Liverpool thread 2020/21

Status
Not open for further replies.
BlueMoonz1977 said:
I think it had more to do with spuds stinking the stadium out to be honest. They could string 2 passes together half the time.

Had son not been offside for the goal it may have been a different story

But spurs were woeful, didnt really see much improvement from the dippers
Click to expand...
Just seen Sons disallowed goal. Technically yes but so far away from goal and so early in the move .The game has gone down the pan and well on its way along the soil pipe.
 
Toffeedude said:
I remember before the all-seater stadiums how dodgy it was being in a packed crowd. The sway when a goal was scored, the pushing and climbing on each other to get a better view of a corner or a free kick, and the often cramped conditions that were dangerous at times. And this was going on all around the country. The atmosphere was amazing though and I loved it. I guess it is one of those things about being young as I would never want to do it again now. Leave me in my nice seat now moaning about Toffees ha ha.
Click to expand...
As others have said, besides my old man taking me to Anfield and sitting with him the main stand at first to graduating up to the paddock and then the Kop, it was as much the atmosphere and the banter at games that made it something you just had to experience.
The blokes kicking a ball about then sometimes adds pleasure to it, but then there is also somethign about that feeling when you lose, hoping for better days.
The whole pissing outside the toilets brings back bad memories recall my first time at Wembley. League Cup Final in 1978, the rows of old wooden benches and then being horrified at the sea of piss all around the concourse near the toilets. From then on it was always a case of holding it until you got out the ground.
As to fighting I guess I was lucky, only ever coming close to that away at West Ham in the late 80's. That despite spending a couple of seasons going to the Old Den frequently when living round that way.
That said, you always knew there were those about eager for a scrap
 
cheekybids said:
Here’s the footage but it will be deleted soon.



“This event could bury the painful memories of a year ago in Brussels”

Of all the things said about 39 innocent people dying at a game at the hands of these scrotes they thought the world would forget because of a FA cup Mersey derby. The world hasn’t forgot but it’s true the memories are buried.

You can see the charge at the turnstiles.
Click to expand...

I started playing senior (over 35's) football a couple of years ago. The group was a mixture of rags, blues, LFC, EFC, even Brighton and Stoke
When Liverpool were confirmed champions in the summer, there was a discussion via the WhatsApp group chat on the wankers who set fire to the liver building and the town hall
If you remember, journalists even said it was a stray firework and absolved them of any blame, even though a video showed them deliberately firing the fireworks at those buildings
I had a right go at the Lfc supporters and said every club has their share of dickhead supporters but they have a huge feral element which consistently gets away with it and why is it "never their fault "
Straight away I was jumped on for disrespectful comments on the Hillsborough families!
However I received this private message from one LFC lad

I am sure those Liverpool fans aren’t the only bellends that follow clubs. But I have seen this sort of thing with LFC fans before. In Barcelona and Basel and at the parade last year. They think they can do whatever they want and won’t get punished and the Club need to call it out because it is getting out of hand and giving us a bad name and rightly so. I was in the seats above the pens at Hillsborough and saw what happened. I also had to get through the pissed up thousands outside with no tickets trying to force their way in. My take on Hillsborough is a bit different from the majority of Liverpool fans and not that popular. There was blame on all sides but the avoidance of accountability and the length of time to get to the truth is the shameful part and you have to respect the families and Dalglish for fighting to get justice. It was tragic and a tragedy. The new generation of fans need to respect the memory of the 96 and act accordingly rather than using it as an excuse to justify their perceived victim status which they wear as a badge. Rant over.
 
Last edited:
Dickie,
You are so right.there are are several historic perspectives that relate to the Scousers that I dont agree with and should I post views online, would probably cause me to be arrested. You all know what I am talking about. I will mention three terms..Heysel Hillsborough Liverpool..Lived in Leeds and went to school in Bradford when that tragedy occured..that was an accident.
 
dickie davies said:
I started playing senior (over 35's) football a couple of years ago. The group was a mixture of rags, blues, LFC, EFC, even Brighton and Stoke
When Liverpool were confirmed champions in the summer, there was a discussion via the WhatsApp group chat on the wankers who set fire to the liver building and the town hall
If you remember, journalists even said it was a stray firework and absolved them of any blame, even though a video showed them deliberately firing the fireworks at those buildings
I had a right go at the Lfc supporters and said every club has their share of dickhead supporters but they have a huge feral element which consistently gets away with it and why is it "never their fault "
Straight away I was jumped on for disrespectful comments on the Hillsborough families!
However I received this private message from one LFC lad

I am sure those Liverpool fans aren’t the only bellends that follow clubs. But I have seen this sort of thing with LFC fans before. In Barcelona and Basel and at the parade last year. They think they can do whatever they want and won’t get punished and the Club need to call it out because it is getting out of hand and giving us a bad name and rightly so. I was in the seats above the pens at Hillsborough and saw what happened. I also had to get through the pissed up thousands outside with no tickets trying to force their way in. My take on Hillsborough is a bit different from the majority of Liverpool fans and not that popular. There was blame on all sides but the avoidance of accountability and the length of time to get to the truth is the shameful part and you have to respect the families and Dalglish for fighting to get justice. It was tragic and a tragedy. The new generation of fans need to respect the memory of the 96 and act accordingly rather than using it as an excuse to justify their perceived victim status which they wear as a badge. Rant over.
Click to expand...
Brilliant post.
The paragraph from your LFC mate sums it up perfectly.
I've met some decent pool fans down the years and every club has it's wankers but I've encountered a far bigger proportion of bellends that follow LFC than any other club.
If I had family who died at Hillsborough I would be very bitter and angry at the cover up and would fight like hell for them.
Equally there has been a complete whitewash of the behaviour of an element of their support.
There is a mountain of evidence of their appalling behaviour before and after that tragic day so based on the balance of probability I would conclude that an element of their support contributed to events that day even if the contribution wasn't a huge percentage.
Most of the blame lies with the authorities and it was disgusting that they tried to lie their way out of it but for the enquiry to totally exonerate an element of their fans is laughable in my opinion and I would strongly suggest that the majority of fans of other clubs would say the same if asked.
The people who died were genuine fans who turned up early to watch the game but you'll never convince me that an element of pissed up fans, many ticketless turning up late wasn't a factor.
RIP the 96 and lessons have been learned but let's not pretend that LFC have failed to call out their less savoury element and are condoning their poor behaviour with their continued silence.
 
fulabeer said:
Not a chance it will be reported that way if we do.
It will be all about the dippers injuries and that we were just lucky to play them when they were down...
Click to expand...
Do you really care how the media report it? What matters is what we think and feel. My brother thinks I consume a skewed narrative going on this forum rather than a varied media output (do me a favour bro, the English media???)
 
Toffeedude said:
They will scream for the season to be ended due to Covid if you beat them
Click to expand...
Oh, being an Evertonian you know your local rivals so well. Thing is as much as it will take the fun out of this season it will make them the shortest reigning champions ever and mean they can only have a bus parade with a cardboard replica trophy of the title! Quite a good silver lining I would say.
 
Johnny Yen said:
I'm currently in a debate about City and Liverpool's history. Is there any info on Liverpool's 1960's investment and the Moores family?
Click to expand...
I'm sure you will have used the contributions from others here on 'Bluemoon' regarding Liverpool's 60s investment sourced from the Moores family and probably (by now, I hope!) eviscerated the arguments put forward by the Scouse apologists you were dealing with. However, you might find this back-of-the-fag-packet calculation from a contribution I posted about four years ago useful if ever the discussion rears its head again?! Sorry if it goes on a bit..

"Please bear with me whilst I outline a discussion I had with a couple of pals, one an Everton fan, the other a Liverpool supporter, a year or so back.

Both had spouted the usual media tosh about City and 'oil money' (with its inherent racism) and us having no history (ie not having won anything for donkey's years and so on) and all the other stuff about buying success.. etc, etc, you know the score..

So, eventually, having sipped on my pint whilst listening to this guff, I slowly knocked each issue they had with City back into the covers, until finally going into some detail about things that I knew about their respective clubs, especially how their joint rise to success post-1960 was pump-primed by the Moores family/Littlewoods connections and shareholdings.

In 1961, Everton had consolidated as a top flight club for 3-4 years after promotion from the 2nd division and were about to appoint Harry Catterick as manager, whilst Liverpool were still a 2nd division side, with their newly installed manager, Bill Shankly.

Both clubs gained significantly from the Moores connections; Everton in 1959-60 to the tune of an initial £56000 interest free loan from John Moores himself plus a guarantee to underwrite transfer spending for the next few years; while a year later, Liverpool gained funding support to buy, most notably, both Ian St John and Ron Yeats for a total of almost £60000. Within a few years, both had won the 1st division title and the FA Cup, on their way to becoming part of English football's long-term elite.

'So what?' you might say.

Well, those sums of money were significant in kick-starting the Everton and Liverpool we came to know (and occasionally support, especially in Europe) over the next few decades. Just as with every other club that has enjoyed successes down the ages, from the Arsenal of the 30's onwards to Nottingham Forest in the late 70s to the modern day Chelsea and now City. And those sums of money given to create 'The School of Science' at Goodison and 'This Is Anfield' across Stanley Park were not piddling amounts.

As I then said to my pals, it's very difficult to locate club accounts information prior to 1974 but taking that year's statement of accounts for both Everton and Liverpool, they posted 'Incomes' of £499328 and £701289 respectively (with 'Income' defined as gate receipts and other sources of funding such as the club shop, programme sales etc less shares paid to other clubs and taxes etc) These figures were earned after some 10 years of being successful top-flight clubs, during which time both had won 2 titles and also the FA Cup, plus begun their early experience with European competition.

Now, using the Bank of England's inflation calculator, 1974's £499k (Everton) and £701k (Liverpool) translate to £223k and £314k in 1960/61. Remember, both were not the giants they later became, so their earnings would probably be much lower - but stick with these numbers for now.

The initial monies given to fund their respective transfer spending of the early 60s (£56k to Everton and £60k to Liverpool) represent approx. 25% of Everton's 1960 income, whilst for Liverpool it's 22%. That was some kick-start for both clubs, almost unprecedented at the time and absolutely the key reason for the subsequent successes both clubs enjoyed between 1962-74.

Again, 'so what?' Well, my two pals were astounded when I outlined this lot to them. In fact, the Liverpool supporter was blissfully unaware that Everton had benefited to such an extent from the largesse of John Moores.

Whenever I point such things out to fans from other clubs (should the occasion arise), they too are similarly shocked. The point being that, just as with our 'lottery win' of 2008, so too every club that wants to dine at the top table needs the ackers to go with their ambition. The numbers may have skyrocketed astronomically since the advent of the Premier League but the principle is exactly the same.

And as for the advent of the Premier League, I'd better finish now before I start on that one.. the accretion of power by (first) the 'BIg 5' of Everton, Liverpool, United, Spurs and Arsenal and then the 'Sky 4' of Liverpool, Arsenal United and Chelsea, is another one that rattles my cage when other clubs' fans seem to forget the history of the thing and what has been going on over the past couple of decades..!"
 
johnevans said:
I'm sure you will have used the contributions from others here on 'Bluemoon' regarding Liverpool's 60s investment sourced from the Moores family and probably (by now, I hope!) eviscerated the arguments put forward by the Scouse apologists you were dealing with. However, you might find this back-of-the-fag-packet calculation from a contribution I posted about four years ago useful if ever the discussion rears its head again?! Sorry if it goes on a bit..

"Please bear with me whilst I outline a discussion I had with a couple of pals, one an Everton fan, the other a Liverpool supporter, a year or so back.

Both had spouted the usual media tosh about City and 'oil money' (with its inherent racism) and us having no history (ie not having won anything for donkey's years and so on) and all the other stuff about buying success.. etc, etc, you know the score..

So, eventually, having sipped on my pint whilst listening to this guff, I slowly knocked each issue they had with City back into the covers, until finally going into some detail about things that I knew about their respective clubs, especially how their joint rise to success post-1960 was pump-primed by the Moores family/Littlewoods connections and shareholdings.

In 1961, Everton had consolidated as a top flight club for 3-4 years after promotion from the 2nd division and were about to appoint Harry Catterick as manager, whilst Liverpool were still a 2nd division side, with their newly installed manager, Bill Shankly.

Both clubs gained significantly from the Moores connections; Everton in 1959-60 to the tune of an initial £56000 interest free loan from John Moores himself plus a guarantee to underwrite transfer spending for the next few years; while a year later, Liverpool gained funding support to buy, most notably, both Ian St John and Ron Yeats for a total of almost £60000. Within a few years, both had won the 1st division title and the FA Cup, on their way to becoming part of English football's long-term elite.

'So what?' you might say.

Well, those sums of money were significant in kick-starting the Everton and Liverpool we came to know (and occasionally support, especially in Europe) over the next few decades. Just as with every other club that has enjoyed successes down the ages, from the Arsenal of the 30's onwards to Nottingham Forest in the late 70s to the modern day Chelsea and now City. And those sums of money given to create 'The School of Science' at Goodison and 'This Is Anfield' across Stanley Park were not piddling amounts.

As I then said to my pals, it's very difficult to locate club accounts information prior to 1974 but taking that year's statement of accounts for both Everton and Liverpool, they posted 'Incomes' of £499328 and £701289 respectively (with 'Income' defined as gate receipts and other sources of funding such as the club shop, programme sales etc less shares paid to other clubs and taxes etc) These figures were earned after some 10 years of being successful top-flight clubs, during which time both had won 2 titles and also the FA Cup, plus begun their early experience with European competition.

Now, using the Bank of England's inflation calculator, 1974's £499k (Everton) and £701k (Liverpool) translate to £223k and £314k in 1960/61. Remember, both were not the giants they later became, so their earnings would probably be much lower - but stick with these numbers for now.

The initial monies given to fund their respective transfer spending of the early 60s (£56k to Everton and £60k to Liverpool) represent approx. 25% of Everton's 1960 income, whilst for Liverpool it's 22%. That was some kick-start for both clubs, almost unprecedented at the time and absolutely the key reason for the subsequent successes both clubs enjoyed between 1962-74.

Again, 'so what?' Well, my two pals were astounded when I outlined this lot to them. In fact, the Liverpool supporter was blissfully unaware that Everton had benefited to such an extent from the largesse of John Moores.

Whenever I point such things out to fans from other clubs (should the occasion arise), they too are similarly shocked. The point being that, just as with our 'lottery win' of 2008, so too every club that wants to dine at the top table needs the ackers to go with their ambition. The numbers may have skyrocketed astronomically since the advent of the Premier League but the principle is exactly the same.

And as for the advent of the Premier League, I'd better finish now before I start on that one.. the accretion of power by (first) the 'BIg 5' of Everton, Liverpool, United, Spurs and Arsenal and then the 'Sky 4' of Liverpool, Arsenal United and Chelsea, is another one that rattles my cage when other clubs' fans seem to forget the history of the thing and what has been going on over the past couple of decades..!"
Click to expand...
Good read fella and an impressive amount of research. Detailed and to the point with no real sniping, just "Facts"....whenever I go to type that I can't help hearing it said in a Spanish accent!

As has been said by many on here, Liverpool fans and fans of other clubs for that matter should know a little about their club before going spouting off about others. That old line of "let he who is without sin" and that applies to club finances or the behaviour of the fans.

Personally I have never had an issue with City and the injection of cash and in fact welcome it as if it boosts your club then it should force other clubs to do better, work harder and try to compensate to compete. Whether it be City or Forest Green, if that injection of cash helps the club and the local community, then it should be applauded and encouraged.
 
Blueboy73 said:
The tragic thing about Hillsborough is that the people who died were genuine fans who arrived early to get a decent view.
At the time I was 16 and would get there early so I could stand at the front at away games and therefore for the grace of god go I.
Having said that, what grates me is the total whitewash around Heysel whilst simultaneously expecting sympathy year after year when it's something that affects them.
No apology almost 36 years on and the pathetic plaque hidden in the corner of a car park at the Victimdrome was not even paid for by them but paid for by Carlsberg.
Click to expand...
Blueboy73 said:
Very true mate, whenever we scored in those days I would duck under a crush barrier to avoid being pushed down the steps to the next one.
Ended up on my arse a few times too.
I don't remember City fans ever turning up on masse without tickets trying to jib in anywhere though.
Click to expand...
I rennet quite a few games in the 80’s when there certainly was a rush to get out before the end !
 
LGWIO said:
Good read fella and an impressive amount of research. Detailed and to the point with no real sniping, just "Facts"....whenever I go to type that I can't help hearing it said in a Spanish accent!

As has been said by many on here, Liverpool fans and fans of other clubs for that matter should know a little about their club before going spouting off about others. That old line of "let he who is without sin" and that applies to club finances or the behaviour of the fans.

Personally I have never had an issue with City and the injection of cash and in fact welcome it as if it boosts your club then it should force other clubs to do better, work harder and try to compensate to compete. Whether it be City or Forest Green, if that injection of cash helps the club and the local community, then it should be applauded and encouraged.
Click to expand...
Don’t suppose you could let Gill, Parry, Tebias, all of Bayern’s board & the rest of UEFA, as the seem to think investment is bad, but debt & taking money out of football is a good thing.

Oh, but investment has only been bad since 2008.

Kudos to you for not being a brain dead & blind supporter like so many other fans of Nited, Liverpool & Arsenal
 
peace frog said:
YOU CANT BE SERIOUS, nearly every away match hundreds used to jib in, it was the done thing
Click to expand...
Happened at home games too. As a slight & skinny teenager, lads would jib in behind me every other game on the Kippax as there was plenty of room behind me & I probably needed the push to get through the turnstile anyway
 
LGWIO said:
Good read fella and an impressive amount of research. Detailed and to the point with no real sniping, just "Facts"....whenever I go to type that I can't help hearing it said in a Spanish accent!

As has been said by many on here, Liverpool fans and fans of other clubs for that matter should know a little about their club before going spouting off about others. That old line of "let he who is without sin" and that applies to club finances or the behaviour of the fans.

Personally I have never had an issue with City and the injection of cash and in fact welcome it as if it boosts your club then it should force other clubs to do better, work harder and try to compensate to compete. Whether it be City or Forest Green, if that injection of cash helps the club and the local community, then it should be applauded and encouraged.
Click to expand...
Like you, I have never had any problem with any club benefiting from such investment. And as I said above, I have always supported English clubs whenever they compete in Europe.

Since the turn of the 20th century, football in every country at all levels, and not simply the elite level, has attracted corporate/industrial cash as 'those who control finance' (as Bertrand Russell called them) sought to associate themselves and their businesses with perceived or potential success. From the top tier clubs such as Real Madrid, AC Milan and Bayern to the likes of Colne Dynamoes and Forest Green Rovers, outside cash has always pump-primed how successful clubs at every level have achieved their successes. There are so many examples down the years in so many parts of the world.

In England alone during my 60+ years of following City, I've seen Everton and Liverpool benefit from such largesse in the early 60s; United in the 60s and beyond too; then Forest in the late 70s (including a world record fee for a goalkeeper in Shilton); Arsenal in the mid-90s (Bergkamp et al); Chelsea under Abramovic; Wigan's rise from obscurity to the Premiership under Dave Whelan; Hull City's similar rise to the Premiership; and so on and so on..

Good luck to any club that obtains success in this day-and-age. The costs of running an elite level club require enormous, eye-watering levels of cash support.

What I cannot accept, however, is the hypocrisy we have seen from many clubs, supporters and media outlets in dealing with City since 2008. The issues arising out of this are well known (FFP/CAS etc) and don't need rehearsing here. Put simply, it hacks me off that my club has been singled out for unfair and incorrect criticism/lies at every turn since the takeover, when it has done nothing different to many another club all over the football world since professional football began.
 
Why should clubs not have cash injections from rich owners? They are, after all, a business. I see nothing wrong with City being bought and turned into a major force. In fact, I was delighted by it as Liverpool. Man Utd, and Arsenal was becoming boring. It was good to see more competition. It was very noticeable and not surprising to see which sets of fans have moaned the most. Green eyes appear when you have had everything on a plate then suddenly the new kid on the block appears and starts taking some of your glory. Chelsea got it in the neck and were accused of all kinds when they had the nerve to start winning trophies, now City are the bad boys to the media darlings. But take it as a compliment as it means you are doing well and miffing a few off along the way. I hope the 'Uncle Usmanov' stories are true and we end up bankrolled and have a chance to win things. I would not give two flying fecks if any rich buyer took us on and gave us silly money. Bring it on I say. You City fans keep on cheering on your team of winners. I hope you grab that league title back.

It amazes me how fans of certain clubs will brag about income, sponsors, merchandise, etc etc. Then start crying because another team has an owner with a few bob to spare. It comes across as very bitter and childish. Something about Dummies and prams springs to mind!

Keep up the good work City
 
johnevans said:
I'm sure you will have used the contributions from others here on 'Bluemoon' regarding Liverpool's 60s investment sourced from the Moores family and probably (by now, I hope!) eviscerated the arguments put forward by the Scouse apologists you were dealing with. However, you might find this back-of-the-fag-packet calculation from a contribution I posted about four years ago useful if ever the discussion rears its head again?! Sorry if it goes on a bit..

"Please bear with me whilst I outline a discussion I had with a couple of pals, one an Everton fan, the other a Liverpool supporter, a year or so back.

Both had spouted the usual media tosh about City and 'oil money' (with its inherent racism) and us having no history (ie not having won anything for donkey's years and so on) and all the other stuff about buying success.. etc, etc, you know the score..

So, eventually, having sipped on my pint whilst listening to this guff, I slowly knocked each issue they had with City back into the covers, until finally going into some detail about things that I knew about their respective clubs, especially how their joint rise to success post-1960 was pump-primed by the Moores family/Littlewoods connections and shareholdings.

In 1961, Everton had consolidated as a top flight club for 3-4 years after promotion from the 2nd division and were about to appoint Harry Catterick as manager, whilst Liverpool were still a 2nd division side, with their newly installed manager, Bill Shankly.

Both clubs gained significantly from the Moores connections; Everton in 1959-60 to the tune of an initial £56000 interest free loan from John Moores himself plus a guarantee to underwrite transfer spending for the next few years; while a year later, Liverpool gained funding support to buy, most notably, both Ian St John and Ron Yeats for a total of almost £60000. Within a few years, both had won the 1st division title and the FA Cup, on their way to becoming part of English football's long-term elite.

'So what?' you might say.

Well, those sums of money were significant in kick-starting the Everton and Liverpool we came to know (and occasionally support, especially in Europe) over the next few decades. Just as with every other club that has enjoyed successes down the ages, from the Arsenal of the 30's onwards to Nottingham Forest in the late 70s to the modern day Chelsea and now City. And those sums of money given to create 'The School of Science' at Goodison and 'This Is Anfield' across Stanley Park were not piddling amounts.

As I then said to my pals, it's very difficult to locate club accounts information prior to 1974 but taking that year's statement of accounts for both Everton and Liverpool, they posted 'Incomes' of £499328 and £701289 respectively (with 'Income' defined as gate receipts and other sources of funding such as the club shop, programme sales etc less shares paid to other clubs and taxes etc) These figures were earned after some 10 years of being successful top-flight clubs, during which time both had won 2 titles and also the FA Cup, plus begun their early experience with European competition.

Now, using the Bank of England's inflation calculator, 1974's £499k (Everton) and £701k (Liverpool) translate to £223k and £314k in 1960/61. Remember, both were not the giants they later became, so their earnings would probably be much lower - but stick with these numbers for now.

The initial monies given to fund their respective transfer spending of the early 60s (£56k to Everton and £60k to Liverpool) represent approx. 25% of Everton's 1960 income, whilst for Liverpool it's 22%. That was some kick-start for both clubs, almost unprecedented at the time and absolutely the key reason for the subsequent successes both clubs enjoyed between 1962-74.

Again, 'so what?' Well, my two pals were astounded when I outlined this lot to them. In fact, the Liverpool supporter was blissfully unaware that Everton had benefited to such an extent from the largesse of John Moores.

Whenever I point such things out to fans from other clubs (should the occasion arise), they too are similarly shocked. The point being that, just as with our 'lottery win' of 2008, so too every club that wants to dine at the top table needs the ackers to go with their ambition. The numbers may have skyrocketed astronomically since the advent of the Premier League but the principle is exactly the same.

And as for the advent of the Premier League, I'd better finish now before I start on that one.. the accretion of power by (first) the 'BIg 5' of Everton, Liverpool, United, Spurs and Arsenal and then the 'Sky 4' of Liverpool, Arsenal United and Chelsea, is another one that rattles my cage when other clubs' fans seem to forget the history of the thing and what has been going on over the past couple of decades..!"
Click to expand...
The change to home clubs retaining all home gate receipts in the 80s benefited the big clubs at the expense of good but small clubs like Forest, Derby and Ipswich who went into decline. It was brought in by the greedy big city clubs. I am sure you know that but your pals didn't.
Sports channels should feature this sort of stuff instead of the 47th showing of Liverpool v Spurs in 1988.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top