I think it is pertinent to look at the Hendo contract situation ( and to a lesser extent Johnson ) to reveal the rather laissez faire attitude the club has as far as some contract renewals are concerned. He wants to stay and sign but is approaching the last year of his contract so why oh why have we left it so long to pin him down. It feels as if the attitude of the club is very apathetic sometimes in these matters
Liverpool: Why do its stars want to leave?
- Thread starter gkmacca
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Yes, and that's why just saying, 'Oh, it's the same at other clubs' is ignoring the specific failings at this club. Some aspects are not at all inevitable, they're the result of eminently avoidable mistakes in attitude as much as action that have been allowed to take root over 20 or more years.
Best point in this thread. We are building at LFC. Right now we are a selling club. Until the gate revenue is fixed in 2018 or maybe even 2020 nothing will change. Arsenal is a completely different story. The stadium is in place. Great economy. They will be a huge factor if FFP is installed to the max, which it looks like it will be.
Patience is nothing new for a true LFC fan. 5 years is nothing compared to what we have already suffered.
Sell the little fucker and shop better than Lallana in the future...
don't let the hacks get to you and overplay this - we've been a punching bag for journos for ages and bored journos like nothing better than peddling the line that LFC is no longer what it was. Admittedly we are not, but the argument the journos are peddling - namely we can't hold on to our best players - is a poor one and our transfer history does not back that up, except for hte caveat below.
What is inevitable is the following: if you have a world class player who plays fanstastically well, sooner or later Real/Barca will come calling. Regardless of who you are.
No club gets it right all the time, but the biggest ones have a momentum which (a) can carry them over the dry spells and (b) ensures that they put mistakes right a.s.a.p, which we did in the glory days. Those days ended when Sir John Smith stepped down and the chairmanship passed to that well-meaning dunce Moores. A major decline was assured when he then replaced the retiring Peter Robinson with that meddling, muddling waster Rick Parry. When you recall that that incompetent regime was then replaced for a while by the Lone Ranger and Tonto before we finally managed to boot those two out, you see how deep the roots of the current situation really go. Any club suffering such a catastrophic loss of quality at the top for so long would have suffered for it as we have.
What gives me hope that we can get back to where we want to be is something which has sometimes been criticised on here and elsewhere, namely the ongoing expectations of us fans. That stuff you sometimes hear about Liverpool fans feeling "entitled" to success (on the contrary we're painfully aware that success has to be earned, because we haven't been doing so for far too long now) is meaningless rubbish, but the successful tradition LFC established pre-1990s is still in people's minds and, IMO anyway, has helped the club to avoid slipping into total mediocrity, driving it onwards almost in spite of itself at times, certainly in spite of the nomarks trying and failing to run it as its history deserved. FSG have made their share of mistakes but I do think they have a plan for bringing the good times back. Time will tell if that plan's the right one.
What gives me hope that we can get back to where we want to be is something which has sometimes been criticised on here and elsewhere, namely the ongoing expectations of us fans. That stuff you sometimes hear about Liverpool fans feeling "entitled" to success (on the contrary we're painfully aware that success has to be earned, because we haven't been doing so for far too long now) is meaningless rubbish, but the successful tradition LFC established pre-1990s is still in people's minds and, IMO anyway, has helped the club to avoid slipping into total mediocrity, driving it onwards almost in spite of itself at times, certainly in spite of the nomarks trying and failing to run it as its history deserved. FSG have made their share of mistakes but I do think they have a plan for bringing the good times back. Time will tell if that plan's the right one.
Ace perspective. We have indeed been guided by the blind for long enough to know the difference.
Getting the revenue/stadium is order is the biggest legacy FSG could ever leave and a major step I the right direction.
John Moores (John Smith???) was an Everton fan.... Not that Lady Granchester did much better.
First of all: don't, whatever you do, confuse Sir John Smith with John Moores. Sir John was a highly successful self-made businessman in his own right (owned and ran a PR company), a definite Red and chairman of LFC during most of its most successful years. He was also on the FA Council and at one stage the government got him to chair an enquiry into the state of British tennis, so his abilities were well known and respected far beyond LFC.
As for the Moores family, they've always been mostly bluenoses. I have a theory for why David Moores became an exception to that, namely that as the runt of the litter, a bonehead surrounded by numerous high-achieving relatives, he had to try and find another way of holding his head up among them all. That said, the Moores family have done a lot of good for the whole city, which is why we approached them decades ago when we were looking for a cash injection. Some might think the fact that David Moores became chairman around that time is coincidental. I couldn't possibly comment, but it's a fact that he failed to make it both in the family business and in a record shop which they then bought for him. You do the math, as our American cousins say.
As for the Moores family, they've always been mostly bluenoses. I have a theory for why David Moores became an exception to that, namely that as the runt of the litter, a bonehead surrounded by numerous high-achieving relatives, he had to try and find another way of holding his head up among them all. That said, the Moores family have done a lot of good for the whole city, which is why we approached them decades ago when we were looking for a cash injection. Some might think the fact that David Moores became chairman around that time is coincidental. I couldn't possibly comment, but it's a fact that he failed to make it both in the family business and in a record shop which they then bought for him. You do the math, as our American cousins say.
Owen, Torres, Reina, and Mascherano all wanted to leave when we were on a downward curve. None of them wanted to leave when we were doing well and looking like we were building something great.
If we had spent properly after our treble season or spent properly after we came second under Rafa, I'm not convinced that would be the case.
I think our yo-yoing is a big part of it...
If we had spent properly after our treble season or spent properly after we came second under Rafa, I'm not convinced that would be the case.
I think our yo-yoing is a big part of it...
True, but if he had his way he would be at Arsenal or Man Utd or somewhere else sooner.
Sorry but I'm not wrong. I'm aware of John Moores' shareholding, but he himself was a bluenose. Fact.
As for your second sentence, we Brits have a saying that "There's many a true word spoken in jest".
As for your second sentence, we Brits have a saying that "There's many a true word spoken in jest".
But he didn't leave, he was booted out. I'm not into alternative realities and counterfactuals. He didn't belong in that list.
Because in a nut shell. . We are shit..
Rubbish. He was always a Red - that's *why* the chairmanship was given to him.
You then posted that bit about his shareholding in both clubs, which made it look as though you were trying to go back on what you had said before.
- Status
