Pacinofan

Why would it mean anything to Everton? There's never been any real talk between the clubs about groundshare, it's been mostly from outsiders. Liverpool have never wanted groundshare, why would they? 90% of fans here won't hear of it, it always has been a none starter. This is a two club city and for many of the early years Everton were the top dog, with the bigger ground and a millionaire owner (rare in those days) I think we're 2nd (maybe lower now) on the all time average attendances last time I saw one of those tables. Regardless of the attendance figures most games at Anfield are sold out, a season ticket rarely becomes available, and a very healthy season ticket waiting list suggests they are right to build up to 60, 000.

There was a 70,000 waiting list, which they started to clean up two years ago. The clean up was needed because the original 70,000 list would have contained double entries, change of circumstances death etc... They sent letters out to the first 25,000 on the list to see if they still wanted to be on it, and they would have to pay £5.00 to show commitment. As far as I know they have stopped the list at 25,000 and will only add to it as ST's become available. My mate got one of the new issues this summer after being on the list for 13 years.

I bow to your superior asininity.

Sorry Fish, you're not really any good at goading, it just doesn't work. Take a leaf out of McFaul/Stevies book, he at least does it with passionate hate. You're a bit of a cold, dare I say it, fish.

Attendances again I don't know how Newcastle sell their tickets, at Liverpool if you're not an ST you have to have a fan card and spend ages on the phone to get a ticket, and only then if you fill the criteria. Also, unlike most clubs our crowd is counted by turnstile clicks, always has been, don't know why it's not by ticket sales, seems stupid to me. You can't even buy tickets at the ground now. Our next two home matches are against Man United and Stoke. Here are the ticket sales for both games. Scroll down the page after clicking on Man U tickets and Stoke. http://www.liverpool...est-ticket-news http://www.liverpool...est-ticket-news This is where I'd rank them: History: 2nd Location: 20th - There are many footballers who've come here and stayed. Even Shearer chose to live here rather than GM. Current first eleven: 8th - Current squad: 7th Turnover: 6th - depends on whereabouts 4th in England atm, 8th in Europe. Pulling power: 5th (some would argue 6th) probably, atm, with no CL Financial clout: 5th - We spend what we raise so not sure we are 5th at all.

The highlighted part is so laughable coming from you, do you understand the word irony at all? You weren't, and never will be the only team that's mismanaged, made the wrong appointments etc... You didn't challenge for many, many years of your history because you weren't good enough, deal with it. Just the same as LFC haven't been, except for once or twice, in 20 years. Leeds were a big club whether you like it or not.

No, not 64 or near it. I said I'd take your word for it because I really can't be arsed checking out stats the way you do, but in reality I 'd have to go outside and check if you told me the sun is shining, so NUFC finishing 54 times in the top ten I'll take with a pinch of salt. That's not to say they haven't, just that the person saying it is untrustworthy. You say since '95 alone, why? How many times, and let's do what you do, were you title challengers between '56 and '92?

I'll take your word for it. In my lifetime though I remember Leeds being challengers lots of the time. I don't think you're the right person to be preaching about knowledge and insight of anything.

So no-one regards Leeds as a big club because everyone looks at attendances first? Oh right, ffs you are unreal. In their whole history have they finished in the top 10 more than Newcastle?

I've always regarded Leeds as a big club, even now. I'm surprised at how few trophies they've won considering how often they've been contenders. Don't know how many times they've finished in the top ten over their history, but when I was growing up, and later on, they always seemed to be challenging. I can't say I remember looking at any clubs attendances and thinking they aren't a big club. In fact attendances have never come in to it.

Why are you so obsessive about us? You have a very ugly mind and god help anyone who betters you in the workplace or social side of life, lies seem to be your stock in trade. I was one of the ST boycotters under Hodgson just like thousands of others. He was appointed for the wrong reasons, he showed no sign of building up a manager/fan relationship, his interviews were the most cringeworthy I've heard from a manager and on top of that he had the team playing the most turgid football I've ever seen LFC play. If he'd been appointed because he was the best man for the job the fans would have stuck with him, he wasn't, he was appointed because he was a yes man, and I have no regret in helping to get rid of him. You've peddled the attendances shiiite for a long time now. Our averages don't show a great deal of change over the years but for some reason you go to the trouble of looking up single gates to try and add more bile to your bigoted views. It would hardly be regular 30,000 gates under Houllier if the averages are pretty much the same each season of his tenure. http://www.european-...tnclub/live.htm Your research into Man U's attendances and the locality of their fans is admirable, proving yet again that your aptitude for creating your own myths is as strong as ever. Man United have been the best supported club for a long time and all credit to them, but attendances don;t interest me that much, I leave that to people like yourself who wear it as a badge because they've got nothing else to shout about. Me, I'm more bothered that Man U may take over our 8 European trophy haul. The London clubs seem to be among the best supported of all time, although Everton have a great showing in the early days. http://www.european-...tnengleague.htm

As far as Keegan is concerned, I think the fact that he was replaced by KD was, as some on here have said, the reason that his contribution wasn't missed. Most LFC fans still love Keegan as a player and give him lots of credit but we were spoiled for great players over the 70's and 80's so he gets a bit lost in the mix. Keegan probably felt a bit miffed when he was coming back to this country because Liverpool didn't choose to take up their first option on his services, so he went to Southampton. I think he was allowed to be a superstar at Newcastle and built up an affinity with the fans and city that appealed to him, strengthening when he became manager. As far as I know whenever he speaks about us it's positive, I think I read somewhere that he still says Liverpool fans made him. Kenny Dalglish came here in '77 and has never left, even when he was managing elsewhere. He's always attended games over all of those years but only became a part of the club again when Rafa brought him in 3 or 4 years ago.

Sorry HF, not trying to hide anything, I was just looking for figures to justfy what I knew from the top of my head. I'm sure being the fact finder you are, you'll soon find out what is true and whats not.

Wrong as usual. Liverpool, and Merseyside as a whole, due to their importance to the war, was the most bombed city outside of London. After that there's Birmingham, in fact most of Coventry survived intact. Hull, proportionately, lost more buildings than Liverpool, but both cities were devastated by the Luftwaffe. ""Over 6,500 homes in Liverpool were completely demolished by bombing with around 190,000 damaged. Bootle, to the north of the city, suffered the most appalling damage and loss of life. Whole swathes of streets simply disappeared and today, street maps of the district show huge grassed over areas in an otherwise densely populated area."" The reason we have three tunnels under the Mersey instead of bridges is because of Liverpools strategic position in the war. The luftwaffe would have created chaos across the country had we had bridges they could bomb, because it would have taken so long to clear the debri from the shipping lanes. Merseyside had over 4,000 dead. Half as many again injured. Anyone who knew their war history would know Liverpool's role in the second world war. Liverpool 2,716 Birkenhead 442 Bootle 409 Wallasey 332 "In 1941 the population of the City of Liverpool was 900,000 today it's a little over 400,000, I doubt there's a city anywhere in the western hemisphere which has seen such desertion. I bet the population of Hiroshima didn't even go down that much, and it's another reason as to why it feels so desperate and desolate" Do you think a lot of it might be to do with the fact that much of it's housing stock was bombed to smithereens in the war? You really are something else ""After the war, Liverpool had suffered much damage from the blitz and much of its remaining housing stock was poor and considered slums. In an effort to improve these conditions. Liverpool Corporation began a policy of buying surrounding areas and moving industry and people to newly developed 'overspill' estates. This process culminated with the purchase of 4,070 acres (16.5 km2) of land, including the land comprising Kirkby from the Earl of Sefton in 1947 for £375,000 (£10.9 million inflation adjusted). Kirkby would become the largest of these overspill estates for Merseyside."" The others were Skelmerdale, Speke and Runcorn (which has a mix of Scousers and Mancs.)

I'm quite certain being the only manager in the history of football to win 3 European Cups more than compensated for any trophies he failed to win.

I'm off now because you're starting to talk even more piss than usual. Delusional is a word that suits you to a t. I would never make things up about Shanks btw, I have too much respect for his character. It's you that makes things up to suit. Shankly spoke about the league title and being the best on numerous occasions. That and the EC were always his goals at Anfield, the rest were just decoration for him, nice to win but not essential. He was a man who wanted his teams to win everything but the title and Europe were his priorities, always.

Wtf is arguing about Evertons attendances? You said your attendances were astonishing, they clearly weren't, but if you want to keep fooling yourself, and gaining some unfathomable sense of pride from the good ones, then fill your boots.

No, as usual it's you talking bollicks. Shanks came to Anfield in 1959, his dream and ambition was to win the title, to be the best. That was THE trophy to win and once he achieved it for the first time he wanted to go on and on doing it. It was about being the best team in the country, of going on to play the great European sides In The EC. The FA Cup final lead up gave a club a good profile, allowed them to cut a record, give the fans a great day out in London, and a parade round the city to celebrate a win or commiserate a loss. No comparison whatsoever to being the best your country has to offer. I'm well old enough to know about football in the 70's, you weren't there. If you're happy enough to place more pride in an FA Cup win then that's great for you, but don't tell me that the rest of the country felt the same. They didn't, although we all love the final.

It might have been for Geordies but not for the rest. The league has always been the greatest trophy, the FA Cup the glamourous one. A prestigious trophy to win, but it's the league title that makes you the best. We hadn't won the cup until 1965 and My Dad was absolutely ecstatic when we finally did but he tells me, as have many other old fellas, they would never swap the title for an FA Cup. I was around in the 70's and you're fooling yourself if you think the FA Cup was more important. It just isn't true. The title was the one to win. Every club has their boycott times, but some of your attendances have been abysmal.

There are more reds than blues in the city. you have to live here to realise that because we don't have parts that are red and parts that are blue. We're not a great shirt wearing people as such, but the kids in the streets are and there are always more reds than blues. The local uni did a postcode survey a few years ago, on people entering the ground. The result had a slightly higher percent of locals being red.

You've said all this before and when I pointed out to you that we never had a 35, 000 average at any time under Houllier, you came out with it being a match or two around Christmas. We've only had one average attendance below 30,00 in the last 60 or so years, and that includes 8 years in Div 2. Newcastle have recorded some great years but some really bad ones. A bit yo yo for many years. http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attnclub/newu.htm I don't really put a great deal of importance in attendances, especially not nowadays when sponsorships and SKY provide a lot more of a clubs finance than match day. Attendances mean nothing to me, never have, for me it's all about trophies and pride, heartbreak and glory, and in those respects I've been spectacularly lucky to have seen my team win everything they can in club football many times over. A few thousand fans missing here and there is minuscule in comparison. Everton have won 9 league titles, they've been the best club in this country 9 times, quite a difference to 4 I'd say.

Well we can only speak as we find, and Liverpool have consistently been in the top 5 world wide shirt sellers. I'm not sure where Arsenal came in the last load of stats for shirt selling, but only Barca, Madrid and Man U sold more replica shirts than LFC. I'm not trying to wind you up or anything, but mostly the Newcastle shirts I've seen abroad were worn by Geordies on holiday, and not so much of that nowadays. LFC have just had a very successful tour of America and last year in Asia they had 40,000 turning up to watch the team train. We're still very healthy in the world wide fan base stakes. I think there is a difference between Newcastle and Everton, they've won 15 trophies, haven't been relegated in what, -- 70 years? Have had consistent fan attendances, if not sell outs. I often hear blues moaning about Kenwright, wondering where, what money they have, goes.

I too have travelled around a bit and wherever I've gone,home or abroad, it's hard to see past Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal shirts, and Chelsea over the last few years. I couldn't say I've seen great numbers for any other club than those. Everton have as many oots and oocs as most other clubs except for the ones mentioned, in my experience. They have supporters clubs around the world and I've often seen Norwegians around town, over for the game. I imagine most of them will be armchairs nowadays but they'd still call themselves Evertonians. There are fans around the world who follow certain players now, fickle as it is, and they change clubs whenever the player moves. Even here in the 70's we'd get coaches of Celtic fans coming down to see Dalglish, they still supported Celtic but they just loved watching Dalglish play. http://www.toffeeweb...bs/overseas.asp

Not true.

As already pointed out, once the case was going to court it came under sub-judiciary rules. From a football point of view bringing the police in to it was the best thing for Chelsea and Terry. It kept the press from making comments, it prevented any bad press for Chelsea, and all of those 'crawl out the woodwork 'I'm black and very offended' people from seeking the limelight. It also meant that the evidence had to be proven, and not, as in the case of Suarez, a verdict of probability. The CPS would have thrown the Suarez case out as it was one mans word against another, with no video evidence or witnesses. The chief constable of Merseyside was on local radio a few months ago answering questions of a local nature, and in the course of the phone in racism came up and he said that Evra had been asked quite pointedly, twice, if he'd allow the police to investigate it. He refused both times. In retrospect, I'm sorry some member of the public didn't make an official complaint in our case, it couldn't possibly have been worse than it turned out. But then, nobody actually heard Evra being 'racially' abused. I personally don't believe Terry is racist, and cases like this have become farcical, although Terry is a cunt of the highest order. I think there are far worse things happen on the pitch with relatively little consequence.