KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum On our knees

the difference in your opinion and some other peoples (who agree with you) is that its possible to debate with you. you back up your belief's with reasons, which is the basis for debate.

you cant have a reasoned debate with people that just state their belief's as facts, and when you do try to they either ignore you or repost the same thing over and over again.

down voting someone's comment would only remove that comment if it reached a very high no of thumbs down.
it would not remove the person who posted the comment.

most of the time if your comment has been down voted to say -200 it's usually because its complete nonsense.

im not saying everyone should agree (that would be impossible and boring) but if you see a well reasoned post that you liked reading then as it stands most of us reply with +1 anyway.

You are holding against them your own assumption of failure.
Look at their net transfer spend since they arrived (ignoring the current window). They have spend far more than I would have expected. If it continues then I can not have a go at them for trying to build the team.

The stadium is about balancing the finances. The council has always been against helping us. Their stance was you pay for it all and we (the community) will then benefit. This stance has now changed but only because a building partner has joined in to redevelop the area. We now have no option but to wait for the council to move people out. It was rumoured a few months ago that the club would have an announcement at the end of August. This could be that the space is available for development and we can then apply for the permissions needed.


To give some balance. I have seen nothing but them trying to do the right thing for the club. This means that I give then the benefit of doubt when the information or knowledge is not known.
Regarding the team, I use the presumed knowledge of the net spend as a stick to judge their commitment. The commitment to the team is different to the progress the team makes.
I admit that there is a massive question mark in this window, but I can only draw conclusions at the end of it. If it closed now I would be far from happy, but I would give them January.

yes I can see the theory in what you say but how do you control the people who delibrately give you thumbs down because they don't like you or previous posts on other threads. Just say for instance you or me put on a post saying you think FSG are doing a terrible job, a person who thinks they are doing a great job will straight away give you a thumbs down simply because he doesn't agree with your post, if you make a point which proves somebody wrong the person on the receiving end will do his utmost to get even with you which would leave the system open to abuse, there are too many sensative souls on here not to let things get personal, look the way they are with me...

What you're saying, is you need to see progress physically with the stadium. But you are disregarding all the work that has to do be done behind the scenes before any of that is possible. As a student architect, I know that big projects take a lot of time to get off the ground. Most of the time this takes a couple of years, especially the case with historic building that are already existing. Given that the club have already said that announcements are going to be made once the buildings have been purchased, bemoaning the fact you haven't seen a building come down seems a little ridiculous.



Firstly, how are all the players sub-standard? I know it is a matter of opinion, but one of the players we've signed just won player of the year for the North-East. The other from the UK is a leader and proven winner, and 3 years younger than the guy he has come into replace. Then you're judging the players from abroad, that I am sure 99% of people on here haven't seen play for a full season, before they've had time to settle or even played a single competitive match for the club. On previous record, we also signed Coutinho and Sturridge, who both played for top clubs before us, and have proven astute buys. It is not about being positive, but randomly criticising players who haven';t even played a game for a club seems a little OTT.



Pretty sure the club can, or else Skrtel, Agger, Suarez and Gerrard wouldn't have signed new deals. The point, was to rid the club of experienced players who were no longer offering the quality we intended to pay for. Why should the club pay Downing £70k a week when his contribution to our seasons has barely been worth £7k? Why should Reina pick up more than any keeper in the Premier League when his performances have been matched by keepers on a fifth of that? It is not like we are recklessly just selling players. We are just selling those that either don't fit with the current style of play, or do, and have not performed well enough.




You at least have not gone down your customary route of saying it is impossible. But in all honesty, look at what our main competition for 4th spot has done this window. Spurs have been looking to sell good young players like Caulker to fund moves. They are also potentially losing the guy that dictated all of their good moves last season. They have signed a striker, but have been looking to move on all their other ones. Arsenal have signed 1 young kid, and are loaning and selling some of their squad players. As yet, they haven't spent money. We have. We have, albeit arguably, improved players like for like, or at least the potential to have. Aspas is an improvement on not having another striker. Alberto is an improvement on an under-performing and at times reckless Shelvey. It is fine to say points, but where is the justification. If you know that our new signings are not very good then let us know why you think that, don't just state it.

sometimes I agree with you and I can see the funny side of your posts, when this happens I would give you thumbs up.

other times i think your just trying to wind people up and on those occasions i would thumbs down.

I think the spend since they took over is slightly false as it includes the crazy kenny and comoli era when we overpaid for poor players. That was not FSG,s fault but they did appoint kenny.

The council have acted fairly on the new stadium which has been dragging on now for almost a decade. When and if it ever gets started it will be a second best option on the new Stanley park build which in turn is a second best option to another area in the city with better transport links such as Speke.

Its fine being optimistic but if this situation satifies you then fine but I think it is a disaster my city and utd mates just pity me now we no longer argue who is best there is nothing to argue over.

Much the same. I don't think having a counter will mean people would just thumbs down targeted people. If they did, I'm sure a MOD would be able to see that and talk to the person in question.

see how it works thumbs up JJ. simple really

@ StanPark re: Stadium

Look at the financials of it.
A new stadium would be the best option only if money was no issue.
FSG stated that the target figure of 60k could be achieved at half the cost if we redeveloped rather than started new.

From a financial point, the best option is the redevelopment. To argue this is insane. Not only that but Anfield is our home, the heritage and history is unique, to throw it away is a horrible idea.
I was against the redevelopment, but now I support it especially if the wider area is redeveloped as it is a cesspit.