Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

Football 2013-2014


Guest kaosmark2

Recommended Posts

  • Admin

Still for the team with the 5th biggest wage budget to come 1st is a great achievement, rarely seen in other countries.

If you look at Liverpool's first 11, they're around as good as anyone's (and that's something I've been appreciating for longer than many have). So perhaps it's not really so surprising.

What Liverpool lack are the back-ups (tho that situation is improving), and where they've got lucky this season is with having injuries to players where they do have more-decent cover than in some other positions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hold on, are you actually saying that it's not a massive advantage for Liverpool to only have to worry about the league? Look at Chelsea and City's results around European games - on average they are significantly worse than when they had only domestic football to worry about. Had Liverpool been competing in the Champions League they would be around 10 points worse off I reckon. On the flip side, had either Chelsea or City not been in Europe they woud probably have had the title wrapped up by now. Liverpool are, at best, the third best team but that doesn't mean they won't win the league.

Edited by strummer77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think everyone's just arguing different points here. Wooderson's saying Liverpool (as a club) aren't at an advantage due to not being in the CL, and ptg's saying the squad itself is at an advantage due to not being in the CL, and therefore winning the league won't prove they are the best team in the league. I agree with both. Apologies if I'm spouting shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what's the strangest thing about our game today? The starting 2-3-2-3 formation? An Englishman scoring for Newcastle? Ameobi scoring? Newcastle getting the first goal of the 3pm kickoffs?

Edited by kaosmark2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you seriously suggesting it is not advantageous to have CL football?

I think it evens out. Chelsea and City got to build huge squads because they have CL football. Liverpool don't have that luxury. Liverpool in the CL with this squad probably would be worse off - but this squad would be a lot better if we were in CL so it is a futile point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure city and chelsea are the best examples. They have the squads largely because they have owners willing to invest money with no return. Not that this is a criticism, I think in general chelsea and city have added more variety to the league.

Liverpool probably should be compared to man u and arsenal who both want success and profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you misunderstood my point. What I'm saying is that Liverpool are playing by the same rules as Man U and arsenal in terms of having owners who want to make money from the clubs, rather than Chelsea and city who are intentionally running at a loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to a game as a neutral for the first time today. St. Mirren vs. Hibs. Enjoyed myself. A good turnout for both teams and a generally good atmosphere, although a goal for the home side after 13 seconds is a good way to ease tension.

Plan on doing this more often. Heading for Dumbarton next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Yeah I do agree on the 2 hour thing. But if they were subbed by Biffy/WA only doing 75 mins or so would be doable.   Only reason I suggested them was because we know they're back doing shows here next year. 
    • Its probably the culmination of issues that have been simmering under the surface for a while. Spain ran a regularisation program recently that allows undocumented individuals to obtain temporary legal status and then a route to EU citizenship. 1.2 million applied. At the same time Montenegro is having to close its citizenship via investment program as part of EU ascension talks.    Countries are obviously asking, why are we having to reject investors whilst others can wave anyone in?
    • I'm not sure, they aren't giving any headliner in that format 2hours and Foos would have at least 2. I wouldn't say Reading is likely for them next year either. If they are as said going big on a tour with stadiums and festivals then the UK is once place they can definitely do stadiums and that would rule them out. And that's even if they come back for a second UK stint as I fully expect them in Europe from very early. That could be seen as hyperthetical but there are is some places I cannot see them not doing from history.
    • One problem could be that many of the hospitality packages are already sold out. Unless you’ve a media contact, media organisations normally get a hospitality allocation.
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...