Liverpool FC Forum

by **Pedro Maradona** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:13 pm

bavlondon wrote:Wasnt Moores going to dip into his own pocket last season to fork out the money for Owen before G&H took over? I agree though he made a mistake selling to these clowns.

I am not for a second doubting moores integrity and his geniune feelings for the club. (funny tho how the owen deal didnt materialise) i am just saying he had no clue what he was doing at the helm of the club, he was and has been a disaster since he bought it. he was nothing more than a rich fan with zero business acumen.

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:30 pm

Bollox Pedro, Moores did all he could for the club, he was competeting with United when they had the best side in the division. We had to buy Babb, while they could bring in Pallister. They got Keane, we got Leohardsen. As for Chelsea everyone fell behind them because of Ambrovich and I don't think we've fell behind Arsenal in a finicial way.

He's sold us to the yanks because like us, he's a fan, and at the time near enough everyone expected them to deliver what they promised. With heinsight we can sit here and say they've proven to be clowns, but at the time it looked like a great bit of buisiness.

by **redtrader74** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:33 pm

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:Bollox Pedro, Moores did all he could for the club, he was competeting with United when they had the best side in the division. We had to buy Babb, while they could bring in Pallister. They got Keane, we got Leohardsen. As for Chelsea everyone fell behind them because of Ambrovich and I don't think we've fell behind Arsenal in a finicial way.

He's sold us to the yanks because like us, he's a fan, and at the time near enough everyone expected them to deliver what they promised. With heinsight we can sit here and say they've proven to be clowns, but at the time it looked like a great bit of buisiness.

Unbelievable you protect Moores with the same points others have used to defend Rafa :no

maybe he should have appointed a manager from the lower divisions, and told him he is only buying players in the conference :laugh:

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:36 pm

How have people defended Benitez with Phil Babb?

by **redtrader74** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:40 pm

You don't seem stupid mate, but i shall spell it out anyway.....that we are financially inferior to Chelsea and Manu, that we have to buy at a lower level to them, and that they have players, Vidic, Ronaldo and Evra (i think) who we were close to getting but couldn't afford.

Arguments that have been rubbished when in defence of Rafa, but suitable when defending Moores. Oh yeah silly me, Moores is Local.

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:51 pm

Nothing to do with Moores being local pal, my arguement to Benitez with money, is he's had it to spend. Moores has had it to give obviously for Benitez to spend it but it's managers (not only Benitez, because from Souness to now we've brought in some sh!t) not buying the right quality. So I suppose I've worded it wrong. I didn't mean Moores has been inferior, I meant the money he's given has been badly spent.

As for Vidic and Ronaldo, neither was to do with money. Vidic we could of got but decided against him with the arrival of the better and cheaper Daniel Agger. And Ronaldo was deemed not good enough by Mr Houllier and Mr Thompson, nothing to do with money because we had a bid of 4 million accepted (8 less than what United forked out) and if you read Phil Thompson's autobiography you would see that was right. Also Evra wasn't deemed to exspensive, it was simplelly Benitez thought Aurellio was a better option, don't see it meself but I'm not Rafa.

So all in all Moores never once said we don't have the money, he could compete with anyone (contradicting an earlier post there aren't I) but we always seemed to end up with the worst option. But when we bought Babb, he looked a great buy after the 94 world cup in America, told you we've never liked that country

by **LFC2007** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:54 pm

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:Nothing to do with Moores being local pal, my arguement to Benitez with money, is he's had it to spend. Moores has had it to give obviously for Benitez to spend it but it's managers (not only Benitez, because from Souness to now we've brought in some sh!t) not buying the right quality.

But you believe we have a team as good as any other in the league, so he can't have spent the money he's been given that badly.

by **Pedro Maradona** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:59 pm

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:Bollox Pedro, Moores did all he could for the club, he was competeting with United when they had the best side in the division. We had to buy Babb, while they could bring in Pallister. They got Keane, we got Leohardsen. As for Chelsea everyone fell behind them because of Ambrovich and I don't think we've fell behind Arsenal in a finicial way.

He's sold us to the yanks because like us, he's a fan, and at the time near enough everyone expected them to deliver what they promised. With heinsight we can sit here and say they've proven to be clowns, but at the time it looked like a great bit of buisiness.

Its not bollox, he has been a disaster. Liverpool spent massive money on some very average players since 1991 for example we got dean saunders when Man utd bought roy keane. It wasnt a question of availabilty of funds it was a question of bringing in the right coaching staff and as a conciquence the right players. Utd won there first league in 1993. We were on the slippery slope well before 1993. Lets get one thing straight. Moores employed managers to buy players, moores didnt buy them. We paid top dollar for the likes of Babb Leonardsen etc because Evans bought them. He also let Souness buy the likes of Paul Stewart, Dean Saunders etc. (granted in hindsight easy to say they were all bad buys) Its very simple, Moores made a lot of bad decisions during his time as Chairman and im basing this on off the pitch not on the pitch. Its not a coincidence that Man Utd became the dominant club when Sky got involved and the money stakes in the game changed. Why because they were better run than Liverpool FC were run. we were left behind and we are playing catch up since. In the meantime the likes of Arsenal have won leagues in a smaller stadium and managed to built the emirates without being whored out to some billionare. Chelsea have overtaken us because of abramavich so what does Moores do he whores us to the new owner of man city, and when that falls thru he decides to turn down DIC to sell to the yanks when prior to this Doug Ellis wouldnt sell to Gillett coz he didnt trust him (who instead sold to Randy Lerner for less money.) Look under Moores Liverpool stagnated as a club. his time at the helm can be described as a period of inertia. when we needed to change and progress with the likes of Utd he did nothing. His idea was to bring in Rick Parry, yet another good move eh?
Look it is no coincidence we didnt win a league under his stewardship. it wasnt about money until the likes of Abramovich bought into the Premiership, dont be fooled by that we cudnt compete financially with the likes of Utd in the 1990s bollox because we were able to do it in the 60s, 70s and 80s, we simply got left behind in the 1990s and I put the blame at Moores door.
And in relation to the hindsight of bringing in Hicks and Gillett, Doug Ellis saw it, so why couldnt Moores?

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:59 pm

Well I personally think the money's he's been given he should be head and shoulders above the rest. And as it's proven the players aren't good enough, I simplelly said at the start of the season, our strongest 11 could give any a run for their money, what a surprise 6 or 7 of the 11 I chose haven't been picked on a regular basis this season, injuries played a part but still, those who haven't been injured are being dropped for Kuyt and Aurellio. Also with the money Benitez has been given, to only bring in 6 or 7 world stars isn't great managing.

by **Pedro Maradona** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:04 am

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:Well I personally think the money's he's been given he should be head and shoulders above the rest. And as it's proven the players aren't good enough, I simplelly said at the start of the season, our strongest 11 could give any a run for their money, what a surprise 6 or 7 of the 11 I chose haven't been picked on a regular basis this season, injuries played a part but still, those who haven't been injured are being dropped for Kuyt and Aurellio. Also with the money Benitez has been given, to only bring in 6 or 7 world stars isn't great managing.

off the top of my head Im sure this year Spurs and Sunderland spent more than Liverpool did on players, its hard to compete with Chelsea and Utd when you get the same funds as them as the likes of Sunderland.

by **LFC2007** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:08 am

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:Well I personally think the money's he's been given he should be head and shoulders above the rest. And as it's proven the players aren't good enough, I simplelly said at the start of the season, our strongest 11 could give any a run for their money, what a surprise 6 or 7 of the 11 I chose haven't been picked on a regular basis this season, injuries played a part but still, those who haven't been injured are being dropped for Kuyt and Aurellio. Also with the money Benitez has been given, to only bring in 6 or 7 world stars isn't great managing.

So our players aren't good enough, yet you believe we have a team as good as any other in the league?

Work that one out.

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:08 am

Pedro Maradona wrote:
god_bless_john_houlding wrote:Bollox Pedro, Moores did all he could for the club, he was competeting with United when they had the best side in the division. We had to buy Babb, while they could bring in Pallister. They got Keane, we got Leohardsen. As for Chelsea everyone fell behind them because of Ambrovich and I don't think we've fell behind Arsenal in a finicial way.

He's sold us to the yanks because like us, he's a fan, and at the time near enough everyone expected them to deliver what they promised. With heinsight we can sit here and say they've proven to be clowns, but at the time it looked like a great bit of buisiness.

Its not bollox, he has been a disaster. Liverpool spent massive money on some very average players since 1991 for example we got dean saunders when Man utd bought roy keane. It wasnt a question of availabilty of funds it was a question of bringing in the right coaching staff and as a conciquence the right players. Utd won there first league in 1993. We were on the slippery slope well before 1993. Lets get one thing straight. Moores employed managers to buy players, moores didnt buy them. We paid top dollar for the likes of Babb Leonardsen etc because Evans bought them. He also let Souness buy the likes of Paul Stewart, Dean Saunders etc. (granted in hindsight easy to say they were all bad buys) Its very simple, Moores made a lot of bad decisions during his time as Chairman and im basing this on off the pitch not on the pitch. Its not a coincidence that Man Utd became the dominant club when Sky got involved and the money stakes in the game changed. Why because they were better run than Liverpool FC were run. we were left behind and we are playing catch up since. In the meantime the likes of Arsenal have won leagues in a smaller stadium and managed to built the emirates without being whored out to some billionare. Chelsea have overtaken us because of abramavich so what does Moores do he whores us to the new owner of man city, and when that falls thru he decides to turn down DIC to sell to the yanks when prior to this Doug Ellis wouldnt sell to Gillett coz he didnt trust him (who instead sold to Randy Lerner for less money.) Look under Moores Liverpool stagnated as a club. his time at the helm can be described as a period of inertia. when we needed to change and progress with the likes of Utd he did nothing. His idea was to bring in Rick Parry, yet another good move eh?
Look it is no coincidence we didnt win a league under his stewardship. it wasnt about money until the likes of Abramovich bought into the Premiership, dont be fooled by that we cudnt compete financially with the likes of Utd in the 1990s bollox because we were able to do it in the 60s, 70s and 80s, we simply got left behind in the 1990s and I put the blame at Moores door.
And in relation to the hindsight of bringing in Hicks and Gillett, Doug Ellis saw it, so why couldnt Moores?

I agree United were probably better run, but let's not forget, in the early 90s (94 to be exact) we were changing the ground when the Kop was becoming an all seater. We were still a firm believer in our youth policy in those days as well as taking gambles because United could offer all the major stars of the day more money.

Souness wrecked the club and took us backward, Moores tried to buy back the success by giving managers all the money they wanted. Unfortunately we were a long way behind catching United in the 90s (no where as far as we are now) I don't blame Moores for us not winning the league, we won our first European Cup in 21 years under Moores, is that his fault as well?

I'll always credit and fault people, but I think trying to lay all the blame on Mr. Moores is unfair. He did great things for this club, and with all the right intentions sold to the yanks. He, more than anyone is probably regretting that decision.

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:10 am

LFC2007 wrote:
god_bless_john_houlding wrote:Well I personally think the money's he's been given he should be head and shoulders above the rest. And as it's proven the players aren't good enough, I simplelly said at the start of the season, our strongest 11 could give any a run for their money, what a surprise 6 or 7 of the 11 I chose haven't been picked on a regular basis this season, injuries played a part but still, those who haven't been injured are being dropped for Kuyt and Aurellio. Also with the money Benitez has been given, to only bring in 6 or 7 world stars isn't great managing.

So our players aren't good enough, yet you believe we have a team as good as any other in the league?

Work that one out.

with hindsight they're not good enough, and even then I don't think it's the actuall players who aren't good enough. It's tactics and rotation that's lost us the league.

by **redtrader74** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:12 am

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:Well I personally think the money's he's been given he should be head and shoulders above the rest. And as it's proven the players aren't good enough, I simplelly said at the start of the season, our strongest 11 could give any a run for their money, what a surprise 6 or 7 of the 11 I chose haven't been picked on a regular basis this season, injuries played a part but still, those who haven't been injured are being dropped for Kuyt and Aurellio. Also with the money Benitez has been given, to only bring in 6 or 7 world stars isn't great managing.

You're letting your disdain for Rafa cloud the vast football knowledge you have :;):

You actually believe that we should be head and shoulders above Chelsea and Manu with the money Rafa had to spend? Come off it they have £20m players sitting on the bench.

We could have bought better (with hindsight), but there was no guarentee we'd have got the alternatives, or that they would have performed. I guess we should have looked in the lower leagues to compete with the Ronaldo, Rooney, Essien, Drogba etc etc. eh?

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:17 am

Alright, maybe I did take it to extreme saying we should be head and shoulders ahead, but the money we've spent since Benitez' arrivial we shouldn't be struggling to get 4th. We should be competeing on all fronts, reguarally.

Liverpool FC Forum

TAKEOVER COMPLETE - H & G Finally Jibbed!

Who is online