Liverpool Thread - 2022/23

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

I could weep.

...I know man, it's heartbreaking isn't it. Weep, or alternatively you could try some of their knock off McDonalds stuff, which apparently tastes very similar to the "real thing" ;)

 

[Betterdeedthan red]

...I know man, it's heartbreaking isn't it. Weep, or alternatively you could try some of their knock off McDonalds stuff, which apparently tastes very similar to the "real thing" ;)

What awful

 

[Tolmie scores]

Unfortunately City’s winning path in ten to fifteen years time will mirror exactly the same sort of Gloryhunting support you despise so much about United’s and Liverpool’ nothing can prevent that if a club becomes a global success which City are far along the road of becoming now.
I think the other thing about this global Club is at one time Clubs were owned by your local businessman or maybe a very rich man who happend to support your Club.. this is still the case in the lower leagues.. however once SKY was introduced it attracted blue chip mega global conglomerates who seen how much money was involved in the English game and wanted a piece of the pie.. that’s why you have owners like FSG.. Big Stan Kronke at Arsenal and the Glaziers.. these people don’t even understand football never mind like or love the clubs they own.. what happens then is decisions to the football club are made in a business way rather than a footballing way and that’s where we are now where they would rather have tourist day tripper fans in the stadium spending money rather than a local from Walton or Ancotes.. a player will be bought from Korea or Japan not because he’s good but because they will market him in those countries.. fans still think they are supporting a football club when really they are just supporting a business or franchise.. we are no longer fans or supports just customers.. where I am in Liverpool if I gave up my season ticket in protest I would be replaced by the few hundred thousand from all over the world from the global brand who wanted one so you could never win.

Totally agree with your comments, sounds like a soulless experience doesn't it. Strange why some clubs lambast City for not having 'global reach'. Whilst it drives revenue , sponsorship, merchandise etc..it creates a pretty bland experience really. I used o play a bit of football in the states in the A league - went to a lot of different sports games and as a sports fan I did love watching the games live but it sort of felt a lot like going to the cinema...nothing wrong with that if that's what your used to but it is a shame to lose what we had. South American matches seem to have retained this (San Lorenzo) and probably sacrificed quality on the pitch - all their top players leave before they are out of the teens ..BUT the team thats left behind are passionately supported. Looks a better deal to me

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Ofcorse the media are biased... Media darlings were always United and Liverpool... might have something to do with them having global reach fanbases... can remember talking to a journalist back in the 80s and complaining that Liverpool beat Benfica away in the old stadium of light in front of 100k in the quarters of the old European Cup yet the back page of the Mirror had a picture of Bryan Robson with all sorts of arrows in his body with details of all the injuries he had in his career... the journalist said if we don't put United on the back page our worldwide sales will be down because United fans won't buy that days edition... probably same applies now with SKY subscriptions and how they sell the rights abroad.. United..Liverpool and Chelsea are the main draws in present climate. This is why they build up certain clubs in a biased way...all about money.

It certainly does apply today. I've heard and read about utd fans in Nigeria and other parts of the world who could no longer watch their club on TV over there because utd are not successful, therefore the TV companies didn't buy the sky product, therefore sky didn't make a sale to that country.

There's a massive incentive for the PL to have utd or lfc as winners or at least contenders. What I am most surprised at is that it doesn't really manifest in obvious bias towards them.

But yes these global clubs that have followers instead of fans get more coverage. But that works both ways, see the difference between its and lfc coverage.

 

[Tolmie scores]

Totally agree with your comments, sounds like a soulless experience doesn't it. Strange why some clubs lambast City for not having 'global reach'. Whilst it drives revenue , sponsorship, merchandise etc..it creates a pretty bland experience really. I used o play a bit of football in the states in the A league - went to a lot of different sports games and as a sports fan I did love watching the games live but it sort of felt a lot like going to the cinema...nothing wrong with that if that's what your used to but it is a shame to lose what we had. South American matches seem to have retained this (San Lorenzo) and probably sacrificed quality on the pitch - all their top players leave before they are out of the teens ..BUT the team thats left behind are passionately supported. Looks a better deal to me

San Lorenzo 1 Instituto 1 Soy de San Lorenzo si señor, que loco soy.. - YouTube

My even lose to Woles, Derby, Forrest or whatever occasionally - but id take it for a bit of this

 

[Grassland Blue]

It certainly does apply today. I've heard and read about utd fans in Nigeria and other parts of the world who could no longer watch their club on TV over there because utd are not successful, therefore the TV companies didn't buy the sky product, therefore sky didn't make a sale to that country.

There's a massive incentive for the PL to have utd or lfc as winners or at least contenders. What I am most surprised at is that it doesn't really manifest in obvious bias towards them.

But yes these global clubs that have followers instead of fans get more coverage. But that works both ways, see the difference between its and lfc coverage.

There was a time when us British knew of few foreign soccer teams.
(We didn't get around much then!)
I guess it's the same for fans from some other countries, who only really know something of a few British clubs, because of those clubs exploits in international competition.
In 1968 I watched the European Cup final.
Who were Benfica? I didn't know.
I just wanted the English club to win. I was happy when they did too,
so little was my knowledge of football back then!!
Anyway, little by little, City are creeping into the consciousness of those unknowing foreign fans and ultimately we will become very well known abroad.
All I ever dreamed about was beating the rags and one day, perhaps, winning the league.
The Premier League matters most to me.
But it's not about ME.
It's about City, what the club and its' owners want.
They, I suggest, want the global recognition which comes with winning the Champions League.
So that's where we are, the path we're on.
Let's get that sodding monkey off our backs.

 

[Tom Ford]

It certainly does apply today. I've heard and read about utd fans in Nigeria and other parts of the world who could no longer watch their club on TV over there because utd are not successful, therefore the TV companies didn't buy the sky product, therefore sky didn't make a sale to that country.

There's a massive incentive for the PL to have utd or lfc as winners or at least contenders. What I am most surprised at is that it doesn't really manifest in obvious bias towards them.

But yes these global clubs that have followers instead of fans get more coverage. But that works both ways, see the difference between its and lfc coverage.

Maybe another reason for media biased is because if you look at the pundits and presenters most of them grew up knowing Liverpool were the best so it gets ingrained.. Souness. Merson.. Le Tiss.. Wright.. Tony Gale etc were all young growing up in the 70s and 80s so wouldn't know anything other than Liverpool being a big club and winning everything in sight... this carries forward to there opinions now even tho Liverpool are no longer the big or successful club they once were.. factor in Redknapp.. Owen.. McManaman.. Ferdinand.. Beglin etc and you have younger pundits with Liverpool ties... its easy to see why Liverpool get special treatment from media circles... if you fast forward 20 years or more Chelsea and maybe City will have more pundits because they will of been the successful clubs from 2005 onwards while Arsenal..Spurs.. Liverpool and United fell away..

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

There was a time when us British knew of few foreign soccer teams.
(We didn't get around much then!)
I guess it's the same for fans from some other countries, who only really know something of a few British clubs, because of those clubs exploits in international competition.
In 1968 I watched the European Cup final.
Who were Benfica? I didn't know.
I just wanted the English club to win. I was happy when they did too,
so little was my knowledge of football back then!!
Anyway, little by little, City are creeping into the consciousness of those unknowing foreign fans and ultimately we will become very well known abroad.
All I ever dreamed about was beating the rags and one day, perhaps, winning the league.
The Premier League matters most to me.
But it's not about ME.
It's about City, what the club and its' owners want.
They, I suggest, want the global recognition which comes with winning the Champions League.
So that's where we are, the path we're on.
Let's get that sodding monkey off our backs.

Its not a monkey its planet of the apes (Mick McCarthy)

But yes, we're headed for what utd and lfc are now. Shame, I think.

 

[mexico1970]

Maybe another reason for media biased is because if you look at the pundits and presenters most of them grew up knowing Liverpool were the best so it gets ingrained.. Souness. Merson.. Le Tiss.. Wright.. Tony Gale etc were all young growing up in the 70s and 80s so wouldn't know anything other than Liverpool being a big club and winning everything in sight... this carries forward to there opinions now even tho Liverpool are no longer the big or successful club they once were.. factor in Redknapp.. Owen.. McManaman.. Ferdinand.. Beglin etc and you have younger pundits with Liverpool ties... its easy to see why Liverpool get special treatment from media circles... if you fast forward 20 years or more Chelsea and maybe City will have more pundits because they will of been the successful clubs from 2005 onwards while Arsenal..Spurs.. Liverpool and United fell away..

Football is a basket case.

The new establishment is trying to sell the big legacy clubs whilst pushing this global franchise to breaking point which disenfranchises legacy fans and promotes fan boys.

we as supporters will be picking over the carcass of this "Quick buck" experiment without the advantage of having a hard core fan base to support the clubs that have been emptied.

 

[BrianW]

I think sooner or later we will have a European Super League. It might even have two divisions.

When that happens, the rest of football will change to something like the 1960s. They will get little media coverage. What's left of 'top' football will be like the Championship is now. You might get a pro league underneath. Then the rest will be semi-pro. Crowds will be modest, but they will be 'real' fans. No plastics will care, any more than they do now for (say) Radcliffe Borough or Inverurie Loco Works.