Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Mourinho, Ancelotti, Hiddink, O'Neil. There's four names for you Anna. I'm not sure you'd have got Jose but I bet you could have made a good fist of getting the others and they would all be suitable replacements. I don't believe a club with your history couldn't attract a manager to replace Rafa.

And we could afford all of them given they all have existing contracts?! Rafa is going nowhere and neither do I want him to. None of that lot would come here given the financial restrictions. Maybe O'Neill would come, but he's a yes man and I would never want him here. I think Rafa has stayed due to his loyalty to the fans. Anyone else would have walked by now.


Mick, i'm still waiting for your tactical football manager genius on what you'd have done differently last night?

It just makes me laugh Anna that you seem to think that people who can afford to go to all the matches, somehow have more right to an opinion than people who can't. Until last season, you watched a lot of matches from your sofa, did your opinions not count back then? Last thing I want to do is have a go at you, but you're always posting shit like that, and it's annoying.

My point is Keef, that people who go to the games tend to know more about what is going on rather than taking their facts from sky pundits and the press. You mix with the locals and matchgoers and you tend to get inside info. Everyone I know who goes, wants Rafa to stay yet those who watch it on the telly want him out. What does that tell you? Nothing to do with money or being a better fan. It really pisses me off when I put my heart and soul in to this team and people who don't seem to grasp "the facts" are hounding Rafa out.

And I do take it as you having a go so offence is taken. You chose to spend your money on your family, I spend mine on the match. Everyone has a choice.

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Oh Mick, quit the Rafa bashing -its tiresome!

> Tell me what you would have done differently oh

> mighty one? Because I don't think he could have

> done much more last night. And while you're at it,

> tell who you'd replace Rafa with.

>

> People were ringing 606 from the comfort of their

> armchairs to slate the manager when they can't

> even be bothered to get to off their arses and

> actually support the team? Well I never - that's

> never happened before.

>

> P.S - it was pen from where I was sat, but given

> it was at the other end of the pitch and I was in

> the gods of the Kop its not fair I make a

> judgement. If he did dive then its a shame and I

> don't want that at Liverpool and won't defend it.

>

>

> We deserve some luck though. I can think of at

> least two situations where we had a penalty shout

> this season and got nothing. Its just a shame

> Birmingham were on the receiving end. Mind you if

> you park the team bus in front of goal then you

> only deserve a draw.


Nailed on penalty for me, luck is one thing, but this wasn't lucky.

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Maybe O'Neill would come, but he's a yes man and I

> would never want him here.


Thats news to me Anna - Martin O'Neill a yes man - you are having a laugh.



> Mick, i'm still waiting for your tactical football

> manager genius on what you'd have done differently

> last night?


Look at the EDF Super Liga FF table and see evidence my management genius - I have brought a poor team from bottom to 6th - so I think you have to accept I know what I am talking about when it comes to management. I'm on your tail.

Well if you've taken offence then I'm sorry, but I still don't think that terrace chat is "fact". Simple fact is, the owners are liverpool's biggest problem, but they are hard nosed businessmen, who definitely aren't going anywhere because the fans tell them to. So, if we just accept that they own the club for now, and the foreseeable future, will Rafa take the club further, or is he as far as he can go, until a mega rich owner comes along? Personally, I don't base my opinions on what anyone says, I just watch the match, or the highlights, and decide for myself. I don't want Rafa out, and don't think there is anyone to replace him just now. However, I don't think he's the best manager in the world.

Do you actually have to touch someone for it to be a foul? If the Liv player hadn't jumped, Carsley would certainly have made contact with him, no? The fact he didn't touch him was because the player hurdled the tackle. The tackler definitely didn't get any ball, did he?


Ngog could have left his foot dragging, like experienced penalty winners do, and drawn the penalty that way. Or he could have made a massive effort to stay on his feet, probably losing the ball as a result of Carsely's slide (that never won the ball).

No you don't have to touch a player - but I think for it to be given as a foul it has to be seen as a foul would have taken place if the opponent had not taken measures to avoid contact. In the case of Ngog it wasn't remotely anywhere near being a foul. The weird thing about Ngog's dive was he was always in control of the ball and if he hadn't decided to go down it looked like a simple pull back for Yossi to equalize on edge of 6 yard box. Liverpool were pushing very hard at this point in the game and the momentum was such that I felt an equalizer was inevitable. But as Anna said we've been denied a lot more cast iron penalties this season than ones awarded for cheating.
Apparently a foul can be given for "intent" but how do you prove "intent"? I still think it was a blatant dive and I'm not convinced that the was hurdling the challenge, if so why didn't he just leave his foot in to eliminate all doubt? Sorry blatant dive for me.

Ted Max Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Do you actually have to touch someone for it to be

> a foul?

>

> Does anyone know the answer to this?


Contact is not necessary Ted - "kicks or attempts to kick"/"trips or attempts to trip" is an offence - if there is no contact its seems to rest on intent.


Laws - see page 32

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "You chose to spend your money on your family, I

> spend mine on the match. Everyone has a choice."

>

> That seems like a sensible perspective. Keef,

> stop wasting your money on that kid and start a

> standing order to the Rafa Transfer Fund.



Interpret that how you like. Keef chose to get married and have children. I chose not to therefore, I can spend my earnings on what I like, i.e. going to the football.

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • You're being a little disingenuous here. It is simply not true that "the area should remain suburban 2/3 storeys maximum" because: -> the area the development is in isn't 2/3 storeys maximum today - as evidenced by the school on the lot adjoining the development to the south, as well as the similarly-sized buildings to the north and east.  -> the SPG doesn't preclude this type of development anyway. This "genie in a bottle" stuff is desperate barrel-scraping. Now you're raising the spectre of a 9 storey building on the Gibbs & Dandy site (the chance would be a fine thing) but also arguing Southwark is too slow to approve things and opposed to development more than 2-3 storeys!
    • The sites in question though are not comparable to the builders yard by the station and less likely to be granted planning permission for 9 storey buildings. The builders yard fronts on to the railway line on one side and virtually no residential property surrounding on the other sides. The Gibbs & Dandy /Kwikfit and ED trading trading estate are surrounded at close proximity by residential, and in the case of the latter a Grade II building, so there would more stringent height restrictions. Both these sites are tired and sad looking, and in need of development to provide much needed housing.
    • Not sure if this is any help but was initally told to use google chrome as the browser and the code was the reference. However the person at Southwark parking took pity on me and did it for me 
    • I can see how it could've worked 20 or 30 years ago, when you couldn't swing a pool cue in the Foresters without hitting a sparks, a plumber or a chippy, but the area has changed somewhat. I'm not sure people around here have such trade-able skills these days. Have a word with someone in your local and you'll see. People are always going to need their boiler fixed, a damp patch sorted or their dimmer switch dimmed, but I can pretty much guarantee I'm never going need my corporate policy complied with, my social media planned, my data mined, my green transport tsared, my information architected or my analytics analysed. It reminds me of the great DIY con of the mid to late seventies. My Mum bought into it, my Dad didn't. Anyway, my Mum won out and we let the gardener go (he went on to be TV's Timmy Mallett, so that's a warning from history), but my Dad shorted the house out and singed his head when he cut through the flex on his new Black & Decker hedge trimmer. We all laughed, of course, but he got his own back when, because we didn't use a qualified electrician to do things properly, she electrocuted herself when she pulled the back of the plug off her Carmen heated rollers while it was still in the socket. Keep things professional, say 'No!' to this sort of nonsense. We pay people a decent rate of pay because they're specialists at these things. I did once barter my sister's space hopper and roller skates for twenty-odd square foot of crazy paving, though. That was a birthday present my Mum never forgot, and not in a good way.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...