Jump to content
IGNORED

Liverpool Football Club

Stilly

By Stilly
in Sport

 Share

Recommended Posts

kiroquai

kiroquai

Posted
Posted

Last year against Stoke was probably the low point of the entire season for me. We looked utterly uninterested, we were out muscled in every tackle and we hardly created anything worth getting excited about. Watched it on ESPN and it made me feel really quite angry.

Much, much improved this season, even if the result doesn't hint at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Last year against Stoke was probably the low point of the entire season for me. We looked utterly uninterested, we were out muscled in every tackle and we hardly created anything worth getting excited about. Watched it on ESPN and it made me feel really quite angry.

Much, much improved this season, even if the result doesn't hint at it.

I think what's also there to see is that Stoke feared us. That is quite a change; teams will now worry about what we have to offer, our midfielders supplying the bullets and chances as Suarez works his magic. Bellamy and Downing are potent threads going forward.

Carroll will, hopefully, offer another dimension to it all when he gets into the swing of things.

As far as the pen goes I thought it was one. Carragher has had plenty of those where he's dragged players down and got away with it. If you're "already going down" then it can be looked favourably upon; in my mind he didn't get away with his old trick that time.

Wasn't really sure on the L'pool pens either, most notably the one where it was chest then hand. That would be massively harsh I'd say. The other one was perhaps a little bit more of a pen yet it's hardly in the same bracket as the one that Wigan conceded against Man City. That was one of the clearest penalties of all time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gabzy

Gabzy

Posted
Posted

Interesting article on BBC Sport about Meireles. Apparently the club didn't keep the promise they made him and then forced him to hand in a transfer request. Also interesting that he says he never wanted to leave. Was it just a case of Dalglish not liking him and wanting to get rid?

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Interesting article on BBC Sport about Meireles. Apparently the club didn't keep the promise they made him and then forced him to hand in a transfer request. Also interesting that he says he never wanted to leave. Was it just a case of Dalglish not liking him and wanting to get rid?

I'm pretty sure that when he joined, compared to when he left, the club had gone under quite a few changes. So what, Hodgson/the previous board promised him something and then they weren't around anymore...guess what Raul!

He was playing better under Daglish, got more of a chance and perhaps that even sealed his move to Chelsea.

So; he's unhappy about a "promise" that was broken by people who aren't even in charge of the club anymore. Something that wasn't even in his contract it appears.

What exactly has he got to moan about?

Ah, yeah, it was money. Money, money, money. That's what he cares about.

Shouldn't have opened his mouth. Seems to be a Liverpool > Chelsea disease.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SMD

SMD

Posted
Posted

Interesting article on BBC Sport about Meireles. Apparently the club didn't keep the promise they made him and then forced him to hand in a transfer request. Also interesting that he says he never wanted to leave. Was it just a case of Dalglish not liking him and wanting to get rid?

Who was 'the club'? The owners? They're long gone. The manager? Ditto. The fans? Don't think we promised him shite. Is there something in his contract? Nope.

He wasn't exactly brilliant until Kenny came in and suddenly he looked like a different player under him. So why use him as an excuse?

Frankly he won't be missed and he can chase money if he wants.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dogsout

dogsout

Posted
Posted

Great news about the Hillsborough files.

As for Meireles, Comoli says one thing, the player says another. I liked him, thought he'd stay with us a while, but someone obviously decided it was best he goes. I cant believe it was the manager and board though, not that late on in the window.

I think if you look between the lines the answer is pretty clear. Meireles would have preferred to have stayed but wanted what he'd been promised by the previous board. The current board couldn't see the point in doubling his wages when he still had so long left on his contract, could command a decent fee, and wasn't a key player. That left Meireles with the option of either staying on his current wage, or earning more than twice that at Chelsea, as long as he asked for the move. The stuff about his wages and the promise was common knowledge before the window even opened, so the deal wasn't much of a surprise - it was just the timing.

Just seen the highlights from the Stoke game and I am amazed that we came away with nothing. The first hand-ball shout should have been a penalty. I've noticed quite a few people (including ex-referees) defending the decision because of the proximity of the ball to his arm before Kuyt heads it. The fact that his arm was outstretched in the manner it was makes it an easy call. There doesn't have to be intent to play the ball with a hand, for hand-ball to be deliberate. Him putting his arm out like that is enough. I thought their penalty was quite soft as well, not for the fact that the lad went down easily, but due to him running across Carragher to draw the contact in the first instance. It's one of those, but I wouldn't have cared much had Clattenburg not fucked us over with the first hand-ball.

I thought we played well, the best I've seen us play in the league at that stadium, anyway. I think the international break hurt us somewhat, but I was pleased with the performance, overall.

Hopefully what Kenny is doing will pay off because I'm already sick of referees and we're only 4 games in.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gabe

Gabe

Posted
Posted

Hopefully what Kenny is doing will pay off because I'm already sick of referees and we're only 4 games in.

I take it you agree with Kenny's views on contentious decisions then? Out of interest, what do you feel has gone against us so far this season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dogsout

dogsout

Posted
Posted

Off the top of my head:

1. Phil Dowd against Sunderland. I wouldn't have minded him giving a foul against Carroll in the build up to his disallowed goal, had Dowd not let their CBs push and pull Carroll about every time he went for the ball. Richardson should have been sent off for his challenge on Suarez, as well. If they're playing that game with 10 men from the 5th minute on, it's much, much less likely they're coming away with a point.

2. Arsenal's only real chance against us came from a blatant push by Arshavin on Martin Kelly. The ref let it go and thankfully Reina saved it, but it could have been a very different story for us that day as it was 0-0 at the time. He also allowed Vermaelan to climb all over Carroll every time the ball went up to him.

3. We should have had a penalty against Bolton when Zat Knight had two attempts at Suarez from behind. There was also a blatant back-pass that should have seen us win an indirect free-kick in their area.

Those are the major ones I can remember, add them to the stuff I've had a moan about from the Stoke game and I think there's enough to back up what Kenny's saying. Obviously the stuff against Arsenal and Bolton has hardly been spoken about because we won those games, but they still happened. Suarez has been going absolutely mental at the officials already this season and I do think that, like me, he's fed up with them already. I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, but I do think poor refereeing decisions have contributed to us dropping points in both of the games we failed to win so far, and I'm glad Kenny is fucked off with it.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JLM

JLM

Posted
Posted

I watched the whole game against Stoke and, as easy as it is to criticise Carragher, I thought Charlie Adam was our worst player on the day.

I can only assume it was frustration at how hard it was to break Stoke down at times but he seemed to be trying to play a killer, defense splitting ball every time he got it and quite a lot of them didn't come off for him at all. He still got some incisive passes away but there were plenty of occasions where he killed our momentum by giving away possession or massively over-hitingt a through ball that no man on Earth could chase down when he could have just played it into feet.

Despite that he wasn't awful by any stretch and neither was the team's performance as a whole. I actually came away from the game feeling pretty positive despite tearing my hair out at a couple of the missed chances. Stoke didn't bully us out of the game as they've done in the past and they spent almost every minute on the back foot. It certainly wasn't surprising that Stoke gave Shawcross their man of the match award.

In other news, Nathan Eccleston has been very foolish indeed:

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2011/09/13/liverpool-fc-striker-nathan-eccleston-under-investigation-by-club-after-claiming-9-11-was-not-the-work-of-terrorists-100252-29416719/

I'd like to request that Raheem Sterling and any other promising young players be barred from social networking sites until they're at least 30 in case of further stupidity.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JLM

JLM

Posted
Posted

I'm not criticising him for having a stupid opinion or disputing his right to hold said opinion, I just think that posting that on Twitter a few days after the anniversary of the event is a really stupid thing for a professional footballer signed to a major club to do. The club is going to have to be seen to do something about it because people will get emotional and blow it out of proportion and the media will have a field day with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bowser123

bowser123

Posted
Posted

Agree with Ramone, why is he under investigation? Sure his opinion is a bit... erm, out there. However it is his opinion and he is fully entitled to it. Whether we agree with it or not.

Na, he has to be reprimanded for sure.

Imagine it was Gerrard who said that about 9/11. It'd be front page news and would create a massive fuss the club doesn't need. He'd be bringing the club into disrepute with his actions and it'd look very bad on Liverpool FC if they didn't act. Just because that youth player isn't as prominent or senior doesn't mean you can have different rules, the actions are reflecting badly on their employers. The fact is that opinion is pretty offensive and stupid at the best of times, to do it this week is off the scale idiocy. He's a representative of LFC and shouldn't be making his thoughts like that public, doubly so when they're so crass and insensitive.

Or let's say Rio Ferdinand read the Sun in 89, believed what they printed and Tweeted it was all the fans fault... after all it'd be his opinion and so what if he was hurting the families and friends of vast numbers of people, it's his opinion.

Basically, if you don't have a grasp of the situation as sensitive as this then just keep your mouth shut instead of causing further hurt and distress.

The bigger picture is that Twitter, Facebook everything are so going to get blanket banned for all the clubs so soon. Brings nothing but trouble, even if it can be amusing at times.

3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bradigor

bradigor

Posted
Posted

Na, he has to be reprimanded for sure.

Imagine it was Gerrard who said that about 9/11. It'd be front page news and would create a massive fuss the club doesn't need. He'd be bringing the club into disrepute with his actions and it'd look very bad on Liverpool FC if they didn't act. Just because that youth player isn't as prominent or senior doesn't mean you can have different rules, the actions are reflecting badly on their employers. The fact is that opinion is pretty offensive and stupid at the best of times, to do it this week is off the scale idiocy. He's a representative of LFC and shouldn't be making his thoughts like that public, doubly so when they're so crass and insensitive.

Or let's say Rio Ferdinand read the Sun in 89, believed what they printed and Tweeted it was all the fans fault... after all it'd be his opinion and so what if he was hurting the families and friends of vast numbers of people, it's his opinion.

Basically, if you don't have a grasp of the situation as sensitive as this then just keep your mouth shut instead of causing further hurt and distress.

The bigger picture is that Twitter, Facebook everything are so going to get blanket banned for all the clubs so soon. Brings nothing but trouble, even if it can be amusing at times.

But it is an opinion. Yes he is an idiot and I don't agree. Same as I wouldn't agree if it was Gerrard or Ferdinand. Here they may be (as far as) totally wrong in their opinions, but they haven't broken any laws.

I also agree that they would be better off keeping their mouths shut if they don't grasp the situation, but to punish them for it, is not right in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SMD

SMD

Posted
Posted

Agree with Ramone, why is he under investigation? Sure his opinion is a bit... erm, out there. However it is his opinion and he is fully entitled to it. Whether we agree with it or not.

I take it you haven't read Kris' article on Lawro then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

I get what Bowser is saying but it's highly unlikely that Ferdinand is capable of reading an entire article, especially if it doesn't include some text speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bradigor

bradigor

Posted
Posted

I take it you haven't read Kris' article on Lawro then?

Yes. Lawro is a tool, but doesn't mean he should be punished or reprimanded for having opinions. Whether I agree with them or not.

I also don't agree with some of what Kristian writes. (in general)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC Lemon

DC Lemon

Posted
Posted

2. Arsenal's only real chance against us came from a blatant push by Arshavin on Martin Kelly. The ref let it go and thankfully Reina saved it, but it could have been a very different story for us that day as it was 0-0 at the time.

It was also 0-0 when you scored an offside goal.

Which is why it's pointless for managers to moan about refs. In the next match or so you'll have something go your way, Kenny will be asked about it and reply, 'we deserved a bit of luck', quickly forgetting about his quest for better refereeing.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

The blatent back pass was a terrible, terrible decision. I've no idea how that wasn't picked up by the Referee, assistant, or fourth official. Really poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SMD

SMD

Posted
Posted

Yes. Lawro is a tool, but doesn't mean he should be punished or reprimanded for having opinions. Whether I agree with them or not.

I also don't agree with some of what Kristian writes. (in general)

It doesn't matter what the opinion is, it's about how you choose to air them, where and when. I'm sure he's not the only footballing personality with wacky ideas but to air them on the anniversary of the attacks is foolish at best. Lawrenson spoke from a position of authority on national radio about something he knows fuck all about. If they want to give their personal opinions then they can do that in private, not in public. If David Cameron said 'scousers? nah don't fancy them' in public, would you or Lo be too pleased about that?

Gordon Brown thought one of the electorate was a bigoted woman and no one actually disagreed with him - he just got slaughtered for being caught saying it. When you're in the public eye, you have a different set of responsibilities and Eccleston fucked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ras el hanout

ras el hanout

Posted
Posted

It doesn't matter what the opinion is, it's about how you choose to air them, where and when. I'm sure he's not the only footballing personality with wacky ideas but to air them on the anniversary of the attacks is foolish at best. Lawrenson spoke from a position of authority on national radio about something he knows fuck all about. If they want to give their personal opinions then they can do that in private, not in public. If David Cameron said 'scousers? nah don't fancy them' in public, would you or Lo be too pleased about that?

Gordon Brown thought one of the electorate was a bigoted woman and no one actually disagreed with him - he just got slaughtered for being caught saying it. When you're in the public eye, you have a different set of responsibilities and Eccleston fucked up.

Yeah it's obvious he fucked up. However it was the thought he was stupid for believing mad things I took ex working to. His ideas are clearly stupid but then most footballers are too stupid to even hold stupid beliefs. But yeah, all footballers should be banned from Twitter and shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bradigor

bradigor

Posted
Posted

It doesn't matter what the opinion is, it's about how you choose to air them, where and when. I'm sure he's not the only footballing personality with wacky ideas but to air them on the anniversary of the attacks is foolish at best. Lawrenson spoke from a position of authority on national radio about something he knows fuck all about. If they want to give their personal opinions then they can do that in private, not in public. If David Cameron said 'scousers? nah don't fancy them' in public, would you or Lo be too pleased about that?

Gordon Brown thought one of the electorate was a bigoted woman and no one actually disagreed with him - he just got slaughtered for being caught saying it. When you're in the public eye, you have a different set of responsibilities and Eccleston fucked up.

Seeing as neither of us are Scouse, then it wouldn't bother me ;)

There is a difference between the leader of the country saying something about an entire group of citizens and a footballer stating a daft opinion.

Fair enough slaughter Ecclestone for it, but to investigate and punish him is bull. Unless ofcourse he did this while at training, or during a match.

Edit: What should happen to Joe Bloggs who works in Primark, if he said similar? Should Primark investigate him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept