
- BigGamesJames
- Truered
- cadger
- Kempes
- YorkshireRed
- Ant 2 Threads
- gumps
- VERBAL DIARRHEA
- Doctor Troy
- benwasmydog
- Shooter in the Motor
- Growler
- johnsusername
- xyzee
- SHG
-
Featured Products
-
-
Available Subscriptions
-
Last Match Report
-
Latest Posts
-
I disagree, because it feels that you are ignoring a huge amount of evidence to the contrary. The fact it all changes in the 80s should give you an idea of why it changed - the world changes in the 80s, it all started in the 70s. The old order was wiped away by the likes of David Sterling, Jimmy Goldsmith et al. But I can't recall a time when clubs - all clubs ownership was with wealthy individuals - the fact that they were not billionaires is not proof of them being custodians - it is proof that the times were different. The Moores family had a tangible influence on both Everton and Liverpool! How can you say they were 'custodians' in the keeping with the criteria in place in 1899. The financial and economic climate created the environment where they were more custodians - TV and international TV rights were not in place then, so you are comparing apples and pears. For goodness sake we were the first club to have sponsors in the early 80s. The argument that the laws stopped change is disingenuous - the global economy changed football as it has done with everything else! I can remember Souness being interviewed on TV early in the 90s as Liverpool manager and he said we would never charge £20 a game like the Italians and therefore they were always going to be the richer league! We were owned by the Moores. All that has changed is that now we are owned by FSG. -
26 years catcherintherye Player Valuation: £70m Forum Supporter 1 minute ago New Add bookmark #43,017
I think is going to get quite messy for them actually. I notice they seem to have pulled away from that Konate deal, which can only suggest to me they didn't want to/didn't have the funds available to sign him. That was before the £300m windfall they knew that was coming down the line.
At a cultural level they are now very split. I don't think they really know what to do with FSG. You kind of have the scab end of their fanbase, that essentially fine comfortabe with what they did but too scared to voice it (as the politburu have decided it is now a bad thing) you've then got those who are fewming about it all but don't want to launch into a full insurrection against FSG. Finally you've got those who are really angry and want them gone- and tats very mucthe way SOS and Spion Kop are going.
As fanbases go they seem to struggle when they don't all have the same thing to parrot. For a fanbase that is so diverse I'm always surprised they depend upon such singularity on outlook. I think this disunity will hurt them, and it's only likely to get worse in the summer as they have little to spend and the likes of City and Chelsea pull further way.
The curveball in this is if Klopp goes. Then you're at H & G territory. Like Quote Reply -
By dockers_strike · Posted
Because he's a two faced cunt, just like martin samuel. Supposedly a dyed in the wool 'ammer's fan, he's so far up city's arse I dont think he could see the London Stadium or whatever it's called, with a telescope. The cunt, samuel, is even bigging up the Saudi's as better owners than any of the 6 PL clubs. Well yeah, if you entice so called dissidents into an embassy, stick his head in a poly bag so he suffocates slowly then chop him up like a butchered cow in a slaughterhouse, then you'd have to be off the scale myopic to say the Saudi's will be better owners than any of the PL 6! The fucking lengths the media are going sucking off the other 14 PL clubs is nauseating. Not one has mentioned the duplicity of west ham, villa and brighton amongst clubs who wanted no relegation as a condition for re starting the league last season. Not one has mentioned the £26m+ of taxpayers money moral high horse fc has sequestrated for its own purposes. Not one has mentioned Aston Villa FC selling its ground to its owner to try and finance promotion to the PL and circumvent the EFL's finance rules. Not one has mentioned Brighton & Hove Albion forcing a public inquiry and hence use of taxpayer's money regarding the building of the Amex stadium at Falmer. I could go on but you get my drift. We all know samuel, birt, lowe, wallace and the rest of them would have been scrabbling to get on the plane and enjoy the 'hospitalies' in these foreign stadiums to report on the games involving the 6 if this has actually come about. Fucking hypocrites. -
By Denny Crane · Posted
Point 1. Rule 34 existed for the majority of Liverpool's existence. Point 2. This created an environment where owners were more custodians than oligarchs, sovereign states and speculators. Point 3 . Under the current system owners will and are obligated to make as much money as possible for their investor's. Point 4. This will always clash with the demands of the supporter unless there is intervention. -
It’s not just fans, apparently, it’s actually the other 14 clubs, which makes it sound like an even bigger load of vindictive shite.
-
-
Latest Round Up
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
-
-
-
