Interesting though that all trouble English fans have caused this year in Europe has been outside of England. His praise of English fans over a two legged affair in London and Liverpool probably was more of a PR exercise outwith of anything else. For the record I think its unfair to call Liverpool the worst fans in Europe. Lazio, Rangers are two clubs worse imo. Liverpools fans behaviour has been appalling at times though and not comparable with many other clubs in Europe.
âThereâs a place we know where Scousers go and itâs always lots of fun,
you can have a laugh at many things if youâre ready with a pun.
You can mock the dead of Munich be glad that George Bestâs dead,
you can sing a dozen funny songs of Duncan Edwardâs head.
You can hope that Gary Neville gets cancer and he dies,
throw ammonia at Whiteside and hope it blinds his eyes.
You can even stone an ambulance where Alan Smith is lying,
even if it doesnât overturn itâs bound to be fun trying.
You can talk of many pleasant things with your like-minded mates,
but youâll pause to show such reverence as you pass the Shankly Gates.
Where every single Scouser who ever passed away,
must be honoured and respected have their own special day.
'Cos Scousers are a special breed their hearts upon their sleeve,
they ask the country to join in and watch them as they grieve.
They celebrate and they respect each Scouser who departs,
they ask that we can shed their tears and nurse their broken hearts.
Yet mention dead of anyone who doesnât fit their own,
they laugh out loud there is no shred of honour ever shown.
They laugh at young men dying on runways filled with ice,
and celebrate that Munich day and never would think twice.
Of mocking Harold Shipmanâs dead that lived within our city,
these wallowers in plastic grief the masters of self pity.
They wave their tin foil silverware and throw cups filled with sh**
to shower on opposing fans but never will admit
Itâs âjustice for the 96â but never 39,
Itâs grieving for âpoorâ Michael Shields but not for Heysel dying,
Itâs always everybody else theyâre not the ones to blame,
It was Chelsea, Yorkshire coppers itâs always been the same,
Weâve all shed tears as 96 lay dying on the floor
but our sympathy has long since died weâll grieve with you no more.â
your too late, thats been posted already
Iâll tell you what annoys me most about this whole thing, itâs the Liverpool fans who complain about the ticket allocations being a cause of the problem. Iâve heard people complaining that too many tickets went to sponsors and corporate tickets so it was inevitable there would be too much demand for tickets, creating a problematic situation that UEFA might have anticipated. Thatâs true but what did Liverpool fans do to intervene? Theyâve welcomed their American owners with open arms, happy to sell their club to the men with the deepest pockets and then complain about the amount of tickets reserved for big wigs.
Not all Liverpool fans fall into that category, some did express reservations. But the vast majority wanted money and money alone from their new owners (there wasnât even much of a protest about the dubious Thai owner).
This quote from LFC co-owner Tom Hicks takes the biscuit:
âTo give 17,000 tickets to the two teams, particularly knowing Liverpool are going to bring 40,000 fans, is insaneâ - this was after LFC withheld 6,000 of their allocation for corporate types.
Or on May 29 1985 when Liverpool supporters went on the rampage in Heysel and killed 39 Juventus supporters.
Platini got the winner that night by the way.
Here I am lads
Firstly out of all of this Platini has come across as the the tosser that I always suspected that he was. He praises Liverpool fans, then calls them the worst in Europe and then finally tonight says that they are not after speaking to the Minister for Sport from the UK. What an absolute spineles fucker. And this is also the guy Raven who âdanced on the deadâ after scoring the penalty in 1985. I am not trying to deflect attention from the Liverpool fans that night but his celebrtations after scoring the winning goal sums him up as a shallow, principal free gobshite.
Anyway I have been over the actions of the Liverpool fans in Heysel that night and I am not going to do it again. I havenât seen much of the Athens incident but from what I can gather the fans acted disgracefully by storming the stadium. Liverpool fans are not well behaved
As for Raven and Piper wanting an apology on me calling them anti-English on the basis that Liverpool have been called the best and worse and not worse fans in Europe⌠do you know what Iâm not even going to bother
Where did I ask for an apology farmer? I donât regard myself as being anti-English but if you can only throw around insults without any justification then Iâll let the other posters make up their minds. I agree with you on Platini and I think he is just probably power hungry. I would also like to applaud your condemnation of the Liverpool supporters. As I have said before on this thread while they are not the worst set of supporters in Europe they are certainly nowhere near the best. Goodnight.
Thousands of supporters down through the years across a huge range of teams have gone ticketless to games and enjoyed the atmosphere in the city the finalâs taken place in. On the other hand thereâs very few sets of supporters who steal tickets from each other, physically assault each other and then try to rush and storm through security barriers. It reflects absolutely horribly on Liverpool supporters in the wake of Heysel and Hillsborough and frankly the English media arguing over the semantics of whether there actually are any set of supporters more deserving of the âworst supporters in the worldâ tag is absolutely pathetic.
some LFC fans with no tickets tried to get into an fa cup semi final, through bad policng this led to a crush - 94 people died
There is no evidence that fans without tickets led to a crush. The crush was caused by bad policing - whether there were fans without tickets or not was irrelevant.
Also it was farily standard fare at the time that people would squeeze through two people on one ticket etc.
The point that Liverpool fans should have known better in Athens after what had happened at Hillsborough is valid of course. But the point about tickets is wrong and inflammatory.
Not sure how reliable a source Wikipedia is on the Hillsborough disaster.
Your comments earlier were â(âŚ) fans with no tickets tried to get into an fa cup semi final, through bad policing this led to a crush (âŚ)â
This means that fans with no tickets caused the crush which was facilitated by bad policing. I donât think thatâs what you meant to say but thatâs the only reason I picked up on it. Bad policing was the cause of the crush, ticketless fans may have been one of the reasons for the bad policing.
that article is the most sensible one i have read since this debate started.
Does anyone know if and when Liverpoolâs punishment will be decided?
Decent article on Torres from the Guardian. Lowe is a very good writer and his opinions are generally bang-on.
Will Torres be Kopâs new God or just another Fernando?
Liverpoolâs record signing has a point to prove to the doubters back home. Can he live up to expectations at Anfield?
Sid Lowe
July 4, 2007 12:41 AM
Fernando Torres is used to the weight of expectation on his shoulders. He joined Atltico Madrid, his boyhood team, at 11, rejected an offer from Real Madrid at 12, had a 3m buy-out clause at 15, made his debut at 17, captained the club at 19 and won his first cap before he was 20. He alone has carried the hopes of one of Spainâs biggest clubs for seven long years - and still he is only 23. Now he has to pull on the No9 shirt worn by the man the Kop called God and prove that Liverpoolâs manager is not insane.
By splashing 27m on Torres, Rafael Bentez has almost doubled the amount spent on Liverpoolâs previous record signing, Djibril Ciss, making âThe Kidâ the most expensive Spaniard ever. It is a gamble, one on which Bentezâs legacy, and his reputation, may well rest; one which, at three times the fee, will have to pay far greater dividends than the last time Bentez brought a centre-forward called Fernando to Anfield. Morientes came with a big reputation and departed having scored eight league goals in 41 league games. For Torres, the pressure is on.
On the face of it he has the credentials to rise to the challenge. He had scored 64 goals before he was 13 and got another 68 over the next two seasons, breaking a club record. At 14 he won the Nike Cup, being named the best Under-15 player in Europe, at 16 he led Atltico to the national juvenile league, and then he was the leading scorer and player of the tournament as Spain won the Under-16 European Championship, hitting the winner in the final. He repeated the feat in the Under-19 championship.
When he made his Atltico debut it was on the orders of the chairman, Miguel ngel Gil Marn, responding to the restlessness of fans desperate to see the player about whom they had heard so much, the saviour who would lead them out of the second division - or âhellâ as the former owner Jess Gil dubbed it. The pressure did not faze Torres and in his second match, against Albacete, he came on and changed the game, provoking two sendings-off and scoring the winner.
Since Atlticoâs return to the First Division in 2002 he has been their top scorer every season. He has scored 75 times in 173 games, twice finishing as La Ligaâs top-scoring Spaniard, never failing to get into double figures. Over the past four seasons only Samuel Etoâo and David Villa have scored more league goals.
And yet there have always been doubts. Torres divides Spain. He is an idol and a star, his raw talent unquestionable, but for some he almost became a figure of fun as well, capable of combining the most brilliant goals with the most incredible misses. When Spain drew 0-0 with Russia in a pre-World Cup friendly he was booed by Spain fans. On one occasion he got the ball, spun his marker, played a quick one-two, dashed clear leaving his defender for dead . . . and put the ball wide. It was, they said, classic Torres.
If Atltico fans indulged him his misses, won over by his love for the club and all too aware that they were watching a one-man team, others were less charitable. He did not do it when it mattered, they said - in 10 games against Real Madrid he has scored once and, for all the millions spent, Atltico have not secured a European place since his debut. He missed too many chances, they said, look at his record.
Torres has pace, power, athleticism and bags of skill, and he frightens defences with his direct running, but where are the goals? Not once has he scored 20 in a league season and, of the 19 he scored in 2003-04, six were penalties. In fact, subtract the penalties and he has twice scored 13 and twice 10 in the past four years.
Even his World Cup, with three goals, only temporarily won over the fans. When Luis Aragons left him out of a friendly with Romania last winter, more than 80% of those polled agreed with the decision. Aragons admitted that he had done it to shake Torres out of a rut.
And yet Bentez would be entitled to believe that the rut in question is Atltico Madrid. If Liverpool see in Torres a man who will get them 25 goals a season, they may be disappointed; he is no Fowler. But he is blessed with immense talent and the change may be exactly what he needs, not least because - too intelligent, too grounded, too open-minded - he is no Jos Antonio Reyes. Leaving Spain will not sink him. It may be the making of him.
Freed from an underachieving chaotic club where he has had seven managers and no support, where he has been burdened with too much too young, where he has, by his own admission, grown weary, maybe the brilliant player can be released - and the goals will follow.
After all, how many players would have scored the goals he has with a team like Atletico? When their sporting director, Jess Garca Pitarch, recently admitted, âItâs ridiculous really that Fernando is still with usâ, the fans saw truth in his words. So, more importantly, did Torres, who finally feels that he has a club, a coach and team-mates worthy of him. Now he has to prove he is worthy of Bentezâs gamble.
Article on Benitez from todayâs Guardian below. I only saw Robbie Keaneâs second goal at the weekend but it was shocking defending. Macsherano was standing alongside Keane when the kick was taken. He simply didnât bother even walking back with him which to be honest is dreadful professionalism and Iâd drop him immediately for that if I was Liverpool manager. Equally worrying was the decision by Hyppia or Carragher to let Hyppia attack the ball.
Looking at the game from behind the goal Carragher was standing on the right hand side of the defence with Berbatov in front of him. The long free kick was played to Berbatov but either by agreement beforehand or by stupid âbraveryâ Hyppia decided he was attacking the ball. If this was the agreed strategy then Carragher was far too late in dropping back left to cover a flick on. If it wasnât agreed beforehand then this was stupid from Hyppia because he left a massive hole.
Either way it was an awful goal to concede from a defensive point of view and one that good managers should be able to iron out. Too many centre halves these days try and emulate the John Terry school of defending. Looks 100% committed bravery when it comes off but itâs an unneccessarily high risk strategy to try and win every ball in the air.
Bentez must shake off conservative streak if Reds are to gain power
Rafa Bentez needs to find some spontaneity in his Liverpool team if they are to challenge for the title.
Kevin McCarra
October 9, 2007 12:54 AM
Stoppage time euphoria at Anfield barely lasted until the end of the game. By then the home supportâs pleasure over Fernando Torresâs equaliser against Tottenham had already been overtaken by unavoidable calculations. At the close of the weekend, Liverpool had been held to a draw while Arsenal and Manchester United both won at home.
Fans must have been striving to ignore that old slipping feeling as their team slithered to be six points off the lead. Yet another Liverpool title bid is in difficulties, even though Rafael Bentez had made it his priority. When the Premier League resumes they must go to Everton, take on Arsenal at Anfield and face a surely gruelling game at Blackburn Rovers.
The fear has re-emerged that the Spaniardâs detailed, mechanistic approach is fitted to set-piece occasions but does not allow the spontaneity that made United champions last season and that has installed Arsenal at the head of the table.
Such irrepressible football makes other affluent clubs look bad. Pragmatism is denounced the instant it stops working and, in Roman Abramovichâs case, there was no reservoir of affection to keep Jose Mourinho in his post at Chelsea. There are well-known episodes to explain Bentezâs clear dislike of the Portuguese, but perhaps this was also an antipathy between people with too much in common.
While each can claim great accomplishments, both are associated for the time being with tedium. Bentez resorted to a seemingly common- sensical view that defensive bungles cost Liverpool a win on Sunday. Even if Sami Hyypia was twice outjumped it will have enraged the manager even more that Robbie Keane was free to score from Dimitar Berbatovâs flicks. None the less, Liverpoolâs two goals do not show that the side were effective on the attack.
Tottenham have been inadvertent collaborators all season. At the first goal for Bentezâs side, Andriy Voronin turned in a loose ball following a Steven Gerrard free-kick that was neither held by Paul Robinson nor pushed to safety. The leveller mortified Martin Jol even as it failed utterly to surprise him. He sighed that with time running out there was little else Liverpool could do but hit a deep cross and hope for a Torres header. These visitors donât guard against even the obvious.
In reality, the game did not differ much from those when Liverpool have been goalless at home, as they were in the draw with Birmingham City and last Wednesdayâs Champions League loss to Marseille. The side cannot shake off their dependence on Gerrard, even though his season was disrupted by a broken toe and the debate over his return from it to play for England. Jamie Carragher, another stalwart, has suffered a disrupted campaign, too, after enduring a fractured rib and a collapsed lung at Sunderland in August.
Bentez had aimed to avoid a dependence on one or two players and, furthermore, his purchases were meant to ensure a broader repertoire. The strategy has yet to work and only those in awe of a 6-0 trouncing of Derby County can believe that Liverpool really are ready to run amok.
The team barely believed in itself after Tottenham had gone in front. Torres has done well enough, considering that his back must be bowed by a transfer fee that could ultimately approach 27m, and Voronin, with his runs from deep positions, is a good Bosman signing. All the same, they will not be taking the Premier League by storm in the immediate future and any forward will be hindered by a staidness in midfield that Gerrard is too often asked to transcend.
Bentez also sought to address that concern in the close season, but he is having to be patient with the 20-year-old Dutchman Ryan Babel, an 11.5m signing from Ajax. He was a substitute against Tottenham and no finesse was to be anticipated from the hard-running John Arne Riise, who occupied the left-midfield berth. Liverpoolâs manager did buy himself a schemer in Yossi Benayoun, but there is no suggestion yet that he will be a regular starter.
A project has been embarked upon that is wise in principle. There are new personnel to broaden the range, but Bentezâs pragmatism looms over all that Liverpool do. Can he really overcome his own conservatism to inspire a free-spirited philosophy that will keep pace with Arsenal and, now that they are starting to find their rhythm, United?
In the short term, Bentez may have to curb his squad rotation and depend more regularly on his best performers, even if they did let him down on Sunday. The freshest of footballers will be of no help if there is nothing left to play for come the spring.
More than decent article from todayâs Guardian online on why Gerrard should not be playing centre midfield for Liverpool. Presents a fairly compelling case for why Gerrard shouldnât play in the middle of the park and as Iâve stated previously on here - Iâm very much inclined to agree. He simply doesnât get on the ball enough to be a midfield fulcrum and heâs not careful enough with the ball. The number of times Keane used to get the ball off the full backs and knock it back or square or a couple of yards forward was unreal. Gerrard wants to do more with the ball. As the author below points out, thatâs fine from a wide position or playing off a striker. Every team needs possession from their midfield though and thatâs Gerrardâs big problem.
Time for Bentez to give Gerrard a wide berth
The root cause of Liverpoolâs poor form isnât Rafa Bentezâs tinkering; itâs playing Steven Gerrard in central midfield.
Scott Murray
October 11, 2007 12:04 PM
The received wisdom regarding Liverpool Football Clubâs current malaise, in a nutshell, for you, now, right here on Guardian Unlimited: Rafael Bentez simply canât stop tinkering with that team!
So there you have it. Pithy and precise, and everyoneâs saying it. Problem is, like so many handed-down truisms - eating up your crusts puts hair on your chest, carrots make you see better at night, whipping it out just before showtime is a foolproof method of contraception - it doesnât actually have that much basis in fact. Hereâs a different suggestion: rotation isnât Liverpoolâs problem at all. In fact, almost the opposite is the case, because the root cause of their patchy form is Bentezâs dogged persistence with playing one particular player in one particular position all the time.
Steven Gerrard should not, under any circumstances, be playing in central midfield.
To clarify, Gerrard is a fine player. His strengths are manifold: goalscoring ability, pace, power, desire, determination, beginning, to, sound, like, Hansen, on, autopilot, now. But tactical discipline? An ability to dictate the play? An eye for the clever pass - and that means consistently, not just the occasional delivery to feet of a Hollywood ball? No. Nope. Yes - but no. In other words, for all Gerrardâs world-class talent, heâs simply not a player to place at the heart of a team.
When Manchester United built a side around a central midfielder, they did so around the ultra-dependable Roy Keane. A talented right-sided midfielder harboured ambitions to play there too, but was told by Sir Alex Ferguson in no uncertain terms to stay out of harmâs way on the right, where his many talents would be utilised as and when - but never, ever depended upon to keep the team ticking over.
David Beckhamâs high-water mark of achievement - the seasons between 1998 and 2001 - were spent out on the wing. Yet amazingly, his signature performance is considered by many to be his 13,447km rampage around the middle of Old Trafford in an England shirt against Greece. Nice free-kick and all, but the main reason that dramatic last-minute intervention was required was because the scoring hero spent the majority of the match haring hither and yon in spectacularly undisciplined fashion, gaps appearing all over the pitch as team-mates attempted to cover. So he really wanted to play there? Tough. A decision from which Ferguson never wavered - and who, given Beckhamâs post-United meanderings, would argue with that assessment now?
Itâs an instructive comparison. Gerrardâs appearance in the centre of Liverpoolâs midfield has had an undeniably unbalancing effect. Consider the clubâs recent run of form. Against Sunderland, Toulouse and Derby, without Gerrard in the team and two central midfielders in the centre of midfield, Liverpool scored 12 goals in three games. The 203 minutes after Gerrardâs return to the middle? Three matches, one goal, no wins. So Sunderland, Toulouse and Derby arenât any great shakes? Well, neither are Portsmouth, Porto or Birmingham, teams Liverpool failed to put to the sword (unlike Reading, who were tonked for four, with guess who on the bench). Marseille and Tottenham are better sides - barely better, but better none the less - and look what happened there. Gerrard flailing helplessly, 40-yard passes sailing serenely into the dark of the stands, 11 men without drive.
If Beckhamâs signature performance snaps everything into focus, so does Gerrardâs. With the player in the middle, Liverpool were stripped naked during that first half in Istanbul; it was only when Didi Hamann came on to wrest control of the midfield, and Gerrard was shunted into a less responsible role, that he had the astounding effect we know he can.
In fairness, Gerrard can show tactical discipline - once Liverpool drew level against Milan, he wasnât half bad for the last hour at right-back against Serginho - but then again he wasnât being afforded the responsibility of dictating the entire game. To be a top-level central midfielder at a major club, itâs got to be the whole package at once, or nothing.
Liverpool have a perfectly serviceable central midfield partnership in Javier Mascherano, who scarcely has a peer in world football when it comes to harrying and tackling, and Xabi Alonso, who when even woefully out-of-form as he is, shames Gerrard with his range of passing. This isnât to say Gerrard doesnât have a vital role to play for his side: out right, or perhaps just behind the front man, positions from where he has posed - and can continue to pose - immeasurable danger. Just not in the centre. So he really, really, really wants to play there? Tough.
Gerrard has always argued his best - and most desired - position is in the middle. Itâs impossible to know what behind-the-scenes promises have been made to keep him happy at Liverpool - though if any deals have been brokered to ensure his continued presence at the club, they shouldnât have been. Bentez needs to give over his centre midfield to players who have the ability to dictate, prompt, playmake and pass. Being an incredibly talented and driven attacking midfielder doesnât necessarily mean a player can do this. Gerrard should be happy enough to play for - and captain - the club he supported as a boy on the right, or off the front man, or⌠well, wherever, really. Just so long as heâs well away from the heat of the engine room.
But if that doesnât make him happy, Liverpool should consider what to many might seem unthinkable: they should cash in, and get rid.