Page 160 of 161
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:32 amby nobybob
You are wasting your time trying to explain basic concepts like this to Peewee i am afraid Lando. I think Einstein would have more chance of explaining his theory of relativity to a caveman. 
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:37 amby 112-1077774096
bob i will stick to my belief that rafa puts more emphasis on europe than he does on the league, in four years here we have not made one serious attempt on the title, that to me shows he has no interest in the league.
you think different, so what? i have my belief, you have yours
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:39 amby LFC2007
peewee wrote:bob i will stick to my belief that rafa puts more emphasis on europe than he does on the league, in four years here we have not made one serious attempt on the title
Neither had the Manc's under Ferguson (since we're talking 'facts').
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:45 amby 112-1077774096
and just when i was warming to you bob you show you are still a weasel, never mind eh. seems its all been one sided lately, i have not belittled you etc but you seem intent on still doing so, sad really, and to think they let you educate children
lets agree to disagree, my thoughts are based on passion, being a scouser, going the game all my life until i emigrated etc, yours is based on TV and what prats on here say. i will stick to my opinions mate, they hold more credence than some canadian armchair viewers opinions and someone who goes a couple of games a season
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:46 amby 112-1077774096
LFC2007 wrote:peewee wrote:bob i will stick to my belief that rafa puts more emphasis on europe than he does on the league, in four years here we have not made one serious attempt on the title
Neither had the Manc's under Ferguson (since we're talking 'facts').
and the relevance here is............. what exactly.
dont in one breath say football has changed and then try and liken something from the past to know
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:48 amby nobybob
peewee wrote:bob i will stick to my belief that rafa puts more emphasis on europe than he does on the league, in four years here we have not made one serious attempt on the title, that to me shows he has no interest in the league.
you think different, so what? i have my belief, you have yours
Completely irrelevant argument .
By your way of thinking then Maureen and his Russian paymaster had no interest in winning the Cl. Because lets face it they never made one serious attempt to get past Rafa ha ha ha.
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:55 amby LFC2007
peewee wrote:LFC2007 wrote:peewee wrote:bob i will stick to my belief that rafa puts more emphasis on europe than he does on the league, in four years here we have not made one serious attempt on the title
Neither had the Manc's under Ferguson (since we're talking 'facts').
and the relevance here is............. what exactly.
dont in one breath say football has changed and then try and liken something from the past to know
The relevance being; in his first four years Ferguson also hadn't managed to mount a title challenge, and yet, he went on to become one of the most successful managers of all time. I suppose he also had no interest in English football based on his performance in the league after four seasons, or was just as much of a 'clown' as Rafa?
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:01 amby 112-1077774096
LFC2007 wrote:peewee wrote:LFC2007 wrote:peewee wrote:bob i will stick to my belief that rafa puts more emphasis on europe than he does on the league, in four years here we have not made one serious attempt on the title
Neither had the Manc's under Ferguson (since we're talking 'facts').
and the relevance here is............. what exactly.
dont in one breath say football has changed and then try and liken something from the past to know
The relevance being; in his first four years Ferguson also hadn't managed to mount a title challenge, and yet, he went on to become one of the most successful managers of all time. I suppose he also had no interest in English football based on his performance in the league after four seasons, or was just as much of a 'clown' as Rafa?
again i ask what relevance that has to rafa and modern day football.
its like when people say rotation worked in spain, whats the relevance to english football.
rafa is rafa, rafa is making mistakes because of selection, fergusons problem was not selecting poor players over better ones to rest them, his was based on having poorer players across the board and having to compete with us
no relevance mate
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:07 amby maguskwt
peewee:i am not suggesting he rests players in the champions league, i am suggesting he places just as much importance on the league as he does on the CL, you all know full well what I am saying and its pitiful watching you all scramble to his defence.
we are out the title race AGAIN because of his team selections but some of you still defend this, and you call yourselves fans, disgraceful
that is a silly comment... so all the other fans who gives support to the manager are disgraceful?
YOU are the sanctimonious 
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:08 amby nobybob
Was it Thailand or somewhere round there you emigrated to ? didn't Gary Glitter emigrate out that way to ? 
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:12 amby LFC2007
peewee wrote:LFC2007 wrote:peewee wrote:LFC2007 wrote:peewee wrote:bob i will stick to my belief that rafa puts more emphasis on europe than he does on the league, in four years here we have not made one serious attempt on the title
Neither had the Manc's under Ferguson (since we're talking 'facts').
and the relevance here is............. what exactly.
dont in one breath say football has changed and then try and liken something from the past to know
The relevance being; in his first four years Ferguson also hadn't managed to mount a title challenge, and yet, he went on to become one of the most successful managers of all time. I suppose he also had no interest in English football based on his performance in the league after four seasons, or was just as much of a 'clown' as Rafa?
again i ask what relevance that has to rafa and modern day football.
its like when people say rotation worked in spain, whats the relevance to english football.
rafa is rafa, rafa is making mistakes because of selection, fergusons problem was not selecting poor players over better ones to rest them, his was based on having poorer players across the board and having to compete with us
no relevance mate
It's absolutely relevant because he went on to become one of the most successful managers of all time, and he is still managing now. He's a living example of what persisting with your manager can achieve, and the circumstances at the club which he inherited were not dissimilar to those Rafa inherited.
The Manc's hadn't won much in the recent period prior to Ferguson's arrival in 1986 (a couple of FA cups in the 80's, but they hadn't won the league for almost 20 years), their league position in the two seasons prior to his arrival were fairly akin to our two prior to Rafa's arrival (4th, 4th for them, 5th, 4th for us).
The league is arguably more difficult to win now than it was back then, and Ferguson certainly wasn't lacking in financial backing in the transfer market (The signing of Pallister broke the British transfer record at the time). If Ferguson had 'poor players' across the board, then he is directly accountable because he had more than enough time and money to craft his own side. After all, that's the same argument you use against Rafa; 'who signed the players, who trains them, who gets rid of those who aren't good enough?', the manager. We can't have a rule for one, and a different rule for another, as you would say 
In the late 80's, the Manc's were often described as "hard working, cautious, methodical and dull". After the 1989/1990 season, many people took the view that they were going "backwards", there was indeed "growing doubt" as to whether Ferguson was the man to turn them into title contenders. The similarities are distinct.
As you want to deal in 'facts', dispute the fact that it took Ferguson 7 years to win the league title. If you want to dispute the relevance of the example, explain how it is not relevant. I have explained how it is relevant, if you want to attempt to distinguish the two scenarios to the extent that it would deem it 'irrelevant' now, go ahead. It's no use saying because it was 20 years ago, it's not relevant now, explain how and why it is not relevant.
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:24 amby taff
peewee wrote:rafa is rafa, rafa is making mistakes because of selection, fergusons problem was not selecting poor players over better ones to rest them, his was based on having poorer players across the board and having to compete with us
no relevance mate
but surely with that argument you defend rafa who had poorer plyers and had to compete with better teams
I dont want to get into a Rafa/Ferguson/Wenger debate but I think you have answered your own question there
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:28 amby Lando_Griffin
It's like trying to reason with a plank of wood at times.
"I've been going to the game all my life, blah, blah, blah..."
What is your point Peewee? You suggest that the past has nothing to do with the present, yet you insist that your history of attending games somehow qualifies you to sit in judgment on members who were less fortunate. (Bearing in mind that, by your own logic, anyone who attends just one game now has more of a say on things than you.)
Who is the better "fan"?: Someone who went to every game because their dad/uncle/brother/other took them, or someone who had to make their own way and their own choices?
Who is the better fan - the one who walks 5 minutes to the stadium, or the one who catches a plane from the other side of the World?
Who is the better fan - the one who was born into a Liverpool-supporting family, or the one who had to go out of their way to find the club?
Attending games doesn't make you an expert. It certainly doesn't mean you have the right to dictate to others how things should be.
You have your opinions, we have ours. But they ARE just opinions.
If you want to keep pulling Rafa down - that's your choice. Just don't expect people to let you get away with it unchallenged.
One last point:
You put so much stock in attending games, yet you admit you've never seen Liverpool play live whilst Rafa has been in charge.
With this in mind, how can you possibly expect to be taken seriously?
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:28 amby Emerald Red
peewee wrote:LFC2007 wrote:peewee wrote:LFC2007 wrote:peewee wrote:bob i will stick to my belief that rafa puts more emphasis on europe than he does on the league, in four years here we have not made one serious attempt on the title
Neither had the Manc's under Ferguson (since we're talking 'facts').
and the relevance here is............. what exactly.
dont in one breath say football has changed and then try and liken something from the past to know
The relevance being; in his first four years Ferguson also hadn't managed to mount a title challenge, and yet, he went on to become one of the most successful managers of all time. I suppose he also had no interest in English football based on his performance in the league after four seasons, or was just as much of a 'clown' as Rafa?
again i ask what relevance that has to rafa and modern day football.
its like when people say rotation worked in spain, whats the relevance to english football.
rafa is rafa, rafa is making mistakes because of selection, fergusons problem was not selecting poor players over better ones to rest them, his was based on having poorer players across the board and having to compete with us
no relevance mate
Go get your manager badges and have a punt at managing us.
Posted:
Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:51 amby nobybob
