Liverpool Thread - 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
We have a global fanbase in every corner of the globe. Making the money back is not problem since we have record profits.

If that's the case why sell doesnt make any sense. You have a fanbase that can turn over 10 billion in a short time and the owners want to sell ?

So the new owners will buy for 5 billion and expect to make that 5 billion back in short time. Who funds the squad as klopp is always saying you dont have the money.

If the new owners only get back 5 billion in a short term (say 5 years lol ) I dont see the point in buying lfc . That's 5 years of 5 billion investment and no return lol

I'm not a business man but that doesn't seem like a good investment to me
 
The problem with this is that 10 of the other top 20 clubs in the world are also in the Premier League fighting for the same top 4 positions.
Its City's fault mate for every single one of the past 31 seasons that they've only won it once, they're an arrogant club with an equally arrogant fanbase, living off times gone by when Alan Hansen and Phil Neal could make the pass back to Grobbelaar and Clemence, in the days when the goal keeper could pick it up before the pass back law came in. They also forget they spent 9 consecutive seasons in the old second division, I'm sure they still wear flares on the Kop, the whole City is stuck in the 60 and 70's , I'm sure they still think the beatles are still churning out top ten singles aswell. The whole city has a chip on its shoulder.
 
Liverpool is one of the biggest clubs in the world. Top 4 should be minimum, I don't want to go back to the days of winning the top 4 trophy and watching our best player leave to better clubs for trophies.
You sound like a typical entitled follower of one of the two cheeks of the same arse.

No team has a divine right to win trophies year after year; that right has to be earnt.

LFC had more inward investment than any other club in the 1960s and '70s. Without that funding, you would, in all probability, still be languishing in mid-table of the second tier, as you were before Littlewoods came along.

You were, along with the other cheek, one of the prime movers in forcing clubs to accept the change to clubs keeping all gate receipts from home matches, because you, and that lot, regularly had the highest attendances.

Also, at the time of the formation of the Premier League (Premiership, as it was then), you were one of the so-called "big five", who led the charge towards the biggest change in the history of English football.

And yet, when other clubs receive investment, you two cry the loudest that it’s not fair, because it hinders your ability to vacuum up the titles available, and therefore the money you earn, so that you can maintain your position at the top of the tree.

You claim that you don’t want to go back to the days of winning the Top Four trophy. You must be happy that it looks unlikely that you will do so this season.
 
Last edited:
You are the biggest in the following:
1. Jibbing in grounds
2. Blaming others for your own fans piss poor behaviour
3. Throwing missiles at opposition fans causing injury
4. Wrecking coaches
5. Murdering fans of the opposition
6. Hounding people out of their jobs for speaking the truth
7. Having a main sponsor, a bank, that has been fined record amounts for money laundering and assisting terrorism

There is more but I trust you get the gist.
You can today add this:

Merseyplod finally charges some Liverpool supporters (with anything), though the piece goes out of it's way to not say "liverppol supporters/fans"
 
You can today add this:

Merseyplod finally charges some Liverpool supporters (with anything), though the piece goes out of it's way to not say "liverppol supporters/fans"
It was the same, when the BBC reported on the missile thrown during the League Cup match recently. The wording was something like, "The object came from the section of the ground housing the away support."

The media in this country are shit-scared of any backlash from Littlewoods.
 
You sound like a typical entitled follower of one of the two cheeks of the same arse.

No team has a divine right to win trophies year after year; that right has to be earnt.

LFC had more inward investment than any other club in the 1960s and '70s. Without that funding, you would, in all,probability, still be languishing in mid-table of the second tier, as you were before Littlewoods came along.

You were, along with the other cheek, one of the prime movers in forcing clubs to accept the change to clubs keeping all gate receipts from home matches, because you, and that lot, regularly had the highest attendances.

Also, at the time of the formation of the Premier League (Premiership, as it was then), you were one of the so-called "big five", who led the charge towards the biggest change in the history of English football.

And yet, when other clubs receive investment, you two cry the loudest that it’s not fair, because it hinders your ability to vacuum up the titles available, and therefore the money you earn, so that you can maintain your position at the top of the tree.

You claim that you don’t want to go back to the days of winning the Top Four trophy. You must be happy that it looks unlikely that you will do so this season.
Liverpool haven't vacuumed many Pl titles for 30 plus years mate despite spending shit loads on the likes of Andy Carrol, and they're quite used to not finishing in the top four as their PL history shows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PPT
Liverpool haven't vacuumed many Pl titles for 30 plus years mate despite spending shit loads on the likes of Andy Carrol, and they're quite used to not finishing in the top four as their PL history shows.
I do know that; it’s the whole point of my post.
 
I see the bbc have done a puff piece on the dippers around offensive chanting etc...naming ourselves & forest fans as offenders

And they throw in a klopp statement praising their fans behaviour

Are they fucking blind to what the dippers fanbase are truly like

At least every other fan base knows the truth
 
Liverpool is one of the biggest clubs in the world. Top 4 should be minimum, I don't want to go back to the days of winning the top 4 trophy and watching our best player leave to better clubs for trophies.
The size of a club doesn’t make any difference to anything, it doesn’t even mean anything. There’s no such thing as the word ‘should’ in English football either.

Sheffield Wednesday, Sunderland, Leeds and City have all had years in the third tier… I wouldn’t even call those dark days because there are hardcore fans of clubs divisions below that who turn up week-in-week-out who would dream of their club getting up to that division. Whether the expectations of Weds Sund Leeds and City fans are way beyond the fans of clubs who could only dream of being in the third tier are neither here nor there.

League 1 Sheffield Wednesday are traditionally a bigger club than Fulham, Brentford and Brighton who are in the top half of the Premier League. But if they have any fans saying ‘Wednesday should be up where those clubs are, we’re a bigger club than all of them’, they’d be wrong. All clubs are where they deserve to be and are there for a reason (how they’re run; on or off the pitch or both).

Liverpool are currently 8th. Liverpool’s average finishing position in the all-time English league system is 8.1. You said Top 4 should be a minimum, but even in the Premier League era Liverpool’s average finishing position is 4.33.

Liverpool spent eight seasons in the Second Division not all that long before they won four European Cups in eight seasons. Which eight seasons are most representative of Liverpool? I’d argue neither, they were just two sets of eight seasons of Liverpool at their extremes and the reality is neither of them are truly what Liverpool are. The realities are more likely to be the averages, for all clubs.

It’s the average 8.1 finishing position that is what Liverpool are more than they are the team that spent eight seasons in a row in the Second Division or that won four European Cups in eight seasons.

In Liverpool’s 130 years, they’ve had 40 years where they’ve won at least one trophy but 90 years where they’ve won nothing. So it’s far more likely and more common that, even one of the most decorated clubs in England wins absolutely nothing and finishes 8th than it is they win something or even finish in the Top 4.

What gets on everyone’s nerves about Liverpool fans is this ‘should’ mentality. ‘Liverpool “should” be challenging because they’re a big club’… it means nothing.

Shoulda woulda coulda and a lorra lorra laughs. English football is competitive, no team has really won that many league titles, 19 and 20 are very low numbers for a top league’s most league title winners (English football has had 96 years where neither Liverpool or United has won the league, that dwarves even Liverpool and United’s league titles combined), no team’s average finishing position is higher than that 8.1 of Liverpool’s, and that’s all because in English football there’s no such thing as ‘should’.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Liverpool haven't vacuumed many Pl titles for 30 plus years mate despite spending shit loads on the likes of Andy Carrol, and they're quite used to not finishing in the top four as their PL history shows.
Shouldn't that be £35 Million Andy Carrol, same as it is when the media report on our signings?

THIRTY-FIVE MILLION QUID in 2011!!!

And we're the ones ruining football...
 
The size of a club doesn’t make any difference to anything, it doesn’t even mean anything. There’s no such thing as the word ‘should’ in football either.

Sheffield Wednesday, Sunderland, Leeds and City have all had years in the third tier… I wouldn’t even call those dark days because there are hardcore fans of clubs divisions below that who turn up week-in-week-out who would dream of their club getting up to that division. Whether the expectations of Weds Sund Leeds and City fans are way beyond the fans of clubs who could only dream of being in the third tier are neither here nor there.

League 1 Sheffield Wednesday are traditionally a bigger club than Fulham, Brentford and Brighton who are in the top half of the Premier League. But if they have any fans saying ‘Wednesday should be up where those clubs are, we’re a bigger club than all of them’, they’d be wrong. All clubs are where they deserve to be and are there for a reason (how they’re run; on or off the pitch or both).

Liverpool are currently 8th. Liverpool’s average finishing position in the all-time English league system is 8.1. You said Top 4 should be a minimum, but even in the Premier League era Liverpool’s average finishing position is 4.33.

Liverpool spent eight years in the Second Division not all that long before they won four European Cups in eight years. Which eight years are most representative of Liverpool? I’d argue neither, they were just two sets of eight years of Liverpool at their extremes and the reality is neither of them are truly what Liverpool are. The realities are more likely to be the averages, for all clubs.

It’s the average 8.1 finishing position that is what Liverpool are more than they are the team that spent eight years in a row in the Second Division or that won four European Cups in eight years.

In Liverpool’s 130 years, they’ve had 40 years where they’ve won at least one trophy but 90 years where they’ve won nothing. So it’s far more likely and more common that even one of the most decorated clubs in England is a team that wins absolutely nothing and finishes 8th than it is they win something or even finish in the Top 4.

What gets on everyone’s nerves about Liverpool fans is this ‘should’ mentality. ‘Liverpool “should” be challenging because they’re a big club’… it means nothing.

Shoulda woulda coulda and a lorra lorra laughs. English football is competitive, no team has really won that many league titles, 19 and 20 are very low numbers for a top league’s most league title winners (English football has had 96 years where neither Liverpool or United has won the league, that dwarves even Liverpool and United’s league titles combined), no team’s average finishing position is higher than that 8.1 of Liverpool’s, and that’s all because in English football there’s no such thing as ‘should’.
Outstanding post
 
Outstanding post
This post just isn't fair. You have resorted to using facts to support your argument.
The size of a club doesn’t make any difference to anything, it doesn’t even mean anything. There’s no such thing as the word ‘should’ in English football either.

Sheffield Wednesday, Sunderland, Leeds and City have all had years in the third tier… I wouldn’t even call those dark days because there are hardcore fans of clubs divisions below that who turn up week-in-week-out who would dream of their club getting up to that division. Whether the expectations of Weds Sund Leeds and City fans are way beyond the fans of clubs who could only dream of being in the third tier are neither here nor there.

League 1 Sheffield Wednesday are traditionally a bigger club than Fulham, Brentford and Brighton who are in the top half of the Premier League. But if they have any fans saying ‘Wednesday should be up where those clubs are, we’re a bigger club than all of them’, they’d be wrong. All clubs are where they deserve to be and are there for a reason (how they’re run; on or off the pitch or both).

Liverpool are currently 8th. Liverpool’s average finishing position in the all-time English league system is 8.1. You said Top 4 should be a minimum, but even in the Premier League era Liverpool’s average finishing position is 4.33.

Liverpool spent eight seasons in the Second Division not all that long before they won four European Cups in eight seasons. Which eight seasons are most representative of Liverpool? I’d argue neither, they were just two sets of eight seasons of Liverpool at their extremes and the reality is neither of them are truly what Liverpool are. The realities are more likely to be the averages, for all clubs.

It’s the average 8.1 finishing position that is what Liverpool are more than they are the team that spent eight seasons in a row in the Second Division or that won four European Cups in eight seasons.

In Liverpool’s 130 years, they’ve had 40 years where they’ve won at least one trophy but 90 years where they’ve won nothing. So it’s far more likely and more common that, even one of the most decorated clubs in England, wins absolutely nothing and finishes 8th than it is they win something or even finish in the Top 4.

What gets on everyone’s nerves about Liverpool fans is this ‘should’ mentality. ‘Liverpool “should” be challenging because they’re a big club’… it means nothing.

Shoulda woulda coulda and a lorra lorra laughs. English football is competitive, no team has really won that many league titles, 19 and 20 are very low numbers for a top league’s most league title winners (English football has had 96 years where neither Liverpool or United has won the league, that dwarves even Liverpool and United’s league titles combined), no team’s average finishing position is higher than that 8.1 of Liverpool’s, and that’s all because in English football there’s no such thing as ‘should’.
It's a bit unfair to be using facts to support your argument.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top