Deportiva La Coruna and the Champions League

[Rashid]

My word what a style of play they have, absolutely phenomenal passing and movement.

 

Watching the Champions League Preview in Eurosport for 2003, it shows why we are not there.

 

1. Poor coaching.

2. No Composure.

3. No passing and movement

4. Some Poor players.

5. No style or cohesion on the park.

6. No Passion.

7. Sunday league tactics

8. Long ball.

9. Favourtism.

10. Dinasour mentality.

 

Jesus, we are so behind the rest its embarsssing. We really miles behind. We aren't mixing it with the big boys because we are NOT good enough to.

[Kopite]

My word what a style of play they have, absolutely phenomenal passing and movement.

 

Watching the Champions League Preview in Eurosport for 2003, it shows why we are not there.

 

1. Poor coaching.

2. No Composure.

3. No passing and movement

4. Some Poor players.

5. No style or cohesion on the park.

6. No Passion.

7. Sunday league tactics

8. Long ball.

9. Favourtism.

10. Dinasour mentality.

 

Jesus, we are so behind the rest its embarsssing. We really miles behind. We aren't mixing it with the big boys because we are NOT good enough to.

Then go and support them.

[Rashid]

Then go and support them.

 

The point is I support Liverpool and here I am aspiring to be as good as Deportivo! We want to win the CL and league and the moment we cannot even qualify.

 

France sacked GH and went from not qualifying to winning it the next time round, maybe if GH left we would go from not qualifying to winning the CL with these same players!

 

BTW - Typical well thought out insightful post Colin.

[Kopite]

BTW - Typical well thought out insightful post Colin.

It certainly can't top your "£116m - £65m = £116m" though. An act of genius if I ever saw one.

 

A little lesson for you, you look at the net spend not the gross. But don't let that fact to get in your way.

 

Next you will be saying "if we ignore the 5 trophies, what has GH really won?"

[Kopite]

By the way Rashid how much have Keegan, Robson (Bobby and Captain Cockout) and McLaren spent.

 

What exactly have they won?

[Rashid]

It certainly can't top your "£116m - £65m = £116m" though.

 

Have you got GCSE maths?

 

Oooh! another comeback of George Foreman proportions! I bow to your superior memory.

 

Cannot remember what you are on about though. Anyway, will you too be chaining yourself to Shankly's gates when GH leaves? Or just support whoever he goes to next?

[Rashid]

By the way Rashid how much have Keegan, Robson (Bobby and Captain Cockout) and McLaren spent.

 

What exactly have they won?

 

Colin, why should we compare against no mark teams who have a history of winning fuck all? You forgot Wenger, Koeman, Lippi etc from your list!

 

Also, this thread is about the play on the pitch and nothing to do with money. Our football is appalling and always has been under GH apart from the odd game here and there.

[Kopite]

GH would never have been able to spend £116m had he not recovered £65m through sales. Which part of that do you continually fail to realise?

 

Oooh! another comeback of George Foreman proportions! I bow to your superior memory.

I didn't think it was that good, but bearing in mind I am responding to someone with the IQ of a lemon drop it is hardly surprising you thought it was good.

 

You really got the next "Barney" video:

 

"Hey kids, £116 - £65 = £116!"

 

Cannot remember what you are on about though. Anyway, will you too be chaining yourself to Shankly's gates when GH leaves? Or just support whoever he goes to next?

I support Liverpool, you should try it. How long will it be before you start on the next manager? I'd say 6 months.

 

My advice, get hold of a video of "The Mighty Reds" by BBC Video, and just watch it over and over again. Before GH came we played like that every game, even in training.

 

Also, this thread is about the play on the pitch and nothing to do with money. Our football is appalling and always has been under GH apart from the odd game here and there.

That is laughable, bordering on the ridiculous. In Treble Season we played (more often that not) some great stuff, but you wouldn't know from the comfort of your armchair.

[Steve]

A bit unfair to say France sacked Houllier then won the World Cup. They were very much aided by the fact they didnt have to qualify in 1998 as they were hosts.

[Guest Dancing Dave]

Also, this thread is about the play on the pitch and nothing to do with money. Our football is appalling and always has been under GH apart from the odd game here and there>>

 

 

What a load of bollox you talk, which is hardlyu surprising as you clearly go on Kraptalk, home of the Yorkshire tout. It beggars the question if Liverpool's play has been in the main appalling under Ged, why;

 

a/ We sell out every game

b/ You haul your sorry arse up from London, EVER.

 

You're a joke mate.:whistle:

[Rashid]

a/ We sell out every game

b/ You haul your sorry arse up from London, EVER.

 

1. We sell out because we have millions of fans worldwide. We sold out when we had Evans and Souness too. It has nothing to do with GH "Pulling them in through the turnstiles".

2. I haul my sorry arse up to Anfield as much as I can cos I support the team irrespective of what I think of GH.

[Rashid]

A bit unfair to say France sacked Houllier then won the World Cup. They were very much aided by the fact they didnt have to qualify in 1998 as they were hosts.

 

The fact is a team that were not good enough to even qualify won it the next time round.

[Rashid]

That is laughable, bordering on the ridiculous. In Treble Season we played (more often that not) some great stuff, but you wouldn't know from the comfort of your armchair.

 

Went to 20 games during the Treble Season, even Barca Away - where we played the type of football Pele speaks about. We were a team whose style of play was the worst of all top clubs in Europe. Even then I said we could not sustain success playing that way.

 

I am a loyal man, but as far as GH goes I cannot be loyal to him over my loyalty to the club, IMO he is not good enough for Liverpool as a 'coach'. Same as with France, his best role is in the background, he has built a great football club here, I think it will take someone else else to transfer that onto the pitch.

[Steve]

It was the nation that falied to qualify in 1994, not the team. It was a different set of players, those that did play in 1998 were youngsters in 1994.

 

If we're looking for reasons why Houllier should be sacked, the fact he fucked it up with the French team shouldnt be one of them. Nobody seemed too concerned with this between 1999 and 2002.

[Kopite]

Went to 20 games during the Treble Season, even Barca Away - where we played the type of football Pele speaks about. We were a team whose style of play was the worst of all top clubs in Europe. Even then I said we could not sustain success playing that way.

Ever heard of David Irving? Even he doesn't produce revisionist bollocks of the standard you come out with.

 

Wow is Barcelona away the best you can do? As I recall we won the tie, and that is all that matters. I dare say had we took them on at THEIR game we would have got beaten. However Barcelona, at the time, were one of the best pure footballing sides in Europe.

 

And where do you get these 20 games from? Please name them?

 

I am a loyal man, but as far as GH goes I cannot be loyal to him over my loyalty to the club, IMO he is not good enough for Liverpool as a 'coach'. Same as with France, his best role is in the background, he has built a great football club here, I think it will take someone else else to transfer that onto the pitch.

Loyal man? You wouldn't know loyalty if it bit you on the arse.

 

You questioning my loyalty to LFC now? Jeez, you are really scraping the barrel now. Just because I choose not to use all manner of twisted logic, lies and distorted facts to denigrate a man who I believe has tried his best for our club. His best might not be good enough, but it seems to me that from day one you and your ilk have been on his case.

[Kopite]

It was the nation that falied to qualify in 1994, not the team. It was a different set of players, those that did play in 1998 were youngsters in 1994.

 

If we're looking for reasons why Houllier should be sacked, the fact he fucked it up with the French team shouldnt be one of them. Nobody seemed too concerned with this between 1999 and 2002.

Spot on Steve.

 

I dare say had GH had the likes of Henry, Vieira, Trezequet and co. to choose from then he'd have been as successful. The fact is he didn't have the quality of player.

[Rashid]

And where do you get these 20 games from? Please name them?

 

You mean fuck all to me and you want me to justify my games to you and name games? Are you feeling ok? Fuck off. What fucking world are you living in.

[Rashid]

Spot on Steve.

 

I dare say had GH had the likes of Henry, Vieira, Trezequet and co. to choose from then he'd have been as successful. The fact is he didn't have the quality of player.

 

 

I agree.

 

Papin, Cantona, Ginola, Desailly, Blanc and the rest were shit not to mention the shit players like Lizarazu, Zidane, Thuram and the rest that were in the squad at the time.

[Kopite]

You mean fuck all to me and you want me to justify my games to you and name games? Are you feeling ok? Fuck off. What fucking world are you living in.

Come on Rashid name them. I mean you went to everyone of them didn't you.

 

This assumes no distinction between your imagination and reality.

[Kopite]

I agree.

 

Papin, Cantona, Ginola, Desailly, Blanc and the rest were shit not to mention the shit players like Lizarazu, Zidane, Thuram and the rest that were in the squad at the time.

Zidane and Thuram didn't make his debut until after France were knocked out of the World Cup qualifiers in 1994, so I would guess they hadn't made a sufficient impact during GH's reign. But don't stop there.

 

Henry, Trezequet and co would have been around 14/15 at the time, so it is a national disgrace as to why they were never selected. More bias from GH?

 

If they were that good why didn't they win the World Cup in 1990, the European Championships in 1992.

[Anubis]

Just a point on the net spend/gross spend debate. It's bollocks. He's SPENT the 116million. End of. The NET COST to the club is irrelevant. He has still handed over 116 million for signings. We should expect better than we have.

[Guest red vespa]

(If we're looking for reasons why Houllier should be sacked, the fact he fucked it up with the French team shouldnt be one of them. Nobody seemed too concerned with this between 1999 and 2002) ]Spot on steve i dont like were GH has taken us at the moment and dont believe hes good enough for lfc anymore but the above is not a reason for sacking him in fact its got fuck all to do with us !

[Kopite]

Just a point on the net spend/gross spend debate. It's bollocks. He's SPENT the 116million. End of. The NET COST to the club is irrelevant. He has still handed over 116 million for signings. We should expect better than we have.

The point is he hasn't spent £116m, he's spent around £50-£60m to spend. What is bollocks is the twisting of facts that is going on.

 

To clarify once more:

 

HE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SPEND £116M HAD HE NOT RAISED MONEY BY SELLING PLAYERS.

 

The point is, that keeps getting missed (how convenient) he wouldn't have been able to spend this figure if he hadn't sold around £60m of players.

 

It is the net spend you should look at because the £116m is misleading, that figure is supported by outgoing sales.

 

It it disingenuous to claim he has spent £116m.

[Kopite]

(If we're looking for reasons why Houllier should be sacked, the fact he fucked it up with the French team shouldnt be one of them. Nobody seemed too concerned with this between 1999 and 2002) ]Spot on steve i dont like were GH has taken us at the moment and dont believe hes good enough for lfc anymore but the above is not a reason for sacking him in fact its got fuck all to do with us !

Amen brother. Next we'll have Rashid telling us his treatment of "poor, liccle" Ginola is another reason to sack him.

 

I think he should be knighted for giving that egotistical ponce some grief myself.

[Anubis]

Sorry Kopite, can't agree mate.

 

If I get a wage of 150 quid a week, and I blow it all on beer (a worthwile cause, I'm sure you'll agree), then I sell my stereo for another 25 quid which I spend on more beer, then I've spent 175 quid on beer - where the money came from is irrelevant, and the net cost may only be 150 (as the rest is a trade off against my stereo), the fact is I've still SPENT 175 on beer.