Khobar's Legacy

[blueandproud]

On 28/01/2024 at 00:23, CarefreeMuratcan said:

Pass me the sick bag!  And Jamie O'Hara is the dimmest, thickest prat on earth, even my Spuds supporting working colleagues can't stand him.

[chara]

Anyone share my, admittedly, not thought through "thoughts"?.....seems to me that Manure and the scouse mob carry a great deal of residue "good will" from the fawning media and somewhat unreliable "I'm a neutral" fans,,read a trendy appearance commentator,,due to the Munich tragedy and the "Old Liverpool" of the Shankley & Co era

Most if not all, real fans are tribal and intensely loyal to their club and although may have interest, for one of many reasons, in a rival club, WE don't waste our emotions on "other" Clubs.

[Dwmh]

16 minutes ago, chara said:

Anyone share my, admittedly, not thought through "thoughts"?.....seems to me that Manure and the scouse mob carry a great deal of residue "good will" from the fawning media and somewhat unreliable "I'm a neutral" fans,,read a trendy appearance commentator,,due to the Munich tragedy and the "Old Liverpool" of the Shankley & Co era

Most if not all, real fans are tribal and intensely loyal to their club and although may have interest, for one of many reasons, in a rival club, WE don't waste our emotions on "other" Clubs.

Maybe but I think it is the Evening papers that are the biggest thing.  A lot of sports hacks started off in the Liverpool Echo or the Manchester Evening news.  Then they moved on to the London press and TV and Radio and they already had strong connections with the Liverpool and Manchester clubs.  A lot of favours had been exchanged already.
Can'rt remember where I first heard this theory but it seems to make a lot of sense.

Not sure why the London Evening News and the Standard didn't have a similar effect, but maybe the better journalists in London want to report on other issues rather than sport (like the Stock Market or Parliament).

[ROTG]

11 hours ago, Dwmh said:

Maybe but I think it is the Evening papers that are the biggest thing.  A lot of sports hacks started off in the Liverpool Echo or the Manchester Evening news.  Then they moved on to the London press and TV and Radio and they already had strong connections with the Liverpool and Manchester clubs.  A lot of favours had been exchanged already.
Can'rt remember where I first heard this theory but it seems to make a lot of sense.

Not sure why the London Evening News and the Standard didn't have a similar effect, but maybe the better journalists in London want to report on other issues rather than sport (like the Stock Market or Parliament).

Day 4 on talksh1t - Even as far a Mr Burgundy saying this is still a headline news even thought he was getting clogg from the listeners 

[Sciatika]

I think they constantly talk about United and Liverpool because they know that those clubs have the most support across the country (statista: 56% of the population 'followed' one or other club in 2023) and that, since most reporters and pundits are in their 40-60s,  those clubs were dominant when they were growing up (Liverpool in the 80s and United in the 90s)  so they see them as hegemonic. They see football as a competition between these two. Moreover, they promote fictional narratives (a bit similar to "The Magic of the Cup"). So they relate stories of Best, Charlton and Law or Rush, Dalgleish and Heighway as if these players never made mistakes. In truth, they were among the best players ever, but they were not infallible. You can hear reverence in the voices of their presenter when they say the words "Manchester United" or "Anfield" as if they can hear a virtual drumroll in the background. Sticking a pin in their inflated view of these clubs is always a good thing for football.

Edited January 30 by Sciatika

[exiledblue]

15 hours ago, Dwmh said:

 

Not sure why the London Evening News and the Standard didn't have a similar effect, but maybe the better journalists in London want to report on other issues rather than sport (like the Stock Market or Parliament).

Too many teams in London

[exiledblue]

Klopp is undoubtedly a top  coach, although I cant stand the sight of him and his teeth, but not a top succesful coach. 4 trophies in 9 years and 2 were against us on penalties in one season doesnt really count for much at a supposedly big club

[CarefreeMuratcan]

9 minutes ago, exiledblue said:

Klopp is undoubtedly a top  coach, although I cant stand the sight of him and his teeth, but not a top succesful coach. 4 trophies in 9 years and 2 were against us on penalties in one season doesnt really count for much at a supposedly big club

The media sure make a bigger song and dance of those 2 Cup wins than credit we ever got for our 8 Domestic Cup wins during the Roman Era.

Jose's won more than Klopp.

[exiledblue]

15 hours ago, chara said:

Most if not all, real fans are tribal and intensely loyal to their club and although may have interest, for one of many reasons, in a rival club, WE don't waste our emotions on "other" Clubs.

This is quite interesting, not for the discussion of LFC etc but also as a reason the Saudi league will never be big in the UK. We have no allegiance to clubs there. 

Here in Italy however i have noted a certain amount of interest in Saudi as fans are more likely to follow individual players next to their Italian teams.

[Dwmh]

33 minutes ago, exiledblue said:

Klopp is undoubtedly a top  coach, although I cant stand the sight of him and his teeth, but not a top succesful coach. 4 trophies in 9 years and 2 were against us on penalties in one season doesnt really count for much at a supposedly big club

Getting 90 + points in a season is an incredible performance.
He has done that 3 times.  Pep aside (who had more time and more money) no one comes matches him on big seasons.
SAF did it 3 times over many years, Wenger just the once.

[asvaberg]

6 hours ago, Dwmh said:

Getting 90 + points in a season is an incredible performance.
He has done that 3 times.  Pep aside (who had more time and more money) no one comes matches him on big seasons.
SAF did it 3 times over many years, Wenger just the once.

We did, 3 times, as far as I can see:

04-05 95pts, JM

05-06 91 pts JM

16-17 93 pts Conte

Impressive this also

[My Blood Is Blue]

22 hours ago, Dwmh said:

Getting 90 + points in a season is an incredible performance.
He has done that 3 times.  Pep aside (who had more time and more money) no one comes matches him on big seasons.
SAF did it 3 times over many years, Wenger just the once.

How many trophies does he have to show for those 90+ seasons? Oh yeah, just the one and that is ultimately all that matters. Being second best to Pep isn't shameful, but it's still 2nd place or first loser to some. I'd rather win the league with 70 points than come second with 90.

Klopp is obviously a very good coach, no doubt whatsoever, but for such a good coach, I would say his trophy list when leaving Liverpool after the money spent and the length of time there, is disappointing and definitely nowhere near as good as he and the media would have us believe.

He's probably 4th in the list of coaches in the PL era behind Ferguson, Mourinho and Wenger.

[CarefreeMuratcan]

23 hours ago, exiledblue said:

This is quite interesting, not for the discussion of LFC etc but also as a reason the Saudi league will never be big in the UK. We have no allegiance to clubs there. 

Here in Italy however i have noted a certain amount of interest in Saudi as fans are more likely to follow individual players next to their Italian teams.

Interesting I would have thought Italy similar to us in that regard.

I always thought the "player following" was more of a non-European thing.

[Mark Kelly]

5 minutes ago, CarefreeMuratcan said:

Interesting I would have thought Italy similar to us in that regard.

I always thought the "player following" was more of a non-European thing.

Having Grandsons and one in particular who's into football , I have noticed that he's far more interested in players than clubs , I think it's the influence of the computer game series FIFA and their reliance of stats and issuing of player cards that can be traded as you build your own team in their "ultimate team" platform .

I support Chelsea , my son in law supports Chelsea (and Luton) but my Grandson is a United supporter from absolutely nowhere to our horror borne from liking Ronaldo and (gulp) Pogba .

Edited January 31 by Mark Kelly

[CarefreeMuratcan]

56 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

I support Chelsea , my son in law supports Chelsea (and Luton) but my Grandson is a United supporter from absolutely nowhere to our horror borne from liking Ronaldo and (gulp) Pogba .

Oh no now you have me worried about my daughter (if she ends up liking football) straying to another team. 

Osgood forbid. 

[Dwmh]

1 hour ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

How many trophies does he have to show for those 90+ seasons? Oh yeah, just the one and that is ultimately all that matters. Being second best to Pep isn't shameful, but it's still 2nd place or first loser to some. I'd rather win the league with 70 points than come second with 90.

I've never really understood this approach.  In sport you do your best and if that wins trophies that is great.
For me a team with 90 points and second is far better than a team 10 years before or after than wins with 80 points.  97 or 99 points is just amazing.
Winning stuff gets you bragging rights (and in certainl places I see that has a lot of value).  But 90 points means a lot of individual wins and very few draws or losses.  

I can see the issue though - that 2008 team that was 2nd in the prem, in the LC final and lost the CL final on pens.
I'm happy to say that Grant did a fantastic job for us that season from September.

[McCreadie]

39 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

I'm happy to say that Grant Steve Clarke did a fantastic job for us that season from September.

 

[My Blood Is Blue]

1 hour ago, Dwmh said:

I've never really understood this approach.  In sport you do your best and if that wins trophies that is great.
For me a team with 90 points and second is far better than a team 10 years before or after than wins with 80 points.  97 or 99 points is just amazing.
Winning stuff gets you bragging rights (and in certainl places I see that has a lot of value).  But 90 points means a lot of individual wins and very few draws or losses.  

I can see the issue though - that 2008 team that was 2nd in the prem, in the LC final and lost the CL final on pens.
I'm happy to say that Grant did a fantastic job for us that season from September.

Really?!

So you would rather 90 points and finish second rather than get 70 points and finish first? When you take into account each season is different, with different level of opposition, different outside elements with injuries etc, total matches based on other tournaments competed in… the points totals end up not really meaning too much.

When you look back in the record books it just lists the winners, it doesn’t list all those who got above a certain amount of points.

Winning things gets more than bragging rights, it gets you more income and it gets you trophies.

I presume you are just winding me up.

[boratsbrother]

1 minute ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Really?!

So you would rather 90 points and finish second rather than get 70 points and finish first? When you take into account each season is different, with different level of opposition, different outside elements with injuries etc, total matches based on other tournaments competed in… the points totals end up not really meaning too much.

When you look back in the record books it just lists the winners, it doesn’t list all those who got above a certain amount of points.

Winning things gets more than bragging rights, it gets you more income and it gets you trophies.

I presume you are just winding me up.

This!

 

The number one aim for every top manager at the start of the season  is to win the league. Pure and simple! 

Things like points totals and the unbeaten Wenger record are just the cherries on the cake.

[boratsbrother]

On 30/01/2024 at 11:44, exiledblue said:

 the Saudi league will never be big in the UK.

 

The Saudi league will never be big anywhere, not even in Saudi!

[Dwmh]

6 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Really?!

So you would rather 90 points and finish second rather than get 70 points and finish first?

Not the point.  I would certainly praise Manager of team X more for 90 points and 2nd than Manager of team Y with 70 and first.

If you don't do that you are essentially stating that you have a personal commitment to team X or hatred of team Y.
When you judge managers across seasons the individual wins and points achieved are the only way to go.

Is a sprinter that has an Olympic PB of 9.8 winning Silver better than a runner that wins Gold  4 years later with a PB of 10.0?
of course he is.

[Blue Moon]

5 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Not the point.  I would certainly praise Manager of team X more for 90 points and 2nd than Manager of team Y with 70 and first.

If you don't do that you are essentially stating that you have a personal commitment to team X or hatred of team Y.
When you judge managers across seasons the individual wins and points achieved are the only way to go.

Is a sprinter that has an Olympic PB of 9.8 winning Silver better than a runner that wins Gold  4 years later with a PB of 10.0?
of course he is.

I think it’s you who is missing the point, Droy. To win against difficult odds in the highly competitive league is infinitely better than strolling a run again collectively crap opposition. The situation with running is totally different, as you (should) well know. 

[My Blood Is Blue]

18 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Not the point.  I would certainly praise Manager of team X more for 90 points and 2nd than Manager of team Y with 70 and first.

If you don't do that you are essentially stating that you have a personal commitment to team X or hatred of team Y.
When you judge managers across seasons the individual wins and points achieved are the only way to go.

Is a sprinter that has an Olympic PB of 9.8 winning Silver better than a runner that wins Gold  4 years later with a PB of 10.0?
of course he is.

But what if the manager who won the league with 70 points had to beat 10 elite teams and the manager who came second with 90 points only had to beat 4 elite teams? Different seasons have different situations meaning that the points aren’t the same each season. Of course getting 90+ points in a 38 game season is impressive, but if it doesn’t win you the league, it isn’t impressive enough.

Do you think winning the Championship with 90+ points is more impressive than winning the Premier League with 70 points? Because by your logic, surely you do, because you don’t seem to take in to account the quality of the league at that time.

The sprinter analogy is an odd one to bring into it, completely different scenario, but even in that I’d rather win the Olympic gold medal with a slower time! Also, a sprinter from 20 years ago with less sports science, less funding will naturally get slower times.

[Dwmh]

6 minutes ago, Blue Moon said:

I think it’s you who is missing the point, Droy. To win against difficult odds in the highly competitive league is infinitely better than strolling a run again collectively crap opposition. The situation with running is totally different, as you (should) well know. 

You are then making a very different point.
If you are saying that the PL was full of weaker teams when Klop was getting 90 + points than it was 5 10 or 15 years earlier you should make that point explicitly.
For my money the PL has just got stronger and stronger and stronger year by year for 30 years.
(I certainly hope so given where we are now)

[JaneB]

You are being ridiculous @Dwmh

No one remembers or cares about points or coming second/third blah blah blah.

Winning, however you do it and against who, is all that matters and all the great champions in any sport know this.  That’s why they’re WINNERS!!!