Luzi

[Steve]

Dancing Dave

 

Instead of making personal insults at Hermes,who has made nearly 2000 posts on this forum, many of them very entertaining, why dont you write a reasoned piece about why GH should stay and everyone should get off his back. I'm sure Dave will print it in the fanzine, he's invited pro GH articles on many occasions but nobody ever sent him any.

 

As for your comment about are the board aware about what sort of people sell/write for TLW, they are, as Rik Parry reads it.

[Guest Dancing Dave]

Dancing Dave

 

Instead of making personal insults at Hermes,who has made nearly 2000 posts on this forum, many of them very entertaining, why dont you write a reasoned piece about why GH should stay and everyone should get off his back. I'm sure Dave will print it in the fanzine, he's invited pro GH articles on many occasions but nobody ever sent him any.>>

 

Well that's an obvious indication that nobody rates Houllier surely?? I have no wish to write in Mr Usher's rag Steve, as that would mean I take it seriously, and I don't. I'm aware that for *fanzines* to exist, criticism is neccessary, I just find some of Mr Usher's comments bizarre is all.

 

As for your comment about are the board aware about what sort of people sell/write for TLW, they are, as Rik Parry reads it.>>

 

Wow. Paranoia is a terrible affliction. John B reads it too, yes?? There goes yer arguement!!

[Steve]

Of course it doesnt mean nobody rates GH, just cos Dave's not received an article backing him. Many may feel Dave wouldnt print it but thats not true. The fanzine doesnt have a anti Houllier agenda. Its Daves personal opinion that he wants him out but is quite willing to print all sides of the argument.As for the Parry/Brennan/JOhn b but, not quite sure what you mean.

[dave u]

Right, I don't know exactly what this Dancing Dave joker has been saying (he's on my ignore list), but I can see what Steve is saying in response.

 

It's true I've written on many occasions that if anyone wants to write in to defend GH against the criticism, I'll happily print it.

 

Steve informs me that DD referred to TLW as a comic. That's fine, I'm not offended, everyone is entitled to their opninion. The good thing with a fanzine however, is that if you think it's crap you can do your bit to improve it by submitting an article.

 

I'm not using the fanzine to perpetrate some personal vendetta against Houllier. I'll speak my own mind of course, but that doesn't mean I won't print any articles just because they differ from my own view.

 

So if Dancing Dave or Kopite wanted to write an article defending Houllier I'd gladly print it, providing the standard of writing was good enough of course. I know that Kopite is a good writer when he sets his mind to it, but I think DD needs to raise his standards a bit if he's to have anything printed in TLW :whistle:

 

But I suspect they'd rather just go from forum to forum getting involved in petty disputes, and in DD's case, slagging off out of towners and telling everyone how they're not a true fan unless they're kissing Houllier's arse.

 

But if they want to do something constructive in defence of Houllier, rather than just bitching about it on here, I'll print it in the next TLW. If they don't want to do it, that's their choice.

[Guest Dancing Dave]

Right, I don't know exactly what this Dancing Dave joker has been saying (he's on my ignore list), but I can see what Steve is saying in response. >>

 

lol!! Yeh RIGHT!! Do you stick yer tongue out at the same time?? How old are you ffs?? 'he's on my ignore list'.......jesus.

 

It's true I've written on many occasions that if anyone wants to write in to defend GH against the criticism, I'll happily print it.

 

Steve informs me that DD referred to TLW as a comic. That's fine, I'm not offended, everyone is entitled to their opninion. The good thing with a fanzine however, is that if you think it's crap you can do your bit to improve it by submitting an article.>>

 

Alternatively you can see it for what it is, somebody's ego trip, or a personal Hyde Park corner. The thing I dislike about most fanzines though is their lack of accountability. I'll state here and now I've never seen TLW (that's NOt a ner ner, you ignore me I'll ignore you thing) Good news will not sell fanzines, ask Red Issue. I'm guessing that the recent stuff has been anti-Houllier. It's unrealistic to expect someone in his position to respond within the fanzine, thus awarding it credibility. It's so one-sided.

 

I'm not using the fanzine to perpetrate some personal vendetta against Houllier. I'll speak my own mind of course, but that doesn't mean I won't print any articles just because they differ from my own view.>>

 

Fair play to you.

 

So if Dancing Dave or Kopite wanted to write an article defending Houllier I'd gladly print it, providing the standard of writing was good enough of course. I know that Kopite is a good writer when he sets his mind to it, but I think DD needs to raise his standards a bit if he's to have anything printed in TLW :whistle: >>

 

lol!! I'll work on it.....start having sausage and chips, drinking mild, wearing scarves on me wrists....that sort of thing.....:sniff:

 

But I suspect they'd rather just go from forum to forum getting involved in petty disputes, and in DD's case, slagging off out of towners and telling everyone how they're not a true fan unless they're kissing Houllier's arse.>>

 

Not even close mate. You only know I exist because it was ME who that poor man who once had to sleep rough in Cardiff was calling on here. I responded is all, as I've responded to people who I consider either don't understand what supporting Liverpool FC is about, or who are clearly just alive to moan.

 

 

But if they want to do something constructive in defence of Houllier, rather than just bitching about it on here, I'll print it in the next TLW. If they don't want to do it, that's their choice.>>

 

I believe you'll find it's you and your mates who do the bitching, I just respond. Col may wish to contribute, I don't. I've had articles published on a variety of subjects, Liverpool being one of them. I'm very careful where they get published though.

 

The *cough* ignored one.:whistle:

[Uncle Travelling Matt]

DD might have been a bit over aggressive in his writing but I have to agree with some of his reasoning on Luzi. Not many managers would ever expect to have to play their 3rd choice keeper. A 3rd choice keeper would be someone you have seen potential in and want to try and develop, he may be older than CK but keepers rarely reach their peak till late 20's, early 30's anyway. Any keeper with experience is unlikely to want to sit on a bench as a 3rd choice so if GH sees Luzi as better potential than any at the Academy, I can't see the problem. And if he thinks Luzi has potential but is not ready for the Premiership yet, then I see it as a VERY wise move bringing in Jones...........this post is yet another stick to try and beat GH with, but its more of a twig than a stick!

[Agent Smith]

Back to the original point of the thread. UTM, what I'm saying is that coaching in training and playing reserve football is completely different to playing first team football. He could have great potential but he needs first team experience where it really matters. You can't beat the experience of playing week in week out, fighting for points, the threat of relegation or getting promotion, winning league and cup matches, the pressure of the fans and matchdays in general. If GH rates him but doesn't think he's ready yet, he should go out on loan where he can get some proper games under his belt(when our other keepers are fit again).

[fivetimes]

whether the original and corresponding points were right or wrong, the only point at which it turned "bitchy" and "nasty" where when "DD" decided to introduce himself into the debate.

 

The whole point of this forum (IMO) is to debate subjects like this and learn/dispute etc from other reds who have different opinions.

 

If you read back through the posts, you will see when this became a silly childish slanging match.

[Uncle Travelling Matt]

Agent Smith, I know what you are saying but what good is a third choice keeper if he is out on loan and you can't get him back when you need him? I'd agree if it was for any other position in the team but with a keeper its different.

We have 3 keepers, Houllier rates Luzi more highly than anyone in the Academy so for what he sees as the best for LFC, Luzi is the best player available to be on the bench when we have either of the first two injured, he is then the best player available to play if the other keeper gets injured during the game. He then brings in an experienced keeper to become the best player available to start a game and Luzi is back on the bench as the best player available to warm the bench. The fact is, if Luzi was good enough right now, he would be starting for us. For the benefit of Luzi and LFC in the future, maybe it would be better if he went out on loan? But for the benefit of the team right now, I don't see the problem in him warming the bench if GH sees him as the best player available.

That is my best available explanation why I don't see it as a problem.......:whistle:

[Agent Smith]

UTM, understand your point completely. I'm not suggesting we loan him out NOW but I'm looking ahead to when Dudek and Kirkland return. If we loan him out THEN, just have a clause in his contract so we can recall him whenever we feel is necessary. If Dudek and Kirkland are fit, one plays and the other is on the bench. If one gets injured just recall Luzi from his loan spell. Meanwhile an academy player would get thrust into playing for the reserves.

 

There may be a small risk that if Dudek or Kirkland get injured on matchday we may not be able to recall Luzi in time and have to put a youngster on the bench, but I'd be willing to risk that unlikely eventuality for Luzi to get first team football (if GH thought he could become a top player).

 

I think the main point where we differ is the acceptable/unacceptable risk of losing cover. :yes:

[Paul]

Sorry to go back to the sniping when people have tried to return to the original subject of this thread. However, I want a reply from Dancing Dave.

 

Why don't you answer when I ask about your confrontational manner? I've posted before about how debate on here has traditionally always been reasoned and reasonable and it irks me that you don't want to play it "The Liverpool Way's way". You are clearly passionate, opionated and can string a half-decent sentence together; all qualities of the best forumites on here. So why the abuse, aggression and anger?

 

I also find it bizarre that you criticise Dave's fanzine on his website of the same name. Furthermore, as you state you have never even read it, I don't understand how you can possibly judge its content. Dave has consistently requested contributions from desenting voices, both here and in the fanzine, even in his "pro-GH" days. So why not?

 

Put up or shut up.

[Hermes]

If Dancing Dave won't write an article in defence of Houllier then I'll do one for the next issue. Although it won't be a defence of Houllier as such, it will be more of a reasoning as to why we should not sack a manager with his record. Does that make sense?

 

I've said all along that we should sack him if we fail to qualify for CL again or revert to the boring football. However I expect us to finish at least 5 points ahead of 5th place, the boring football bit remains to be seen.

 

Anyway, if Dancing Dave wants to do the article instead somebody please let me know. DD is also on my ignore list, a "list" of one. Personal censorship, I love it Haje.