I fail to see how we can match or better man united / Man City unless we have comparable or better facilities than them. I dont think thats an unreasonable assertion. The only way I can see we can do better is if we consistently (and by some way) better them on the field to such an extent the success overtakes the physical size of the club. But we will have to do this every year and for all time and with the handicap of lower transfer budgets. Forgive me but that seems a tall order to me. In which those who would want a reduced facility at Liverpool are accepting of the clubs reduced long term capability. And for what ? To protect an owner they have never met, never will meet and who probably sees them as no more than commodities to enrich himself. Maybe I am getting old because thats not football club support as I know it.
I know I'm getting old, but I'm damned sure that's not football club support as I know it either. And the funny part of all this is that we're only talking about the transfer price of a few top quality players, at today's prices, to bridge the difference between the 160redevelopment as against about 450m for a decent stadium with expansion potential.
It's not as if we we're saving the money for top quality signings, as FSG haven't sanctioned any transfer above 25m, and that only buys you a medium quality player in today's market.
It's penny pinching and it'll stand as a monument to short sighted financial expediency and cowardice for a generation at least. What a tragedy for LFC, Liverpool City and the match going fans.