Liverpool FC Forum

by **Red @ Heart** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:10 pm

Gaunt wrote:
Red wrote:
Ciggy wrote:
Red wrote:Hmm ciggy had a look at there forums, are you sure it is an everton forum?? because it was more talk about liverpool than there own club lol.
goes to show how bitter they are towards us.

they also wished that flag that was made for the second leg against benfica would burn up and burn my fellow supporters
man they are deluded.

What about them wanting to wear orange boiler suits with prison numbers on the back, and making banners with bricks for the derby meaning Michael Shields and constant calling of wall pushers kunts

nope didnt see that i got banned after making a post lol, i didnt make a harsh post i just said you guys are truly bitter, and this is an everton forum? lol it more about liverpool than everton.

any way i wont go there again.

and i defo would not like to share staium with them, but i suppose it would be cheaper to build one trophey room than 2 lol.

YNWA

Why would we need to build two trophy rooms red@heart?

Not like Everton are ever actually gonna need one

I know that is why i said "it would be cheaper to build 1 instead of 2"

by **The Ace1983** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:38 pm

Personally I would rather be spoonfed elephant :censored:

by Michael Winner than see the home of Liverpool FC with half the seats made from blue plastic (or in their case, blue painted wood). I know we're not exactly rolling in it, but I wasn't aware that we were facing an economic crisis. Adidas will change things, a sponsor will be found and if we need an investor, we'll find one. As much as I don't trust Parry's morals, I more than trust his business sense and Mr Moores can get his hands on a lot more cash than he's currently letting on. This nonsense about groundsharing isn't worth worrying about.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:21 am

Here's a solution to it:

Build a complex, where there are two "stadiums".

We'll have the one we're going to build anyway, and Neverton can rent a shed in the grounds for £200k per match.

Sounds about fair to me.

by **Gaunt** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:53 am

Red wrote:
Gaunt wrote:
Red wrote:
Ciggy wrote:
Red wrote:Hmm ciggy had a look at there forums, are you sure it is an everton forum?? because it was more talk about liverpool than there own club lol.
goes to show how bitter they are towards us.

they also wished that flag that was made for the second leg against benfica would burn up and burn my fellow supporters
man they are deluded.

What about them wanting to wear orange boiler suits with prison numbers on the back, and making banners with bricks for the derby meaning Michael Shields and constant calling of wall pushers kunts

nope didnt see that i got banned after making a post lol, i didnt make a harsh post i just said you guys are truly bitter, and this is an everton forum? lol it more about liverpool than everton.

any way i wont go there again.

and i defo would not like to share staium with them, but i suppose it would be cheaper to build one trophey room than 2 lol.

YNWA

Why would we need to build two trophy rooms red@heart?

Not like Everton are ever actually gonna need one

I know that is why i said "it would be cheaper to build 1 instead of 2"

Oops my mistake :blush:

One of these days i'll learn to read stuff properly.

by **lawrenson_sarah** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:17 am

I would never want to ground share

Dont know why just wouldnt

It wouldnt be like.... as special if it was shared by those blue nose tw*ts

by **redmikey** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:40 am

make everton ground share with tranmere or wrexham..

i don't want our club tarnish with that pile of sh.ite

city of culture board should invest in our club because of the world wide press it brings to the city

a good thread though because people need to express ideas like this because nothing is clear cut and the stadium issue is one i cannot believe doesn't get more attention as it will affect the whole club for the next 20 years if it is not done right and soon,

parry and moore need to pull there fingers out in the branding and marketing of our club

by **murphy0151** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:41 am

I dont think there is a need for a new ground. There is nothing worse than watching premier league games on the telly with loads off empty seats. I think we would probably be able to fill an extra 10,000 seats for the big games. But, honestly I think we would struggle to sell out for a sky game on a monday night against the likes off Reading or someone like that.

If anything we should forget about the new stadium and give Rafa the funds, and think about just renewing the Main stand.

by **Ace Ventura** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:17 pm

murphy0151 wrote:I dont think there is a need for a new ground. There is nothing worse than watching premier league games on the telly with loads off empty seats. I think we would probably be able to fill an extra 10,000 seats for the big games. But, honestly I think we would struggle to sell out for a sky game on a monday night against the likes off Reading or someone like that.

If anything we should forget about the new stadium and give Rafa the funds, and think about just renewing the Main stand.

If it was possible to update the main stand and bring in another 5-10,000 seats then i think the majority of supporters would be made up with that.
You are right Murphy, we are covered on sky all the time and that would affect attendances alot.
The option of staying at Anfield should be explored imo.

by **JBG** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:42 pm

Lads, the club has been looking at this for close to 20 years and the club's moneymen feel that if we has a 55,000 capacity stadium, we'd pretty much fill it every game, and if we had a 60,000 capacity stadium we might have a few empty seats for league and especially league cup matches, but the club would still fill it for important league and European matches.

The club has always wanted to stay at Anfield but its been mooted for 20 years and the cost of rebuilding Anfield is enormous. The whole stadium would be needed to be rebuilt and that would mean we'd have to share with Everton for two years, at least.

Man UTD rebuilt Old Trafford but they have the luxury of the fact that Old Trafford is surrounded by car parks whereas anybody that has stood under the Shankly Gates will release the problem with Anfield: its surrounded by terraced houses and even getting the builders in to do a very limited amount of work on Anfield would effectively close off a couple of the streets around it: not an option in a residential area.

I understand the club has managed to acquire some of the properties next door to Anfield but to rebuild Anfield like the Mancs did with Old Trafford would really mean we bought all of the surrounding properties, demolish them and close off the access roads for anything from 18 to 36 months.

The club has stated that its policy is to own its own stadium and not to groundshare.

In an ideal world I'd love to see Anfield refurbished and tidied up with another 10,000 seats, with those seats going to locals who have been priced out of attending Anfield by corporate and hospitality tickets sold outside of Liverpool. Thats not an anti-OOTER comments (I'm an OOTER) but instead it would be the best of both worlds, allowing both locals and OOTERS an equal bite of the cherry and would bring back a bit of life to Anfield on Saturday afternoons.

An extra 10,000 seats would also give the club more financial whallop in the transfer market.

by **laza** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:18 pm

Never ever share hallowed ground with infidels

Good discussion though

by **Judge** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:26 pm

redmikey wrote:make everton ground share with tranmere or wrexham..

i don't want our club tarnish with that pile of sh.ite

actually, anfield was evertons in the beginning

-------------------------------------------------------

writing courtesy of the L files site (see reference at bottom of article)

History of Liverpool Football Club

A Bright Beginning

In 1888 the Football League kicked off for the first time and at Anfield, Everton, Liverpool's biggest club of the day were the home side.

John Houlding, 'King' of Everton, a brewer of 'sparkling ales', a mover and shaker in Liverpool politics and a good part of the brains and money behind Everton Football Club was the owner of the Anfield Road ground. In 1892, Everton parted company with Houlding over the issue of the rent paid on the ground.

Houlding was left with a ground but no team, but not for long. He was fortunate that talented Irishman John McKenna, a member of the Everton coaching staff stayed loyal to him. With a hefty loan of £500, McKenna set about building Liverpool Football Club. He looked north for talent and assembled a team which became known as 'the team of all the Macs'. The team all hailed from Scotland with the exception of goalkeeper and Englishman, Bill McOwen…

After a modest double in their first season when they took the Lancashire League title and the Liverpool District Cup, Liverpool entered the new football league Second Division. The Macs romped to the title, unbeaten in the division. Something was happening at Anfield...gates rose from a few hundred to over 3,000 once word got around about the side's high scoring habits.

Sadly the runaway success had to come to an end and the newly promoted team crashed out of the First Division at the end of the season. However they bounced back in fine style, taking the Second Division by storm to return to the First Division determined to stay there.

After finishing as FA Cup runners-up in 1899, Liverpool captured the League Championship in 1901 under the guidance of McKenna's canny successor Tom Watson. The Anfield club had arrived among the teams to be reckoned with. 1901 was no fluke, the title returned to Anfield again in 1906 but the now established side needed more room for its growing army of fans.

Improvements to the ground included the towering hill of earth and cinders which quickly became known as the Kop after the Liverpool Echo compared it to the Spionkop; the hill where Boer guerrillas had inflicted a heavy defeat on the British army a few years earlier. Many of the men killed were from the north west, the name sticking because it was especially poignant.

Article courtesy of Stephen Done © Liverpool Football Club & Athletics Grounds plc 2001. The Club History has been produced with the help of Stephen Done, Curator of the Liverpool Football Club Museum.

by **madred** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 2:09 pm

Interesting read but what always come to my mind first about a ground share was could you ever imagine a ground where there is no Hillsborough memorial, shankly gates, paisley gates and the statue of shankly? And if they were going to be at a new ground shared by Everton I dare not think about the treatment that the Hillsborough memorial would get by them.

by **Dalglish** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:16 am

The Liverpool / Everton divide has got far worse in recent years and for theories as to why that is look no further than the Heysel disaster and the subsequent banning of all English clubs from Europe for 5 years (6 for Liverpool). Even though it has taken Everton longer than any other of the teams affected by the ban from 85-90 to get back into Europe (even Norwich got into Europe before them !!!) it is a statistic they conveniently overlook. Of course the Bitters were going to reign in Europe for time immemorial and we stoped that happening so what better way to blame all your failings on than to look jealously across the park to the neighbours.....

Groundshare doesn't work , AC and MIlan don't like it and Roma and Lazio arrange 2 riots a season and trash their own place such is their love for their shared home

In the world of football the fan has less of a say than at any other time. For fans sakes lets listen to what we are (on the whole) saying and stop this ridiculous idea that we can somehow save a few quid by sharing and learn how to get along when society and histroy dictates that it's never going to happen .....

by **ivor_the_injun** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:35 am

I think some people are getting the wrong end of the stick in terms of how our club is for money these days. We are not in any kind of financial trouble - we just need new investment to allow Rafa to kick on and build the team that he wants, as well as get the club a new stadium.

I think it's fair to say that most clubs in Europe would kill to get our current attendances, to have the players that we have at our disposal, and to realistically talk about having £30m to play with in the transfer market come summer. It's just that, in the context of where we are in the Premiership, and from a Champions League perspective, to move onto the next level we need sustained investment.

Until that happens, the new ground will be on the back burner, attendences will remain at the same level, and Moores and co will have to be a bit more frantic than they'd like trying to get the money together that Rafa wants.

I absolutely believe that the new stadium will happen. I'm just not sure that it'll happen at any point in the next 5 years. Rest assured, when it does, the money they'll make on the gate will mean it'll pay for itself in astonishingly quick time.

A ground share simply won't happen. I'd say that 90%+ of supporters of both Liverpool and Everton are dead against it.

by **The_Rock** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:53 am

BOODIDDY wrote:We have announced a deal with Adidas from next season onwards. However, the deal is totally dwarfed by the one they have with Chelsea. Even though we sell more shirts and merchandise worldwide.

Thats why Parry has to go. He is not competant enough to be a CEO. I am not sure of his credentials but LFC are one of the biggest clubs in the world...... We should be able to command a "premium" with the sponsors. Sponsors should be dieing to sponsor us...... Why is that not happening ?

Parry might be a good man...a great LFC fan at heart (he opposed the ground-sharing)...but he is not CEO material.

Liverpool FC Forum

Ground share - Ill get slated for this but please read

Who is online