Page 5 of 9
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:15 amby RedBlood
Why dont we call it 'Strawberry Feilds' loool
Seriously a beleive like alot of you 'New Anfeild' would be best with The Kop remaining or main stand.
This way we can move forward but remeber our roots, and there worth remebering.
It would also show us fans that these Dubai boyz understand and respect what this club has acheived and what it stands for.
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:12 amby The Manhattan Project
Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:42 amby Lando_Griffin
The Manhattan Project wrote:Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
That is a very good question mate.
I can't see them being too annoyed by that when they've just bought Travel Lodge, who have lager-filled veding machines in their receptions! 
Seriously, though - would it hurt us to change, seeing as we get a very poor deal from them as it is?
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:01 amby Ciggy
The Manhattan Project wrote:Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
Doubt it and I hope not, cant wait to get that Carlsberg logo off our kit its old and dated now.
I reckon it could be Pepsi, if anyone has ART sport all the adverts have all the superstars advertising pepsi.
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:07 amby Woollyback
the ground should be called new anfield, although i'm sure it will have a corporate sponsor name as there's megabucks in it. i just hope it ends up like boro where it was the bt cellnet riverside or southampton's friends provident st mary's stadium so eventually the corporate name just fades away. something like the pepsi new anfield stadium would be fine by me if they want to pay us a fortune for the privilege
for the stands:
the kop
the shankly stand
the paisley stand
the hillsborough memorial stand
i just really hope there will be a distinct "end" which can be clearly differentiated from the rest of the ground and will become the kop. i would've thought the club will aim for this as the kop is one of the most marketable things about LFC at the end of the day, it would be daft to not have it in the plans
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:46 amby puroresu
The Manhattan Project wrote:Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
I would be glad if Liverpool made tops avaliable without the Sponsor. Rangers sell tops for there Muslim fans without Carling on them and and would be great if Liverpool did that.
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 10:12 amby Reg
Just call it Anfield. Why change?
More likely, bearing in mind the improved status of the club and Chelsea like prospects (please...) the asking price for shirt sponsership will shoot up, Carlsberg will get the boot and we'll have a mobile phone name on our chests pretty pdq.
Stadium name depends purely on who has deep enough pockets. 'Thats just the way it is' . Would be nice if the stadium could sneak back upto 70,000 tho eh? 
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:43 pmby stmichael
Can see the arguments for making it just 60,000 but to deny yourself any opportunity to expand later on seems a bit narrow minded.
However Anfield can be as souless as any stadium and there has been more than a few complaints over the past few years at the atmosphere which makes me wonder why people are so scared of moving to another 'souless stadium'.
It's not the bricks and steel that make a stadium it's the people in it so if the attitude is wrong it doesn't matter where you are.
The last thing we should be doing is looking to scrap the plans for the stadium and start again, it's been hard enough getting through the red tape and fighting off consistant ground share plans without going through it all again.
Just because we might have the money to build an 80,000 seater stadium doesn't necessarily mean it's definitely the best thing for the club.
Incidentally, am I right in thinking the designs do have one single-tiered end ie the new Kop or have I made that up??
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:47 pmby Leonmc0708
puroresu wrote:The Manhattan Project wrote:Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
I would be glad if Liverpool made tops avaliable without the Sponsor. Rangers sell tops for there Muslim fans without Carling on them and and would be great if Liverpool did that.
Why ?
Thats football.
If you dont like it then dont follow it.
Does my head in all this.
You cant even have a St Georges flag i nyer garden incase you 
a paki off !!
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:07 pmby stmichael
The Manhattan Project wrote:Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
No chance.
Infact I've heard reports that plans are already underway to replace Carlsberg with LG.
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:59 pmby red37
stmichael wrote:It's not the bricks and steel that make a stadium it's the people in it so if the attitude is wrong it doesn't matter where you are.
Wait till they hit ebay...then see how much they're worth
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:52 pmby puroresu
Leonmc0708 wrote:puroresu wrote:The Manhattan Project wrote:Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
I would be glad if Liverpool made tops avaliable without the Sponsor. Rangers sell tops for there Muslim fans without Carling on them and and would be great if Liverpool did that.
Why ?
Thats football.
If you dont like it then dont follow it.
Does my head in all this.
You cant even have a St Georges flag i nyer garden incase you
a paki off !!
What is your problem. I wasnt saying Liverpool must get rid of Carlsberg. Like you said If I dont like it, dont buy it which I choose to not to do.
I just brought up the idea of LFC selling shirts with and without the sponsor so the fans who dont buy shirts with carlsberg over it will buy the shirt.
It isnt beyond the realms of possibility that a player will be signed who doesnt want to wear a shirt which promotes something against his beliefs. What u going to say to him? " off". Sissoko could say it. Kanoute said it at seville and they got him a shirt without 888.com on it. Is this wrong? Not at all.
What all this has to do with your flag story I have no idea.
I see that thing call Racism still is ok to you.
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:31 pmby Leonmc0708
puroresu wrote:Leonmc0708 wrote:puroresu wrote:The Manhattan Project wrote:Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
I would be glad if Liverpool made tops avaliable without the Sponsor. Rangers sell tops for there Muslim fans without Carling on them and and would be great if Liverpool did that.
Why ?
Thats football.
If you dont like it then dont follow it.
Does my head in all this.
You cant even have a St Georges flag i nyer garden incase you
a paki off !!
What is your problem. I wasnt saying Liverpool must get rid of Carlsberg. Like you said If I dont like it, dont buy it which I choose to not to do.
I just brought up the idea of LFC selling shirts with and without the sponsor so the fans who dont buy shirts with carlsberg over it will buy the shirt.
It isnt beyond the realms of possibility that a player will be signed who doesnt want to wear a shirt which promotes something against his beliefs. What u going to say to him? " off". Sissoko could say it. Kanoute said it at seville and they got him a shirt without 888.com on it. Is this wrong? Not at all.
What all this has to do with your flag story I have no idea.
I see that thing call Racism still is ok to you.
Jump on the fu.cking racism badwagon why dont you ?
How is it remotely racist that a football club continues to do something it has done for ever and a day.
Posted:
Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:35 pmby woof woof !
The Manhattan Project wrote:Will the Arabs continue with Carlsberg as a sponsor?
probably not , maybe we can look forward to this .
