CL Result: Arsenal 1 Liverpool 1 QF 1st Leg
UEFA Champions League QF 1st Leg - April 2nd 2008 - Result
Arsenal 1 Liverpool 1
Liverpool held Arsenal to a 1-1 draw in this quarter-final first leg at the Emirates meaning they’ve got the always-vital away goal to help them in their quest for a third Champions League semi-final in four seasons. Arsenal’s goal, scored by Adebayor from a corner on 23 minutes had looked like being on the cards as Liverpool seemed to be letting Arsenal creat chances in a spell of a few minutes. But it was only a few minutes before the lead was lost again, and it was some good footwork from Steven Gerrard that created it, making the defender look silly as he went round him before crossing the ball to Dirk Kuyt to bang into the net under pressure.
The other match of note for both sides tonight was in Istanbul. The winners of this tie will play the winners of the tie in Istanbul and from the first leg score it’s looking more difficult than perhaps Chelsea expected. They were beaten 2-1 by Fenerbahce having gone in front early on. Of course they’ve also got an away goal to take back to Stamford Bridge, meaning an all-English semi is still on.
A 0-0 draw would of course be enough for Liverpool next week but any goal from Arsenal and the London side will have the upper hand. The only way it can go to penalties next week is if it ends 1-1. Before that is the league tie between the two sides, again at the Emirates, and neither side can afford to be too complacent in terms of selection, both sides needing the points. Liverpool’s five point cushion above Everton perhaps allows them the most room for the resting of players, but wouldn’t be popular with fans. Arsenal need the win to try and catch Manchester United.
Liverpool co-owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett were both expected to be at the game, but a storm in Colorado put paid to that when Gillett was unable to fly over. It probably prevented a storm around the pre-match dining tables. Gillett’s son Foster was at the game, with Hicks joined by other members of his family.
Arsenal: 24 Almunia, 5 Toure, 10 Gallas, 6 Senderos, 22 Clichy, 27 Eboue (26 Bendtner, 67), 16 Flamini, 4 Fabregas, 13 Hleb, 11 Van Persie (32 Walcott, 45), 25 Adebayor
Unused subs: 1 Lehmann, 2 Diaby, 17 Song Billong, 19 Silva, 31 Hoyte
Booked: None
Goals: Adebayor 23
Liverpool: 25 Reina, 23 Carragher, 37 Skrtel, 4 Hyypia, 12 Aurelio, 20 Mascherano, 14 Alonso (21 Lucas, 76), 18 Kuyt, 8 Gerrard, 19 Babel (11 Benayoun, 57), 9 Torres (10 Voronin, 85)
Unused subs: 30 Itandje, 6 Riise, 15 Crouch, 17 Arbeloa
Booked: None
Goals: Kuyt 26
BBC Stats: (Arsenal - Liverpool)
Possession: 58% - 42%
Shots on target: 7 - 3
Shots off target: 6 - 1
Corners: 6 - 3
Fouls: 8 - 13
Referee: Peter Vink
Attendance: 60,041
BORING BORING LIVERPOOL!!! THAT KIND OF RUBBISH LONG-BALL FOOTBALL HAS NO PLACE IN THE SEMI-FINALS! LET US ALL PRAY FOR THE SAKE OF THE BEAUTIFUL GAME THAT ARSENAL STUFF THEM NEXT WEEK. THEY WERE PATHETIC!!!
Kuyt derserves a bit of luck to go with his hard work. Long may it continue………but if it doesn’t let’s hope he miscues a shot right between the eyes of Tommy Hicks et al.
Got my fingers-crossed for next week!!
Kuyt certainly deserves some praise after this game, he along with Mascherano kept us in it. Gerrard provided an acute pass that Kuyt met "I don’t know how" and scored the so crucial away goal. Still much to play for, the Saturday game will be a whole lot different, and Benitez should start making changes now considering he wants to keep some fresh legs. I’d fancy seeing Crouch, Pennant, Benayoun and Riise a start come Sat!!! C’MON YOU MIGHTY REDS
Gosh, how close and tight it was, but the lads did what they had to do. We’ll make it to the semi-finals, but we’ll have to be better vs … the Turks!
I am 100 % sure I saw Kuyt at three places at the same time
I’ve never seen anything as tight in my life!
with Chelsea losing and Everton at home to Derby on Sunday (Paul Jewell?).
I’m in no way under-estimating how much
Wenger wants the Champions league this year. But there’s that small chance that were results to go a certain way at the weekend Arsenal are away to United on the
following weekend.
A draw suits Benitez at the weekend. Which would really mean game on next Tuesday. But if we were to lose and Everton win…..
I think it will end as a 0-0 on Saturday, both teams will be in a confused mode, as to the fact their playing the same side again. I don’t think Benitez will shuffle much, he might add Arbeloa or Pennant, or "hopefully" Crouch, but not much will be changed!
A good result last night and great games from Mascherano, Gerrard and Kuyt. I feel for Dirk Kuyt, he was in his favoured Striker position twice last night, on the first occasion he scored and on the second he hit a shot nowly wide. His lack of the silky skills exasperates yet he contributes so much in an unsung way. I thought last night was an illustration of why the two managers involved as yet cannot be considered “great”. Wenger has consummate skills in handling flair but seems unable to educate his genii in more than one game plan. Benitez, on the other hand seems deeply suspicious of “flair” as it threatens a departure from the introverted, defensive “we’ll take your best shots and hit you with counterpunches” approach.
Whatever, it was a good result for us and let’s hope Benitez allows at least a period of “going for the jugular” play at Anfield.
I hope on Saturday we don’t put too much of a weakened team out, because the psychology of losing against Arsenal is probably worse for us than the dropped points would be. In fact I wonder how much worse a slightly tired Torres and Gerrard would be on Tuesday compared to a rested Torres and Gerrard playing with a dispirited Pepe and Xabi and co. Two 0-0 draws would suit us now, but I also hope we don’t play for that on Tuesday. We’ve got to get a goal as soon as possible on Tuesday if we can.
Rafa must hope to take players out from this weekend not just to protect them from tiredness but also from a chance of injury. I hope he makes the changes and gives others a chance to show how they can change the game for us on Tuesday, if needed.
Just heard the FA’s decision on Masch. They’re a joke!
I take it Fergie and Queiroz will get a similar ban and fine!
I watched the game on Sky and had to admire Gordon Strachan faced with the transparent partiality of Keys on zonal marking. Strachan reminded him that the stats favour zonal marking as opposed to man for man and also told him straight that the goal we concede had nothing to do with our defensive system it was down to Sami Hyppia losing spatial awareness! Man for man is favoured by some because of the limited brain power of the old-fashioned defender in dealing with the slightly more complex zonal system. "If it is above the ground kick it" was good enough for defenders in Andy Gray’s day and his mind froze then, Graeme Souness’s face was a picture as Strachan was attempting to explain to Keys the concept, that you were responsible for anyone immediately in front or to the right of you. Way over Keys’ head!
Hicks has done an excellent job of leading this team this season. He obviously loves Liverpool whereas Gillett was just in this for the money as he shows by now wanting to quickly hand the team over to greedy Arabs. If Liverpool makes it to the Champions League final again, Hicks deserves much of the credit. After all, it was under his leadership (and money) that Torres was acquired.
The image of Rafa going ballistic when we scored the goal is an absolute classic!
He also mentioned extra-time in the post match interview.
Texas Dawg - Are you Hicks? Are you Hicks? Are you Hicks in disguise?
One thing mate your in dreamland if you think he has put a penny of his money into our club!
1. Torres was committed to LFC before Hicks was involved. ……2. Hicks admitted he knew nothing about either Liverpool or football at the time Torres actually signed.so he would not have known him from snoogy-doogy……3. Hicks might have signed the cheque?……..4. The money was not from Hicks as a provision was included in the refinancing package.
Texas Dawg, you need to send me your address so I can forward the receipt and you can reimburse me for the adult diapers I’ve had to buy and wear every time I read your comment and laugh so hard I wee myself.
Texas Dawg (clearly you are Hicks in disguise…………….but then if I had a face like yours I would also wear a disguise). I can’t even count the number of inaccuracies in your mindless rant but others have beaten me to it already so why waste the time.
On a more pleasant note……what a disciplined and composed performance from the lads last night. I know I’ve criticized Kuyt in the past (and for good cause) but you can never fault the lad for effort. I can’t understand though why he grabbed Hleb’s arm like that. Also a typically great performance from Stevie G showing us some great dribbling skills we didn’t know he had. Arsenal are like the energizer bunny though……they just keep coming back at you. We’ll really have to be up for it next Tuesday night to add them to our recent collection of Euro scalps.
The only real concern last night for me was big Sami’s wayward performance at times. For some reason he seems to reserve his worst games this season for European away nights (Marseille excepted). Has anyone else noticed this or am I just imagining things ??
John Steele, I think your comments are a pretty accurate summary of the two coaches although I think Rafa might do better with a bit more real money to spend (relative to Man Yoo & Chelsea) instead of having to shop most of the time in the bargain basement.
The only real sour note of the night was seeing that fast arsed phoney Hicks so obviously trying to take advantage of the current feel good factor. My only regret is that I’ll be too focussed on Arsenal on Tuesday night to really do justice to my loathing for this guy if he shows up at Anfield !!
I’m not Hicks. I just think he’s done a good job with the club so far. Thankfully, he will be the owner of the club for a long, long time, and Gillett will be gone very shortly since he was only in this for the quick investment. So the Liverpool fans whining about Hicks need to find something else to complain about. I doubt Hicks really cares what any of them say anyway as long as the team is successful. Gillett on the other hand is clearly just a big baby. (Seriously, who whines to the media about “death threats”? How lame.)
texas_dawg tell hicks to join gillett in leaving and then we’ll have little else to complain about!.
by the way, you’re saying the exact same things as hicks. you sure you’re not his son?
“by the way, you’re saying the exact same things as hicks.”
I’m sure not ALL Liverpool fans can’t see what is going on here. One owner wants to sell quickly for a profit. The other owner wants to stay for a long time. Whatever you think of either owner, it’s pretty obvious to the rational observer what the motivations of each are here.
“you sure you’re not his son?”
I’m sure.
Let’s say Hicks is the owner for the next 15 years and Gillett leaves in a few months. Let’s say the team wins the Premier League and Champions League within the next few years. Would you still be complaining about the owner or would you get over it? Personally, I really couldn’t care less about who owns my sports teams as long as they win.
More importantly I want the owner of my sports team to care whether we win or not. We know Hicks’ take on that, we are the same as Weetabix! Hicks wants to hang on because he is greedier than Gillett end of! The pictures of bored shitless, struggling to understand what was going on at last nights game spoke volumes. That was what? his 3rd visit to a match? and Rafa has had how many emails?hail great leader!
line three: read hicks bored etc
"Personally, I really couldn’t care less about who owns my sports teams as long as they win."
Sounds like a Chelsea fan to me!
Well Texas Dawg…….You’re obviously a brave man writing these provocative words from the safety and anonymity of Texas. If you’re really so enamoured with Hicks (ie. yourself) then why don’t you come on down to the Kop next Tuesday night with a banner or some chants restating that Hicks is going to be owner for the next 15 years ??? If you do I promise you’ll get something more substantial to think about than mere "threats".
Texas_Dawg » You’ve got some interesting points but you’re making them in a bit of a smug fashion. That said, I suppose much of what is said against Tom Hicks from over here sounds smug to people in Texas.
It’s a good question about what we’d do if Hicks was owner for 15 years and we won the League in the next few years. No matter how much people claim otherwise, if we started to win things (not counting the CL because we did that pre-Hicks and people wouldn’t credit it Hicks for it!) then opposition would start to die out.
But opposition is unbelievably strong now. He’s blamed for everything, whether it was his fault or not. Even if he shows evidence of what was his fault and what wasn’t, it’s a hell of a task to win people over.
He’s got to hit the ground running as soon as he gets full ownership if he does get ownership. He’s got to ride a storm. Anything he does will be met with suspicion. If we get a £50m transfer budget there’ll be screams of “Where’s that money come from?”. If we get a £20m transfer budget there’ll be screams of “Where is the rest of our transfer budget?”
Talking about the majority of “soccer” fans, I think the idea of not caring about who owns the club as long as it’s winning is usually true. In fact as long as a club is matching expectation an owner is rarely mentioned. I say usually - they’ve got to have matched expectation from the off for this to happen. Hicks hasn’t, as part of his partnership, and he’s not got himself a bigger task now because rather than expectations, we’ve probably got demands.
It’s fair to say that he’s got a lot more in front of him in terms of obstacles than DIC have. He’s got to get the money, persuade Gillett to sell, fund transfers, get the stadium moving, show us how our debt situation is not a worry after all - well it’s a long list, and persuading Gillett to sell is probably the easiest, and he was adamant he wasn’t selling the other night.
“More importantly I want the owner of my sports team to care whether we win or not.”
Hicks does care about winning, just as every other fan of the team cares about winning; if only because he has a lot invested in the matter.
“The pictures of bored shitless, struggling to understand what was going on at last nights game spoke volumes.”
I doubt he knew much about hockey either when he bought the team, yet Dallas now has a Stanley Cup because of him. Really weak argument there.
“Talking about the majority of “soccer” fans, I think the idea of not caring about who owns the club as long as it’s winning is usually true. In fact as long as a club is matching expectation an owner is rarely mentioned.”
Thanks for a rational response, Jim, and I totally agree with your comments.
All I’ve tried to do here is point out that whatever Liverpool fans think of him, Hicks will be the team’s owner for many years to come. He’s not holding out for more money from DIC or anyone else. The only person doing that is George Gillett, who truly was in this, from the start, for a short-term investment.
Oh, and Jim… Gillett will soon sell to Hicks, make a few more whiny, crybaby statements on his way out the door, and then disappear.
Just keep watching… and remember what your old friend Texas_Dawg told you.
I’d like to see us play a bunch of reseves on Saturday and kick the s*** out of Fabregas, Adebayor etc. Soften them up before Tuesday night. It’d be funny to hear Wenger complaining like a little girl too. Come on you reds!
Personally I wouldn’t care that Hicks was the owner as long as he was doing the right thing by the club. Problem is, given his track record, not many of us think there’s much chance of that.
With all due respect Jim, Mr Hicks (and his aptly named surrogate "Dawg") hasn’t made any good points. All he’s done is make a lot of unsubstantiated and ill-informed comments that have no basis in reality.
I have not heard or spoken to a single Reds fan anywhere who thinks Hicks has shown "…evidence of what was his fault and what wasn’t." We’ve all been watching real carefully Jim but all we’ve seen from Hicks is a lot of deception, spin and cheap bullshit designed to distract us all from some fairly obvious truths about what Hicks’s ownership of the Club does, and would, entail in the medium to longer term.
Posing hypothetical scenarios which are a million miles away from the reality we have to live with is not going to help you or "Dawg" persuade any of us to back Hicks.
You ask what would happen if we "started" winning things. Here’s a newsflash Jim…….we have been winning things……….. but just not with the frequency we got used to back in the golden years and think this Club is capable of under the right direction. Therefore if we did continue to win occasional trophies under Hicks why would we attribute those trophies to him ?? It would merely represent a continuation of the recent status quo which most fans believe we can improve upon.
Instead of posing a pie in the sky hypothetical can you please instead answer a more relevant question by explaining to us how the Club having to service a massive annual interest bill (not to mention a principal repayment of hundreds of millions of pounds) merely to fund Hicks’s own takeover (which added no value whatsoever to the Club) is somehow going to help the Club win trophies ??
Hicks’ standard position on finance issues is that he will not deign to participate in any interview unless its agreed beforehand that finance issues will not be discussed. How reassuring !!! Not that I would believe anything he said on the subject anyway. All we’ve ever heard from the bullshitter in chief are occasional mindless and totally unbelievable one liners like "the finances will be fine" or "I’m looking at other American sources to invest in the Club". As if any businessman with half a brain would ever want to tie himself to a partner like Hicks or trust someone like Hicks with their money……and even in the unlikely event that this happened the next Yank who’d never heard of LFC before would expect the Club to pay through the nose for the privilege of being sucked dry.
As for the new stadium. What a f*****g fiasco that’s become. When Hicks and Gillett first arrived the plans for the new stadium had all been approved and construction was ready to commence right away as soon as the promised new investment arrived. After all, this long awaited "major new investment" to fund the stadium (and the assurances given about this by Hicks & Gillett) were the reason why the club had to have new owners in the first place. Yet here we are now over fifteen months later and not a shovel or blade of grass has been turned. No one (least of all Hicks despite his bullshit attempts to pretend otherwise) has any f*****g clue if, when or how the new stadium is now going to be built. All we’ve seen are a few sets of Star Trek style drawings of various stadiums that Hicks has decided are too expensive to build.
And lets not forget Jim that only a small portion of the existing £350 loan is for "initial" construction costs. This means that in the best case scenario under Hicks we still have to somehow borrow, service and ultimately repay at least a further £300-400 million (on top of the existing £350 million) to complete any new stadium. This is with a man who even after surreptitiously planning all along to lump the majority of the cost of his own takeover back onto the Club (in violation of his earlier assurances to the contrary) still had to publicly hawk us around the Banks with a begging bowl merely to refinance the loan !! Our Club debt is already bigger than Arsenal’s even though they’ve already built their stadium and we haven’t even begun work on ours !!
Prior to David Moores’ sale of the Club one of the main reasons identified for major new investment was the ability to invest more competitively in the playing squad. Both before and after last season’s CL final every man and his dog acknowledged the need for major squad investment to catch up with Man Yoo and Chelsea. However these expectations run directly contrary to some telling comments Hicks made a few months ago to some local Texas media. These comments were to the effect that in order for Hicks to make money out of Liverpool it was not necessary that the Club be winning as fans would continue to support the Club regardless based on "brand loyalty." He also stated that moneys could be taken out of Liverpool to fund his American teams. Despite Hicks recently describing himself as enjoying 13 years of "successful" ownership of sport’s teams the reality is that his American baseball and ice hockey clubs have enjoyed virtually no meaningful success at all under his stewardship. Their record under him is piss poor. After being publicly challenged by Rafa over squad investment during the summer Hicks released some of the RBS loan monies. Our net spending over the summer was approximately £20 mil (roughly the same amount we earned from CL prize money alone). This net spending put us well behind the likes of smaller clubs like West Ham, Man City and Spurs who (despite having no access to CL moneys and no recent success of any kind) managed to convincingly outspend us again. Meanwhile Man Yoo (having left us for dead in last season’s title race and FA Cup) bought four new players (Anderson, Hargreaves, Tevez & Nani) averaging almost £20 million apiece and recouped £6 million by selling Alan Smith to Newcastle. The American spin on this summer spending involved trying to convince everyone that our one really big summer signing (Torres) cost £27 million when he really cost £20 million. The subsequent signing of Masch last month, once again, only took place after Rafa publicly forced Hicks’s hand on the issue after a prolonged saga. This could easily have resulted in Masch going elsewhere and very nearly did. The reality is I’m glad our net spending has been relatively small since it was all borrowed money anyway. Shades of Leeds United and Peter Ridsdale.
As for the situation with Rafa very few, if any, fans believe for an instant Hick’s recent claim that the plan to ditch Rafa was all Gillett’s idea or that Hicks was secretly against it. The fact is that Rafa’s comments after the CL final clearly riled Hicks’s ego and this was very obvious from Hicks’s subsequent comments and behaviour. If anything I would say Hicks wanted to fire Rafa on the spot but tried hard not to show this too clearly knowing it would be political suicide. After a bad run on the field Hicks thought by December the climate had changed sufficiently to make his move. Gillett may well have been in favour of this as well but they both badly misjudged the situation (yet again). Now it has become politically convenient for Hicks to try and reinvent the history of this affair by putting it all on Gillett. Does anyone who has witnessed Hicks’s abrasive personality or who saw his comments and body language about Rafa’s "pouting" behaviour really believe Hicks, of all people, is the type to subvert his own opinions in order promote someone else’s totally different agenda ?? Are we really expected to believe that Hicks was secretly cool with Rafa all along and was just publicly supporting an anti-Rafa agenda for Gillett’s benefit while all the time subverting his own positive feelings about Rafa ?? Do me a favour !! This whole suggestion is just another crude, cynical attempt by Hicks to reinvent history to suit himself. Political realities may dictate that Rafa play along with this up to a point (or at least avoid publicly arguing against it) but Hicks’s attempt to manipulate this issue is just another insult to the intelligence of fans who are far smarter and more observant than he gives them credit for. But then we shouldn’t be surprised to find that someone whose policital mentor is George Bush believes baseless spin (if repeated over again enough times) can be converted into reality.
So Jim, you’re damn right when you say everything Hicks says or does will be met with suspicion until we’re finally rid of him……..and I personally couldn’t give a rats corpse what anyone in Texas thinks about it. I’m sure Hicks and his family members (and "Dawg" whoever he may be) appreciate all the free advice you’re giving them about how to handle things "….as soon as he gets full ownhership" but there’s no f*****g chance in hell of us ever getting on board with this guy. All this effort you’ve been putting in lately to push Hicks’s barrow is really a wasted trip.
And now there is this Texan dawg coming to the site to clearly jeer at LFC fans with his ‘Mr-knows-all’ attitude, which he intends to sound ironical and detached but only reveals what he is - an arrogant prick. The only thing this pathetic dawg has in common with Jim is his belief that Hicks will not go away from the club for years and years. This is a distinct possibility, but, like most of us in this site, I believe that time is against Thicks, with the credit crunch and the prospect of further (huge) loans (on the club of course!) looming alarmingly (for him) dark and near to silence his Texan bigmouth.
Anfielder is spot on. Texas_dawg has made a couple of statements backed up by nothing. My argument that Hicks cares nothing for us winning is described as weak, yet I can back it with the following:
1. Up to and including the Arsenal game the other night we had played 50 competitve matches. To my knowledge Hicks and Gillett have attended 4.
2. Hicks has never made a positive statement on our on-field activities win lose or draw. The only relative utterance has been his criticism after the defeat at home to Man U which he did attend.
3. We were on our best winning run of the season when these two clowns chose to embroil us in the Klinsmann business. The winning run stopped abruptly.
4. Hicks is on the record as believing his mission is not reliant on success in winning trophies but in giving the spectator a better matchday experience via a new stadium with bomb proff bunkers and directors box access so he can get to his “occasionally used seat unmolested.
5. Our two owners save any statements or arrange any leaks consistently on the eve of our most important matches.
So there is compelling evidence that neither Hicks nor Gillett care enough about us playing never mind the result.
Texas_dawg backs up his argument with what? A feeling in his bones? Or is he on the payroll? Who knows, perhaps his motivation can be found in the use of the phrase “a bunch of greedy arabs”?
Ignoring the sinister overtones of such a phrase, the adjective is interesting contrasting as it does the willingness of “greedy” DIC to pay over the odds for our club with Hicks who did not refuse to countenance a sale to them but asked a price described as being from “Dreamland” So we know about greed.
On the noun, we have within our fanbase every creed, culture and nationality so we care nothing for nationality and would welcome the likes of Kraft and Lerner. Even Shinawatra with his problems being associated with shady dealings in Thailand has been accepted at Man City and we did not castigate Hicks because of his involvement with the Utimco and Carlyle Group affairs or even his political affiliation with George Bush. We do have our fringe element who would resort to flagburning, hence the death threats, but they don’t represent the majority.
Jim is wrong to generalise about fans accepting any owner as long as the team is winning. In the only two LBO clubs there is persistent hostility. Check out the website LoveUnitedhateGlazers.com for the ManU view and they are winning consistently. As for us well search any website, fanzine, newspaper, radio or TV phone in and you will find evidence enough of our hostility.
Bravo Anfielder - one of best posts I have read on this forum.
Jim, I don’t know what has gotten into you lately defending Hicks based on hypothetical scenarios but you would be advised to read Anfielder’s post each time before you respond to people like Texas Dawg - who is obviously just trying to stir it.
If any further corroboration was needed than Anfielder’s fine post on why we need to part ways with both Hicks and Gillett one need look no further than the Daily Mail article linked below. How low have we been dragged by these two that we should be fodder for such ridicule!http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pag…..ge_id=1951
Back on topic. A lot of confident statements are coming from Arsenal fans and players about the replay. They claimed they were not fazed about the first game but the extent to which their young team was absolutely spent well before the final whistle testified that they had been extremely anxious before the game. Anxiety is the enemy of physical condition. If they approach the game at Anfield with any fear they will fold. He writes hopefully.
Anfielder, good post and good you reminded people about the situation..
is there any comment’s on rafa’s situation and why he now chose to give somehow strange comments..
Why Rafa just revealed in the Guillem Balaque interview that we basicly need to sell players before buying, ”now we can spend money on players if we can earn some by selling players”. What he really meaned with that..? I found that comment quite amazing. Also Rafa seems to think it’s fine for him, or is he just afraid to demand what we really need..? Now’s the time to find the three or so quality players to make the difference, especially when our rivals will continue spending, yet we cannot do it because of finances..What?? We got the ”new owners” and ‘’significant investment”
and yet we have to go the arsenal way..
Certainly Rafa has been supporting Hicks in the last couple of months, or he has been told to do so..
You are trying a little too hard, John.
Hicks and Gillett want to win just as any other fan of the team wants to win. The stuff about number of games attended, etc. is just you trying to find fault with them. That’s fine, but they still want to win. The difference though is that Gillett no longer wants to be an owner of the team whereas Hicks does.
Regarding the anti-Glazers MU website, that is a good example of how some people will whine and complain no matter what happens. And of course a lot of this is simply based in anti-Americanism. Jim is right though… with winning, all but a few will go away or at least find other things to whine about.
Texas_dawg - you’re a great one for leg pulling!
By drawing parallels between Liverpool and United you fail to recognise the difference between the two teams supporters. When the Glazers were on the verge of takeover you got a few token voices from the celebrity circle making noises - and a number of fans who felt they were being marginalised. In the case of us, it’s the mainstream view that is against Hicks. Because he lied and also because he’s just not likeable or - from weetabix etc. - not a sound, and in some ways ethical, businessman.
Texas-dawg, your mate/father/brother Tom Hicks needs to recognise that we want him out of our club. And it’s not just because he doesn’t have the money!
“In the case of us, it’s the mainstream view that is against Hicks.”
Of course. But that’s because Liverpool isn’t winning at the level MU is currently. Once Liverpool is, there will be no difference here.
“your mate/father/brother Tom Hicks needs to recognise that we want him out of our club”
He realizes that. He’s not going anywhere though.
Mr. Dawg - given the time diffence between here and texas, are you now uk based??? I’m beginning to think you’re a continuation of April 1st.
Why would any man with even a shred of scruple or self regard want to stay in a situation where he is manifestly not wanted? Is his lust for the profit this business opportunity promises so great that he is oblivious to the wishes of the fans you pretend he identifies with? Of course what you are confirming is what we have guessed much earlier, we have no minds of our own being just the punters who fill the seats, give us the odd win, like throwing fish to the performing seals, and we’ll be there filling his pockets.Incidentally you are in good company, dismissing those who disagree with you as whiners. I heard Mugabe say the same thing recently when he was challenged to come up with a counter to the lucidly argued case of his opposition. When you are bankrupt of facts to back up your statements dismissing interlocutors as whiners is a cop out.
Now I know what it must feel like to be a citizen of Iraq.
I never fully understood their pain until reading your posts Texas_Dawg.
“Why would any man with even a shred of scruple or self regard want to stay in a situation where he is manifestly not wanted?”
Because he enjoys sports and wants to own a great team.
“Is his lust for the profit this business opportunity promises so great that he is oblivious to the wishes of the fans you pretend he identifies with?”
Where did I say he identifies with fans? I simply said he understands many fans don’t like him currently.
As far as profit motivations, he’s already rejected an offer that is a DOUBLE of his money in a year. Gillett, in this for profit, wants desperately to take that offer. Hicks doesn’t because he’s not in this primarily for profit. He’s in this because he enjoys sports and wants to own teams and win with them. Which is why he has yet to sell one that he owns.
Er, he wants a £1billion for the club. Not because he wants to win but because he thinks that’s what the club will be worth when a stadium is built.
The guys a money man - he wants to more than double his money that’s why he’s hanging around.
Wow !!! Great post earlier by Anfielder. It took me ages to read this but I’m glad for the comprehensive refresher course. The thought of Hicks makes my blood boil but he seems to enjoy making us all feel powerless.
Dawg, you’re a typical arrogant, loudmouth, ignorant Yank and by strange coincidence so is your Mr Hicks. There certainly is plenty of Anti-Americanism in the World right now and people like you and him are the cause of it. You have failed utterly to convince anyone with your drivel and have simply reminded us of who our real enemy is.
Wenger trying to pick the team!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/7331494.stm
Jim, all, check this link for details of a leaked email on the Hicks pitch of his sports empire (incl us!) to the City.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pag…..to=newsnow
“Er, he wants a £1billion for the club. Not because he wants to win but because he thinks that’s what the club will be worth when a stadium is built.
The guys a money man - he wants to more than double his money that’s why he’s hanging around.”
You don’t know any of this of course. Just wild speculation.
Hicks bought the Dallas Stars for $84M in early 1996. Forbes now values the team at $254M. (http://www.sportscity.com/NHL/Forbes-NHL-Team-Valuations/) A 300% return in a little over a decade, and despite that AND a new arena, Hicks hasn’t sold.
Hicks bought the Texas Rangers for $250M in 1998. The club is now worth $365M according to Forbes. Hicks still hasn’t sold.
I’d say the evidence clearly indicates he enjoys sports and wants to own sports teams.
“Dawg, you’re a typical arrogant, loudmouth, ignorant…”
And this from a “Hitchens”. That is some sweet irony.
A little selective with your stats dawg. The Stanley Cup win was in the 98/99 season nothing since for the Stars. Your list of clubs includes the ones in his backyard and he would not be selling them would he? Might lose him face in the Highland Park Country Club or at The Dallas Cattle Baron’s Ball or whatever. You did omit his investment into Corinthians of Brazil in 1999. What were they worth when he left?
“The Stanley Cup win was in the 98/99 season nothing since for the Stars”
That is the only Stanley Cup the Stars have ever won. They were founded in 1967 and had never won it until Hicks.
But I was simply addressing the speculation about Hicks holding out for more money and a new stadium. He’s well past both those points with the Stars and has not sold.
“Your list of clubs includes the ones in his backyard and he would not be selling them would he? Might lose him face in the Highland Park Country Club or at The Dallas Cattle Baron’s Ball or whatever.”
I can promise you that not a person at such places care one bit whether Tom Hicks keeps or sells the local hockey team. It’s Dallas. And hockey.
Why is it so hard to believe that he just wants to own the team because he likes owning major sports teams?
At last a statement I agree with. Hicks likes to possess major sports teams. It’s with the rest of it that I disagree and which you have dropped as this thread has progressed - that he cares about winning or the fans. Any success this season or any future season will come in spite of Hicks not because of him. When the fans merrily posting on other sites their lists of multi-million pound acquisitions realise the import of Rafa’s recent disclosure to Guillem Balague that purchases this close season will depend wholly on player sales you will see a racking up of hostility if that is possible.
Guess your sweet irony is lost on all of us over here Dawg since no one knows what you’re talking about. But since you want to make fun of names………… isn’t it a bit redundant for a Texan to add the word "Dawg" on the end of his when all Texans are dogs by definition ??
I don’t know why you all bother with this pain dawg-dog (as Leanne H wittily suggested). He’s a clown like his mate Tommy Thicks. And it’s true that anti-americanism is not just a ‘prejudice’. The problem is just that pathetic fools can be dangerous when they put their greasy paws on the greatest ’soccer’ (sic) club in the world. Gosh, how I wish ‘greedy Arabs’ shoved these yanks off our great club.
John Steele » Heard something was coming, expect more in the Telegraph later. I’d like to see the original email if there is one, to see if those figures were really quoted.
The options are buying a share of the Hicks Sports Group, whose half-share of Liverpool amounts to 75 per cent of the value of the group; purchasing warring co-owner George Gillett’s stake for £100million or joining a Hicks refinancing scheme that promises investors a 16 per cent profit over two years.
Figures seem a little odd. How does £100m fit in with the debt? GG’s half of the debt is either £175m if counting the lot, £122.5m if counting the part not on LFC itself. Some of the refinancing did include cash I think, but it’s a strange figure at first read.
Re the 75% figure, Texas_Dawg says Stars are worth 254m US and Rangers 365m. So $619m. Or about £310m. So taking LFC value of £350m based on that debt, TH has £175m. Would make Hicks SG worth £485m. 75% of £485m is £364m. £175m is not £364m. So it’s not been worked out that way. And 75% of the £310m excluding LFC is £233m - still not £175m.
Do it again based on debt of £245m, or £123m for Hicks’ half. Hicks SG + LFC = £433m. 75% of that is £325m.
Just my first thoughts - the figures seem odd.
Doesn’t mean the idea of those three options isn’t true, but I’d like to see what’s really been proposed.
I’m sure we’ll see the email if it’s available and in keeping with this early article.
John you’re wasting your time trying to reason with this embarrassing clown. Guys like this are only capable of learing the hard way.
Dawg…like most people I think you are either Hicks, Hicks’s son or one of his paid employees. Whoever you are you’re labouring under the sad illusion that any of us care what a greedy prick like Hicks wants or likes. These matters mean nothing to us.
Hicks may have temporarily gained 50% of the shares by his deceipt but Liverpool Football Club always has, and always will, belong to us. If Hicks and his family insist on trying to cling on beyond the end of this season then what happened to his son at the Sandon will be just the beginning. There will be no place to hide and they will need a team of bodyguards around them constantly just to stay alive over here. I know you don’t believe us when we say this………….. but thats only because you’re too stupid to understand the passions you and Hicks are playing with.
The figures seem odd. The figures seem desperate. He is desperate. Who in their right mind is going to buy into this scheme in this current market and with this current owner. I can’t see it. They’d have to be some serious long-term investors who are cash-rich and willing to take a punt on Hicks being in great partner…..and given that his friends in the US appear not to have backed him, why would anyone here do so….assuming this email email exists and is true of course.
Jim, the figures supplied by Dawg are gross. The value included in the hicks net worth figure will represent his net stake. I don’t know the current debt/equity ratio for those clubs, can’t find it on the web!
“Guess your sweet irony is lost on all of us over here Dawg since no one knows what you’re talking about.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens
Never mind. Just making a joke about another “arrogant, ignorant loudmouth.”
“At last a statement I agree with. Hicks likes to possess major sports teams. It’s with the rest of it that I disagree and which you have dropped as this thread has progressed - that he cares about winning or the fans.”
I’ve never dropped my contention about winning. About the fans? Not sure if he cares or not, but I’m sure he realizes that ultimately they just want championships… as does he.
“Any success this season or any future season will come in spite of Hicks not because of him.”
Only if you start from the assumption that an owner can NEVER play a role in his club’s success. If not, you are just predicting the future. Fair enough if so, but you don’t know the future. We shall see.
“Dawg…like most people I think you are either Hicks, Hicks’s son or one of his paid employees.”
None of the above. Just an observer.
“Guys like this are only capable of learing the hard way.”
Maybe so. But I might say the same about people adamant Hicks won’t be the owner for years to come.
“If Hicks and his family insist on trying to cling on beyond the end of this season then what happened to his son at the Sandon will be just the beginning. ”
Like with most press reports of the type, what happened at Sandon wasn’t nearly what it was made out to be, fwiw.
“They’d have to be some serious long-term investors who are cash-rich and willing to take a punt on Hicks being in great partner”
That shouldn’t be too hard. Certainly hasn’t been to hard for him lately:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/DN-hicks_04bus.ART.State.Edition1.35ad83c.html
John » They’ll be around somewhere!
—-
I started to write this reply earlier but the “leaked email” article sidetracked me a bit.
I’m not sure if I’ve got time to respond to all the stuff above, but I appreciate the time everyone takes in explaining what they think without using txt spk and in the main avoiding abuse, even if provoked!
Re “Texas_Dawg” – I’ve no idea who he is. I’ve had no direct contact from him. From the limited information the control panel for the website software tells me, he’s not using an email address that belongs to any of the Hicks companies, and isn’t posting from the offices of any of the Hicks companies. Obviously I’m not going to breach his privacy with any more info than that, but at least it rules that part of the theory out! It’s up to him how much more he reveals about himself.
What he says is interesting, and worth listening to, even if you don’t like it. And by “worth listening to” I don’t necessarily mean “believing”.
I know I’m going to get slated for this, but…
TD sounds like the exact opposite of many LFC fans who despise Hicks and are desperate to see DIC take over. Well, obviously, you’re probably saying. But think about that a bit more.
TD is way over the top in his support of Hicks. There’s no criticism at all of Hicks there. Not an ounce. That’s why he’s being accused of being Hicks himself. He’s taken everything positive he can find about Hicks and is emphasising it. A lot of what he says is true in terms of it matching the intentions of Hicks. Other parts about other parties’ intentions or actions are probably also based on a version of the truth that he’s heard. I say a version of the truth, because he’s picked just one of the versions that are out there. He also sounds like he’s heard a few extra bits and pieces that add more weight to his 100% support of Hicks in this battle for the club. Some of the claims he makes I wouldn’t expect even Tom Hicks to make in support of himself!
I’m not asking anyone to believe him, but I think he genuinely believes what he’s saying. Does it make him right?
This is how it sometimes feels when I read some of the more pro-DIC, anti-Hicks, leave-George-alone stuff that’s out there. To be fair most people on here are at least willing to listen to all sides and are able to accept that it’s not always all black and white. But when I hear the way a lot of people can see no wrong in Gillett or DIC, especially when they go out of their way to praise Gillett, I feel real despair!
The same goes for Dawg as anyone else – assuming Dawg is a fan of LFC that is. Open your eyes and your ears and be wary of what’s being said if you care for this club. Try and get a feel for where each of those involved has told lies, is telling lies, is playing with our emotional ties to this club, has changed their approach after listening to what we all think. That’s all of us, just not the louder ones! If we all thought like TD then Hicks wouldn’t have to worry about how he acted if he won this battle. If DIC think we all sound like TD when we talk about them then they’ll not worry how they act if they win this battle.
We’re clearly getting closer to the end of this war, and we might not get a choice in who wins or how, but from the moment of victory onwards that winner needs to know that as a group of fans we’re both open-minded and cautious. We’ll listen to what they say, we’ll give them a chance to show us they mean what they say, and we’ll make life hard if they don’t do what they say.
I like your style, Jim. No joke. Good stuff and very sharp.
And my apologies for my initial comment about “greedy Arabs”. I admit that was just some chum for the sharks here.
I have no collective problem with Arabs or any other group (individual basis? that’s another matter… 
), and I’m sure DIC is run by good, well-intentioned people. They desperately want to own this great club. Unfortunately for them, Tom Hicks does as well and just beat them to the punch and isn’t selling for any price. At least not for a long, long time anyway.
John Steele, way back there you mentioned the game. Speaking of which these comments from Wenger:
Wenger also believes Liverpool, five points clear of Everton in fourth but eight points adrift of the third-placed Gunners, can afford to rest players on Saturday with Europe in mind. "I believe they will make changes. I am not sure whether Steven Gerrard and Fernando Torres will play," said Wenger. "They have a big squad and a lot of experienced players who didn’t play on Wednesday. To my calculation, eight players with big Premier League experience."
So what bugs me is why he’s trying to pick our team. Rafa picks the team and it’s none of his business. This is typical Arsenal, a team that has achieved nothing but is so far up its own arse to be having the nerve to suggest that we need to rest players in order to compete with them on Tuesday.
The facts are if they lose to us tomorrow they’ll have to come to Anfield on Tuesday in a must-win situation.
Jim - Texas_Dawg is an out and out supporter of Hicks. That automatically puts him in a position we don’t like because his friends a liar.
When Hicks puts his money where his mouth is - and by that I don’t mean just buying the club for future profits he hopes to reap - and lets Rafa know that he has funds to rival United why would we want him at our club?
As many have pointed out in the past, Rafa has had to largely generate his own cash to make our team achieve the 7 finals - all without Hicks’ (and Gillett’s) input. So what difference exactly is Hicks proposing he can make? He’s currently not put any of his own money into the club, he’s placed the club in debt and every single supporter will tell you that he has destabilised the club from top to bottom.
Please, someone, tell me the positives that Hicks has so far contributed? At the moment, trying to put the lies to one side, I can’t see it (which is not the same as not wanting to see it)!
Oh yeah, I forgot one other thing!
A friend of mine who works for a City PR firm reminds me that they - and we shouldn’t forget Financial Dynamics are working for Hicks - get people to join forums to spin on their clients behalf - without easily being traced. This includes using ‘believable names’ etc. These PR firms are not stupid as they know newspaper are no longer the sole place people go for news/influence.
However, Jim’s pointed out the flaw in Texas_Dawg’s approach: he’s not even tried to give the impression that Hicks is wrong in anyway whatsoever. So his approach is like being an elitist from Eton and trying to say your ‘down with the kids from the Estate’ but not empathising with them by trying to understand their pain……which is why none of us believe him!
Texas_dawg you should go back to the drawing board and ask one of your other colleagues to try another approach.
Edward, it’s a fascinating match this. Wenger has seen how Ferguson’s mind games seems to have an effect on our mind set so is trying his own version. We really cannot afford to take the match too lightly as so much depends financially on fourth place. Say what he likes, Wenger must win the match if they are to stay in with a chance of the title. I expect some changes from Rafa but I also expect the players brought in to play out of their skins in a dual attempt to influence Rafa and /or to keep themselves in the frame for the close season transfer scramble.
Jim, at our local supporter’s club meeting last night this dawg business was a hot topic. The consensus was that it is one of us with a second id!!! Perverse scouse humour? Maybe not as the effect has been to refocus and galvanise the arguments against Hicks. Thanks dawg you have stimulated some of the fans who were tiring of the issue.
I think TD is an educated Manc (if there are any) trying to wind us up.
"Jim, at our local supporter’s club meeting last night this dawg business was a hot topic. The consensus was that it is one of us with a second id!!! Perverse scouse humour? Maybe not as the effect has been to refocus and galvanise the arguments against Hicks. Thanks dawg you have stimulated some of the fans who were tiring of the issue."
John,
I’m just an observer who finds the level of the anti-Hicks rhetoric comically disproportionate with the facts of the situation.
"Texas_dawg you should go back to the drawing board and ask one of your other colleagues to try another approach."
I can assure you I’m not working for anyone, midlands… which is exactly why I don’t care what you believe about my posts (nor do I have any boss to answer to on this).
Go back and read my posts. Outside of some admitted early barbs intended to stir up some comments ;-), I’ve really just made one point: Gillett is in this for a short-term profit while Hicks is in this for a long-term interest in owning, and winning with, a great football club.
Time will tell.
Dawg……no one believes your utterly predictable denials but quite apart from this we all know any gutless wimp can make provocative comments online while hiding behind a phoney pseudynom. I think its fair to say from the feedback that with the sole exception of Jim Boardman no-one else has found your arguments even slightly persuasive so you’ve failed totally in that respect and now your drivel has become tiresome and boring. However fear not…..because your comments have served a useful purpose. At a time when most of us have been focussed on events on the field you’ve helped forcefully remind us all what a cancer Hicks really is. You can now go back, like a faithful messenger boy, to your boss/father/whatever and tell him that the "loyal and passionate fans" he referred to recently all still want him to fuck off and die somewhere…….preferably quietly. I’m sure he’ll probably be too dumb to do this voluntarily of course………but there are other ways to excise a cancer than asking it politely to leave.
Ellery,
Classy.
Dawg, if you have no emotional involvement in a situation it is easy to view those who have as caring disproportionately. My wife has been waiting 40 years or so in vain for me to grow out of my passion for this club. There are also millions of people in this country who care nothing for football but are passionate about other pursuits. I might not share their passion but I would never belittle it. We scousers are no strangers to derision from those who don’t know us or who believe they do and underestimate us. Rather than retaliate insult for insult I will try and give you some idea of where this ”over the top” care comes from.
Let me take the Dallas Stars as a point of comparison. A potted history will help. On December 8, 1967 the California Seals changed their name to the Oakland Seals. For the 1976-77 season the California franchise was transferred to Cleveland, named the Cleveland Barons. For the 1978-79 season the Cleveland and Minesota franchises merge, under the Minnesota name. For the 1993-94 season the Minnesota franchise was transferred to Dallas. After the labor lockout shortened the 1994-95 season, the team was sold to media mogul Tom Hicks. The Dallas Stars won their first Stanley Cup defeating Buffalo in the 1999 season.
Contrast this with the history of a football club like ours with over 100 years of achievement and disappointment. Before every game I attend, I pass by the memorial at the Anfield Road end where the names of 96 of our supporters, who lost their lives traveling to watch the club play, my surname being one of them, are listed. Those fans are part of our legend every bit as much as the great players and managers. In fact at any away match whether a competitive match in the remote eastern cities of Europe or a pre- season friendly game in Asia or the USA you will find our supporters in their thousands. I am not just referring to the wealthier fans able to jet around the world at will, I refer to the mass of ordinary working fans many of whom are still paying off their debts from Istanbul or Athens. How many fans of the Dallas Stars would you expect to find at an exhibition match in Kiev in the depths of winter? You observe this situation through a US paradigm and you really don’t get the difference between our club and a franchise. I’ve been as temperate in this response as I am able but if you are a sincere in your comments please think twice before again dismissing our concerns about this great club as comical or disproportionate.
I suspect your view mirrors that of Mr Hicks himself. He is after all a dispassionate observer of the game we play and the real concerns of the fans of the club are obviously seen by him as comical and disproportionate to the facts of the situation as they appear to him. It’s his club now and he wants us to butt out. As you have repeatedly told us he likes owning great sports club, he buys them because he can. Basically it is an ego/power thing.
We are here for the duration whilst Tom Hicks’ sojourn by comparison will be relatively short. My belief is that whilst you may be right in suggesting that with a winning run some fans will moderate their hostility, enough will remain to ensure that he will never be able to visit Anfield without being reminded of it. So what, you will say. Personally it would concern me if I thought one person considered me a man of no principle let alone 40,000 or so.
Here’s a twist of fate which might interest you and possibly Jim. It seems a myth is building on the blogosphere of George Gillett the potential hero. George is being exhorted to hold on to his shares to thwart Hicks or if he must sell to do so to anyone but Hicks, DIC being preferred. The demonisation of Gillett whether orchestrated from Dallas or not is proving counter productive.
Jim, I managed to find the debt/Equity figures from Forbes but only for fiscal 2007. Using these as a rough guide we get:
Texas Rangers team value $365m Debt/value = 73% Hicks net = $98.55
Dallas Stars team value $248m Debt/value = 81% Hicks net = $47.12
Hicks total = $145.67 which if 25% of total values Hicks empire @ $582.65m and values LFC @ $435.01m.
Given the disparity in accounting periods and the fact that I cannot ascertain what debt Hicks might have for the two US clubs “off the balance sheet” as he has at LFC, these figures produce only the crudest indication. However it becomes clearer where the valuation of the 50% owned by Gillett comes from.
The irony of these indicative numbers is that it appears that on a net basis Hicks is not much richer than David Moores!
Incidentally everyone…the article Dawg has given a link to above praising Hicks are from the Dallas News. This is a newspaper with a reputation in the United States about equivalent to our Sun……….and I mean the Sun with Rob Beasley not Chris Bascombe. I’ve read some of the articles from this paper regarding the US election and they are laughably childish, basically non-stop over the top spin with no substance to support any of it…………………….where have we seen this before ????
See Link and my subsequent exchange of e mails with the columnist, says it all about Hicks reputation in Texas.
http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/columnists/randy_galloway//story/561589.html I’ll pass your message on to all concerned.
Best wishes
JA
And I love the Liverpool fans for it… rg From: John Adkins
Sent: Thu 4/3/2008 2:01 PM
To: Galloway, Randy
Subject: Re: Texas Bullshit Randy,
Thanks for your reply, I can assure you he’s top of the list in Liverpool !
JA
John…first, there are many who want him out of baseball and hockey….soccer is third on the list… Randy Galloway From: John Adkins
Sent: Thu 4/3/2008 9:43 AM
To: Galloway, Randy
Subject: Texas Bullshit Please note well: Liverpool Football Club is NOT a "Storied Franchise". It is a private Limited Company founded in 1892 owned equally at the present by Thomas O Hicks and George Gillett.It was purchased with borrowed money by the foregoing pair who have loaded the club with debt after undetaking not to do so. I was born in Liverpool in 1945 and I have never known anyone so loathed in the city as Hicks. It is highly unlikely he will ever be able to attend a home match at Anfield again due to the hostilty of the fans, moreover the management of the club has been paralysed by his falling out with Gillett. Not bad for a "pro team owner"
Please all you Texans tell him to get out of our town and stay out.
John Adkins
The Ballad of George and Tom. A screenplay for Acrossthepond admirer’s of Ellefci. Scene: Merrie England, the Province of Scouseland, the domain of Lord David de Moores the Baron of Anfield. Plot: Lord David reluctantly needs to marry his youngest daughter, Elleffci, off to a rich suitor. He issues a proclamation to all parts of the known world for men of the Knightly order to come to Scouseland and “try their hand” (colloquial scouseism). Many try and fail but one day a knight short in stature but seemingly long in pocket arrives from a land called Acrossthepond. This is BSD George de Closeshave. His first offer to Lord David does not meet with approval and it seems that a rival suit from an Eastern Sultanate is finding favour. Undaunted Bsd George returns a short time later with a brother Bsd in tow. This is Bsd Thomas le Thick, a large seemingly benign specimen willing to let Bsd George press their claim for Elleffci’s hand. He is said to have longer pockets than Bsd George. Making use of the scheming Grand Vizier to the Baron, Rick le Pariah the two acrossthepondians succeed and agree a price and a dowry for Ellefci. To their chagrin (a term seldom used in Scouseland) they find in the small print that though they can own Ellefci they cannot possess her, further, they have to live with her at the baronial court, she cannot leave Scouseland (no way would she consider a move to Acrossthepond or even nearbye Kirby?). This is the way things are done in Merrie England. To effect this Lord David has Ellefci fitted with a chastity belt to which only he has the full combination, Bsds George and Tom having only a portion of the code each. Feeling cheated at this turn of events they conspire and agree to pay Lord David his due in filthy lucre as he requires but for the fair damsels’ dowry they produce acrossthepondian fools gold. As the months go by it becomes obvious to some that rather than being benign Bsd Thomas le Thick is in fact an ogre in disguise and means to possess Ellefci (in the biblical sense) as soon as he can. A plot is hatched with his unsuspecting partner to replace Elleffci’s loyal Captain of the Guard Rafa el Gaffa with a satrap of their own choosing (Bsd George knows a redundant officer from back home who fits the bill, Jurgen le Nearly). In the nick of time Rafa el Gaffa discovers the plot and donning the garb of ye Towne Crier he informs the citizens of Scouseland. Le merde hits the proverbial fan. Lord David sinks into a depression, Rick le Pariah retires to his attic to consider which of the warring parties to back. As if this wasn’t a big enough pickle the fools gold starts to shed its shiny coating and our intrepid Bsds need to replace it. The manufacturers of this tinsel are becoming tougher and demand a high price. Bsd Georges pockets are not as long as they appeared and blaming Bsd Thomas for the leak of their plot he decides to “fait-le-runner” (medieval Scouse usage for doing one!). With George back in Acrossthepond Thomas has the field to himself and he sets about planning his campaign. His pockets are not much longer than Georges but being of the ogre clan he is not debilitated by the code of chivalry (or any code for that matter). He contacts fellow ogres in Acrossthepond and offers Ellefci’s favours for sale. Finding no takers at home he comes back to Scouseland and similarly pimps her throughout Merrie England. Appalled by the behaviour of his erstwhile friend George lets it be known that even if Thomas raises the gold he will not give up his half of the combination to him. He enters negotiations with the representatives of the Eastern Sultanate with a view to saving the damsel by selling his half of the combination to them. They come from a culture different from that of Scouseland but are flush with the filthy lucre and promise to honour local customs such as the quest for the Holy Grail (Treble) To be continued: Notes. BSD. This is the Acrossthepondian equivalent of Sir and is actually short for BigSwingingDick as the Knights there are designated. Le Chasse. Acrossthepondian knights have their own form of hunt. Instead of chasing the Holy Grail (or Treble) they chase The Big Buck. They also have a form of damsel rescuing, which they call “wildcatting” where the knights will “rescue” damsels of any age whether they wish to be rescued or not. Their motto when questing so is “You have to drill 20 dry holes to find a gusher”. Their custom is to carry off the fair damsel to their own fiefdom and fatten her up for later consumption or even to be traded to their brother BSDs. I do not jest!!!
Sorry folks ignore that last post. If I try to enter via Safari or Firfox all the formatting gets lost This is in Explorer which seems to work.
The Ballad of George and Tom. A screenplay for Acrossthepond admirer’s of Ellefci.
Scene: Merrie England, the Province of Scouseland, the domain of Lord David de Moores the Baron of Anfield.
Plot: Lord David reluctantly needs to marry his youngest daughter, Elleffci, off to a rich suitor. He issues a proclamation to all parts of the known world for men of the Knightly order to come to Scouseland and “try their hand” (colloquial scouseism). Many try and fail but one day a knight short in stature but seemingly long in pocket arrives from a land called Acrossthepond. This is BSD George de Closeshave. His first offer to Lord David does not meet with approval and it seems that a rival suit from an Eastern Sultanate is finding favour. Undaunted Bsd George returns a short time later with a brother Bsd in tow. This is Bsd Thomas le Thick, a large seemingly benign specimen willing to let Bsd George press their claim for Elleffci’s hand. He is said to have longer pockets than Bsd George.
Making use of the scheming Grand Vizier to the Baron, Rick le Pariah the two acrossthepondians succeed and agree a price and a dowry for Ellefci. To their chagrin (a term seldom used in Scouseland) they find in the small print that though they can own Ellefci they cannot possess her, further, they have to live with her at the baronial court, she cannot leave Scouseland (no way would she consider a move to Acrossthepond or even nearbye Kirby?). This is the way things are done in Merrie England. To effect this Lord David has Ellefci fitted with a chastity belt to which only he has the full combination, Bsds George and Tom having only a portion of the code each.
Feeling cheated at this turn of events they conspire and agree to pay Lord David his due in filthy lucre as he requires but for the fair damsels’ dowry they produce acrossthepondian fools gold. As the months go by it becomes obvious to some that rather than being benign Bsd Thomas le Thick is in fact an ogre in disguise and means to possess Ellefci (in the biblical sense) as soon as he can. A plot is hatched with his unsuspecting partner to replace Elleffci’s loyal Captain of the Guard Rafa el Gaffa with a satrap of their own choosing (Bsd George knows a redundant officer from back home who fits the bill, Jurgen le Nearly).
In the nick of time Rafa el Gaffa discovers the plot and donning the garb of ye Towne Crier he informs the citizens of Scouseland. Le merde hits the proverbial fan. Lord David sinks into a depression, Rick le Pariah retires to his attic to consider which of the warring parties to back. As if this wasn’t a big enough pickle the fools gold starts to shed its shiny coating and our intrepid Bsds need to replace it. The manufacturers of this tinsel are becoming tougher and demand a high price. Bsd Georges pockets are not as long as they appeared and blaming Bsd Thomas for the leak of their plot he decides to “fait-le-runner” (medieval Scouse usage for doing one!).
With George back in Acrossthepond Thomas has the field to himself and he sets about planning his campaign. His pockets are not much longer than Georges but being of the ogre clan he is not debilitated by the code of chivalry (or any code for that matter). He contacts fellow ogres in Acrossthepond and offers Ellefci’s favours for sale. Finding no takers at home he comes back to Scouseland and similarly pimps her throughout Merrie England.
Appalled by the behaviour of his erstwhile friend George lets it be known that even if Thomas raises the gold he will not give up his half of the combination to him. He enters negotiations with the representatives of the Eastern Sultanate with a view to saving the damsel by selling his half of the combination to them. They come from a culture different from that of Scouseland but are flush with the filthy lucre and promise to honour local customs such as the quest for the Holy Grail (Treble)
To be continued:
Notes.
BSD. This is the Acrossthepondian equivalent of Sir and is actually short for BigSwingingDick as the Knights there are designated.
Le Chasse. Acrossthepondian knights have their own form of hunt. Instead of chasing the Holy Grail (or Treble) they chase The Big Buck. They also have a form of damsel rescuing, which they call “wildcatting” where the knights will “rescue” damsels of any age whether they wish to be rescued or not. Their motto when questing so is “You have to drill 20 dry holes to find a gusher”. Their custom is to carry off the fair damsel to their own fiefdom and fatten her up for later consumption or even to be traded to their brother BSDs. I do not jest!!!
"Dawg, if you have no emotional involvement in a situation it is easy to view those who have as caring disproportionately."
John,
My point wasn’t about how much you care about your team. I’m a sports fan. I respect that and relate. My point, as I said, was about the anti-Hicks rhetoric being disproportionate with the facts of the situation. Big difference.
Dawg and my point is that you only grade the proportionality of our rhetoric as those facts appear to you. To us those facts are well worth the response and thus proportionate. On this forum they might even be considered muted. Try posting on RAWK (Redandwhitekop) or YNWA (you’llneverwalkalone) and you will experience the wick turned right up!
The ‘anti-hicks rhetoric’ is all based on facts, not emotion - though he has managed to twig that side too.
Look, Texas_Dawg, he doesn’t have the money which is the reason why Gillett brought him in. If he does buy the club it’s because he’s just managed to scrape the finances together. Great for him, but what’s in it for us?
He and his sons can wear as many LFC scarves as they want for PR reasons but it is the case that they’re not wanted. What kind of bloody-minded man would not take the profit over the vitriol? A man who’s got his mind firmly fixed on $$$s. Great for him but in line with the ‘anti-Hicks rhetoric’.
I think its all getting a bit much for John. I am starting to question his mental health.