This net spend argument of the Mousers is very subjective – last summer Klopp spent £161,550,000 & recouped £33,500,000 so his net spend alone last season was £128,050,000. From the stats I found online last summer Guardiola spent £63,720,000 & sold £70,050,000 of players so in the same period he had a net spend of -£6,330,000

Liverpool’s net spend in the whole time Klopp has been here are skewed by the fact that they got £142mill for 1 player which equates for half their total sales. I heard Scousers banging on last week on TalkSport that what Klopp has achieved was greater than Guardiola this season coz they’ve spent next to nothing compared to City, almost as if he’s had his team ripped apart in order to fund new signings but it simply isn’t true. The vast majority of the rest of their sales is also skewed by the fact that, at will, they seem to be able to rip off Crystal Pace & Bournemouth for their squad players (Benteke, Ibe, Solanke & Sakho) to the tune of a combined figure of almost £90mill. No-one they’ve sold since Klopp arrived other than Coutinho has been anything more than a squad player

Both are clearly great managers who are able to motivate their players to a hell of a level – in some respects, as much as I hate City I see what they did this season as a greater achievement than Liverpool (in the league) as aside from the obvious i.e. winning it, to be put under the pressure that they were by Liverpool & not to crack takes some doing

If they go in to administration its probably highly unlikely that they will shut the doors on them & they relaunch under a different name.
Going in to administration is more likely to mean that the debts they owe will all get renegotiated to 30-40p for every £1 owed which will undoutedly affect other businesses both locally & nationally and us as taxpayers as the HMRC won’t get the £1.2mill they’re owed either.
It means that rather than a prospective buyer having to find the £42mill to clear the debts (plus whatever Anderson is asking for the club), that figure will drop to nearer £20mill which makes them a much more attractive prospect to any interested buyers (I believe that Football Venture, one such interested buyer, were there at court today)

It stinks to be honest – they’ve not been run anything remotely approaching responsibly for a long time (they had debts of £140mill whilst still in the Premier League) & whilst I feel sorry for the supporters in one respect they should have been asking questions a long time ago but were content to lap up the glory. I feel more sorry for the employees who haven’t been paid for months &, like you say, the businesses who will get nowhere near what they’re owed

And whilst I’m on a rant, we should have had a penalty in the first leg for a handball against Wiekens n’all

Also, how the touchy City fans could moan about Latics pitch invasion last season after their own shenanigans after this is beyond me

Oh, & Graeme Jones should have buried that header

The first one no coz it was a penalty.
The second one if I’m being ultra picky his body shape was all wrong & he didn’t close the angles down like modern keepers tend to (a la Peter Schmeichel style) but instead crouched down & exposed more of the goal for their player to hit – BUT the original error was Dunkley’s i think when he missed his clearance
He then spilled a simple shot identically to how Walton did for Hull’s equaliser last night only luckily for him the Blackburn player wasn’t as alert as Frazier Campbell was yesterday & he was able to get to the loose ball first
He then clearly didn’t communicate well enough (or at all) to Olsson to leave the ball as he was coming to collect it – hence why Olsson then tried to knock it back to him. He was as much at fault for that goal (if not more) as Olsson was & I think that’s why Walton was brought back in

I think that the referee has as much a part to play in it as any of the players to be honest. I only experienced it once when refereeing when one team’s manager came on to the pitch & called his players off for some comments that he claimed had been made. This was more NWCFL level (but not the NWCFL) as opposed to grassroots – I told him that he could do that if he wanted but as I hadn’t heard anything & no-one else had complained that I would have to put that in my report. He didn’t end up taking his players off & the other team were livid about the accusations

At park level any decision to abandon the game for whatever reason is putting yourself (the ref) at risk. If it was racist abuse from a player I’d send him off. if it was racist abuse from the crowd I’d get both captains & the management together & explain what I’d heard & that if it carried on I’d abandon the game so hopefully they’d deal with it – that would make it less likely to cause chaos as opposed to just stopping the game & walking off

I’m not sure how they’re being well protected by the FA/EFL. It’s the high court & co giving them the extensions to pay bills etc. & not the football authorities.
In addition no potential buyer has been approved via the FA/EFL fit & proper persons test for all that they are worth – certainly not that Bassini fella who was at the High Court the other day & who the representatives of Anderson were alluding to being the potential new owners. Even though that was who the club were alluding to being the buyer, another group (Gaspard Holdings) claimed on 2nd April that they were 48hrs from completing the takeover despite them not being who the club solicitor referred to as the buyers & they’re certainly not a group who have stakes in existing foreign clubs as BWFC have also claimed the prospective new owner has. Its also been over 48hrs since this group made that claim

So you wanna stand there till 7 say mid winter on a Saturday, freezing your ted’s off while drinking nats p1ss ?. I think by 5:30 you’d be on your mobile on your jack’s while everyone else are either at home thawing out or in a nice warm boozer chatting away.[/quote]

To be fair Cup Winners, Dave Whelan had the very same idea not long after the stadium was built coz I was at a fans forum where he spoke about it.
Apparently it was vetoed by the police who said it would just be encouraging excessive drinking[/quote]

Correct Tilders, I also remember that.

Seem to recall that the Police & Council poured cold water on a number of reasonable ideas :( :( :([/quote]

That’s all well applying for the bar to be left open till 7 but how many would want to stop behind drinking dish water for 2 hours while freezing your buds off ???.

Black’s white whites black, for f**ks sake, non of you would be there that’s unless your one boring fart and homeless with f**k all else better to do other than get in your cardboard box[/quote]

I agree that it aint for me but the point I was trying to make was that it wasn’t that stupid an idea as it is something that the club has explored in the past – not the club hasn’t had its fair share of stupid ideas over the years!!

It was a definite penalty – the Blackburn player was just that little bit more alert & got in there with a header ahead of James who was already committed to kicking the ball. As the Blackburn player got there first it meant James’s only connection was with the player so it was a foul

It doesn’t matter that the Blackburn player came from behind him or that the contact was accidental & not deliberate (it never has to be deliberate to be a foul).

For the Massey one in real time it looked to me like 2 players bumping/shoulder barging each other for a ball in a dangerous area &, as it was in the penalty area, Massey went down to look for a penalty. I agreed with the ref’s decision not to give it at the time

Just to add I’ve only seen both incidents in real time on Sky’s red button coverage so haven’t seen any replays since the incidents so my initial impressions may well be wrong

EDIT – just seen the online Sky short highlights. Definite penalty for them but it doesn’t show the Massey incident but I think if there’s been any controversy about it they would have show it
Watching it again all 3 goals were really poor ones to give away. Poor header from Dunkley & then a lazy clearance/challenge from James for the first. God knows what Dunkley was attempting to do for the 2nd as he had no-one challenging him & he should have gone towards it with his head instead of waiting for it to come to him at an awkward height & attempting some odd kick thing. As for the 3rd, Jones either didn’t shout loud enough or Olsson wasn’t listening – They’re the types of poor goals given away to an opposition who don’t have to work to create the chance by a side devoid of confidence, low on ability & on a downward spiral