Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 18/02/20 in all areas

  1. 10 points
    They trudge the worn and mud strewn ways, Weary to their bones, their silence betrays, Spewed bile the dressing for their wounds, Heysel, VAR, Ifithadntbeenfer loons, The shellshocked accounts, the money gone, The trench long breached named Goodison.
  2. 10 points
  3. 9 points
    The Goodison Guns by S.Baldrick Boo boo boo boo Boo boo boo Boo boo boo boo Boo boo boo
  4. 6 points
    Yet you come on and give it the biggun. Yeah, I’m really hating seeing him do so well. You can just see it dripping off all the posts I’ve made recently praising him. I’m hating it. You, on the other hand, wanted him dropped a few months ago. LFD gon’ LFD. I give in with you.
  5. 5 points
    There's no way City provided 'proof' of the above-board nature of their sponsorship deal. Even without the hacked emails, Uefa would have been within their rights to say okay, what was the second highest bid you received so we can guage your value in the marketplace? This lad has them sussed:
  6. 4 points
    He was the captain who lifted number six and is soon to be the captain to bring home number 19. Jordan Legenderson
  7. 4 points
    It’s really weird. He was at the point where he was dropped by Klopp and only making the bench. People want to rewrite history rather than judging him on what actually happened. It’s self delusion and done to protect their ego. Same with anybody that can’t admit how well he is doing now. He went from somebody that would general put in a 5 or 6 performance to somebody who puts in 7 or 8 every week without fail. Add on top of that his leadership that is becoming more and more evident, and he deserves all the credit in the world. I’m not going to rewrite history over it, but I’m certainly over the moon with him. What I find weird is that people like LFD are so quick to try to point score whilst as short a time ago as November they were on here saying he should be Fabinho’s back up as he would prefer Keita and Gini starting ahead of him. Essentially, during the period where he has come to the best form of his career, he wanted him back on the bench.
  8. 4 points
    To Goodison the blueshite go To sit disgruntled, row on row Each in their place; and in the sky The larks, still bravely singing, fly Scarce heard amid the boos below.
  9. 3 points
    I can never remember which poster said what. Who cares who was right? Just enjoy watching our Captain strut around midfields. bossing it. The arguing about it is a shitfest on both sides. I hope Ferguson gets asked about Hendo a lot.
  10. 3 points
    I was talking to Jimmy, the Ancelotti-alike manager of the Vernon last night. He was saying that he gets a lot of people staring in the street these days. One fella even stopped and asked (in the kind of stilted way idiots do when they're talking to someone foreign) " DO. YOU. MANAGE. A. FOOTBALL. TEAM?" Jimmy answered in kind "YES. AND. THEY'RE. SHITE."
  11. 3 points
    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/feb/17/manchester-city-backers-are-not-the-sort-to-take-punishment-lying-down?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other Manchester City backers are not the sort to take punishment lying down There is resentment among City fans about their treatment and word is that Abu Dhabi will be fighting back against Uefa In 2011 Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the emir of Abu Dhabi and president of the United Arab Emirates, received a letter. It came from a group of Emirati intellectuals inspired by the recent wave of pro-democracy protests sweeping through the Middle East and north Africa, and requested a range of modest reforms, including an extension of the voting franchise which at the time encompassed just 2% of the country’s population. No marching on the streets. No popular unrest. Certainly no disorder of any kind. Just a letter. Nonetheless, with a regime petrified to the point of paranoia by the spectre of political Islamism, the reprisals would be swift and merciless. Within weeks the arrests had begun, rounding up most of the 160 letter’s signatories, who were designated as “terrorists” plotting to overthrow the regime. Citizenships were revoked. Hefty prison sentences were dished out. In 2014, Abu Dhabi enacted Terrorism Law No 7, reclassifying peaceful opposition as a terrorist act punishable by death, and criminalising a whole range of hazily-defined acts, from “antagonising the state” or “stirring panic among a group of people” to “carrying explosive crackers for a terrorist purpose”. Now: does this strike you as a group of people that is going to be intimidated by the fine print of Article 56, section (a) of the 2018 edition of Uefa’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations? Does a regime serially defying a United Nations arms embargo in Libya – according to the UN’s own reports – strike you as the sort that places a high premium on bureaucratic process? Does the family that bought itself the world’s largest super-yacht – a $600m behemoth two-thirds the size of the Titanic and reportedly equipped with its own missile defence system – strike you as the sort to take a swingeing punishment with humility and good grace? These are just some of the ways of understanding Manchester City’s current dispute with Uefa, one that for all its clear footballing repercussions carries far more sinister overtones. Trawl the City messageboards in the wake of Uefa’s decision to ban the club from the Champions League for two seasons, and it won’t take you long to stumble across the rhetoric of scorched earth: of traitors and revolutionaries, violence and purgation, shady cartels and subhuman scum. This is the language of existential threat, the register of total warfare, and it is fed by the incendiary invective coming out of the club. One little snippet to emerge is the fact City’s appeals to the court of arbitration for sport have been dubbed “Cas One” and “Cas Two”, as if they were military campaigns, rather than ringbinders being delivered to a courtroom by clerks in TM Lewin suits. Witness, too, the assertion of the club’s lawyer Simon Cliff in the Der Spiegel leaks of 2018 that “Uefa doesn’t respond to anything other than aggression”, that a lawsuit against their auditor could “destroy the entire organisation within weeks”. City talk about their footballing enemies the way Abu Dhabi talks about its real ones. This, perhaps, was the most persuasive argument against allowing cherished footballing institutions to fall under the control of entire states. It wasn’t the lack of transparency or the potential for financial distortion, grave as those are. But in hindsight it was perhaps inevitable over time clubs would come to resemble state actors in their own right, that sporting problems would impel geopolitical solutions, that the cut and thrust of footballing sabre-rattling would increasingly take on the character of the real thing. There has always been a slight misconception about the concept popularly known as “sportswashing”, the attempt by autocratic regimes to embed their soft power through sport. It is never purely a PR exercise: there are PR firms for that, and they tend not to go to the trouble of spending £1.5bn on footballers or rebuilding large parts of east Manchester. Rather, it helps to think of the sportswash as some vast, pointless infrastructure project: a man-made glacier, a giant bridge to nowhere, a Nando’s visible from space. The objective is to create something so iridescently perfect that it generates its own innate shock and awe, a timeless monument to beauty, wealth and the power to do whatever the hell you want. And so there is a rich double irony at work here. Firstly, for all the eye-watering sums lavished on the brilliant Guardiola sides, it is instead the years of faltering ascent, the 2012-16 era, for which City are being punished: not the years of £50m full-backs, but your Mangalas and Rodwells and Wilfried Bonys. Secondly, that one of the world’s most meticulously-crafted sporting projects could be undone by simple naivety: an apparent belief the rule of law could be subverted by force of will alone, a failure to build any sort of political or diplomatic contingency against it. While the Qataris at Paris Saint-Germain made it a priority to infiltrate the corridors of power, City find themselves adrift: friendless and alone, with only their money and their hubris to protect them. It may yet be enough. The word is City are stockpiling a cache of inflammatory evidence against other clubs, in anticipation of an epic fight. Perhaps, armed with a battery of lawyers and accountants, they will get their ban overturned. Perhaps, as some of the more bellicose voices insist, they will even destroy the apparatus of football as we know it, which definitely feels like a proportionate response to not being allowed to sign Stevan Jovetic. Either way, you sense for City the ends will always justify the means. After all football, like geopolitics, is very much a results business.
  12. 3 points
    Yeah, but if I was looking to sponsor someone, I'd be sure to look for the team that wins the league before the outbreak of world wars. Who wouldn't be drawn to a brand like that? They're so fucking robust, they survived 2 world wars and were only taken out by heysel.
  13. 3 points
    Cheers, miss the big fella as do plenty of others, if we win the league I’ll be raising a glass , that’s for you mate.
  14. 2 points
    Am I the only person who had no idea about this? I'm looking at that thinking "nah, no way" but I'm guessing it's real. Seriously? Jesus. Placcy flags is bad (Norwich last weekend anybody?) but LED screen flags is a whole new world of excruciating. When we got into the stadium at Kiev a couple of years ago, seeing the LFC banners draped over the stands, covering at least 2/3rds of the perimeter, was gobsmacking. Like "wow". And then I see those City banner sceens up there? Please. Never.
  15. 2 points
  16. 2 points
  17. 2 points
    Should buy them a few more flat screens, then they can each have a go at drawing something and putting it on a slide show so they all get a turn.
  18. 2 points
  19. 2 points
  20. 2 points
  21. 2 points
  22. 2 points
  23. 2 points
    Well, I might as well tell you now. You lot may all be internationals and have won all the domestic honours there are to win under Guardiola. But as far as I'm concerned, the first thing you can do for me is to chuck all your medals and all your caps and all your pots and all your pans into the biggest fucking dustbin you can find, because you've never won any of them fairly. You've done it all by bloody cheating.
  24. 2 points
    As Paulie's song should have been.
  25. 2 points
    I'm sure I've posted thoughts along these lines before around here but sod it, it's something I feel very strongly about . . . he was the greatest. Not just the greatest at Liverpool, the greatest. You know how Moyes failed hard at Old Trafford, and the consensus after the fact was that it was impossible replacing Alex Ferguson, that no one could have succeeded? And the historical record tells us this is true. There's a reason there are no dynasties in English football. With one exception. It's telling that Klopp was drawn to the down-on-their-luck club that was Liverpool when he took over. He could dispense with the past without resistance from within, without anyone going 'well, it worked under the old gaffer'. What's more, he did it at both ends. Ferguson's legacy has been diminished by how he dropped Man Utd in the crapper, going long on just-past-their-peak types like Van Persie so he could have one more chance at glory before saddling his successor with those players who were now well-past-their-peak. Bob Paisley left Liverpool in better condition than he found it. The greatest.