Eco Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 Decided to give this a watch despite it being on C5, the actual prog sadly got in the way of the adverts. We got to see Gerrard, Rodgers & Lucas's 'crib's', lots of embarrased family members, some clips from training sessions and a meeting with the Red Sox in Boston which could've been interesting but wasn't, although we learnt that Charlie Adam has never played cricket. Oh, and L'pools S American contingent play Monopoly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northampton Red Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 Thought it was OK, shot quite nicely and Brendan Rogers comes across as a decent bloke. Seems like a bit of an advert for Liverpool FC though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderArmyy Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 being liverpool: being total garbage at football and reffering to your history at every chance you get. Thinking their a big club and that luis suarez is an angel. Did I mention their pretty good at hitting the post to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welcome To The Jungle Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 Decided to give this a watch despite it being on C5, the actual prog sadly got in the way of the adverts. We got to see Gerrard, Rodgers & Lucas's 'crib's', lots of embarrased family members, some clips from training sessions and a meeting with the Red Sox in Boston which could've been interesting but wasn't, although we learnt that Charlie Adam has never played cricket. Oh, and L'pools S American contingent play Monopoly. And its slow news days Slow news days are great They're by fat the greatest days That the world has ever seen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abraham Romanovich Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 The ego has landed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 The ego has landed. Has at least a passing resemblance to this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 I bet Suarez even cheats at Monopoly. Brendan Rodgers is David Brent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastonboy Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 I bet Suarez even cheats at Monopoly. Brendan Rodgers is David Brent. I don't know if anyone picked up on the opening scene when Rodgers is giving his pre-match speech.... (I paraphrase) " You can only trust yourselves. Once you step out onto that pitch only trust yourselves. You can also trust your family and supporters" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rule The Waves Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 I'm not really sure why, but I don't like Liverpool. As someone else has alluded to, they seem to think they have a god given right to be successful today because of what has happened in the past, which is admittedly to be admired. They also think, as was briefly mentioned in the programme last night, that their is something special about Liverpool as a place and the club "Liverpool is a religion, and Anfield is our place of worship." this is no different to how a lot of football fans think, yet they seem to think it is unique to them. They also seem to spend large amounts of money on decidedly average players. I just don't get them for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 I don't know if anyone picked up on the opening scene when Rodgers is giving his pre-match speech.... (I paraphrase) " You can only trust yourselves. Once you step out onto that pitch only trust yourselves. You can also trust your family and supporters" The result of the match where he was giving that speech: West Brom 3-0 Liverpool. That worked then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 The result of the match where he was giving that speech: West Brom 3-0 Liverpool. That worked then... Think that's good, enjoy this inspirational motivational speech from Mr Magoo:- McGhee told the club's official website: "With Matt Harrold's injury there is no question that I should be playing Eliot Richards, but he leaves us with questions all the time; he is brilliant and then he is disappointing, so we don't know what's coming. "So the decision I have got to make is do I risk Eliot's inconsistency or do I go with five midfield players." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_bristol Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 I'm not really sure why, but I don't like Liverpool. As someone else has alluded to, they seem to think they have a god given right to be successful today because of what has happened in the past, which is admittedly to be admired. They also think, as was briefly mentioned in the programme last night, that their is something special about Liverpool as a place and the club "Liverpool is a religion, and Anfield is our place of worship." this is no different to how a lot of football fans think, yet they seem to think it is unique to them. They also seem to spend large amounts of money on decidedly average players. I just don't get them for some reason. Don't forget that much of the "history" they speak of was winning the European cup back when you could get a bye from one round to another and win it in about 4 matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastonboy Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Don't forget that much of the "history" they speak of was winning the European cup back when you could get a bye from one round to another and win it in about 4 matches. Yes, but it was the competition with ONLY the league champions in it. Not The CHampions League , but ok , you finished second third and fourth do you can still compete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eco Posted September 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Don't forget that much of the "history" they speak of was winning the European cup back when you could get a bye from one round to another and win it in about 4 matches. Can't believe you're disrespecting their being the best team in Europe for a portion of the late 70's early 80's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunnyfunt Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Decided to give this a watch despite it being on C5, the actual prog sadly got in the way of the adverts. We got to see Gerrard, Rodgers & Lucas's 'crib's', lots of embarrased family members, some clips from training sessions and a meeting with the Red Sox in Boston which could've been interesting but wasn't, although we learnt that Charlie Adam has never played cricket. Oh, and L'pools S American contingent play Monopoly. Sounds amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Don't forget that much of the "history" they speak of was winning the European cup back when you could get a bye from one round to another and win it in about 4 matches. Not so. When Liverpool originally won the European Cup during the 1970s you had to be the Champions of your domestic league or the holders of the trophy. European Champions were true Champions in those days. During the late 1970s, I remember the then mighty Liverpool (under Bob Paisley) and the then mighty Nottingham Forest (under Clough and Taylor) vying for the European Cup - one club as holders and the other as English Champions - those were the days because we played both those great teams at Ashton Gate in the top flight of English football as was. The more I think about it the more I think that the 1960s and the 1970s were the real halcyon days of English football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Don't forget that much of the "history" they speak of was winning the European cup back when you could get a bye from one round to another and win it in about 4 matches. Sorry Luke but your miles off on this one. I'm no Liverpool fan but they were a great side and as others have alluded to , it was harder to win the old European Cup than it is to win the Champions League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Sorry Luke but your miles off on this one. I'm no Liverpool fan but they were a great side and as others have alluded to , it was harder to win the old European Cup than it is to win the Champions League. Very true,nowadays you can lose a couple games and still win it. There is a rare group this season I see, Man City's group actually have 4 teams that were all Champions of there countries last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In the Net Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 The ego has landed. I thought that was decidedly weird, and a bit unexpected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bs3 Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 Don't forget that much of the "history" they speak of was winning the European cup back when you could get a bye from one round to another and win it in about 4 matches. You are sadly mistaken . There was no byes and it was a straight knock out with all the THE BEST teams in Europe . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InCider Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Both very different comps. I actually think the new format is better. 2nd placed teams like Man U and Barca for example are much better teams than the winners of say Albania and Belgium. In the old format you could still have 2 teams in the final that didn't win their leagues in that season, so don't really get that argument either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunnyfunt Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 You are sadly mistaken . There was no byes and it was a straight knock out with all the THE BEST teams in Europe . Without doubt ALL the best teams in Europe are in the champions league group stages today. Liverpool 'fans' are in th same ilk as Forest and Leeds. You used to be decent but now your shite...get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Both very different comps. I actually think the new format is better. 2nd placed teams like Man U and Barca for example are much better teams than the winners of say Albania and Belgium. In the old format you could still have 2 teams in the final that didn't win their leagues in that season, so don't really get that argument either. You had to win your respective league to gain entry into the competition. Every team were Champions in the truest sense ,because they had won the league in the previous season , or in the case of when Liverpool played Forest , Liverpool were the reigning European champions. There was no way of winning a European Cup unless you had won your own domestic title and that is not the case anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Both very different comps. I actually think the new format is better. 2nd placed teams like Man U and Barca for example are much better teams than the winners of say Albania and Belgium. In the old format you could still have 2 teams in the final that didn't win their leagues in that season, so don't really get that argument either. I think the point is, every team who was in the tournament had won their league the previous season, so the clubs had actually achieved something. Finishing 2nd 3rd and 4th is now classed as achieving something. Arsenal are making a great living off the back of winning nothing year after year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Normally I'd say that it's a better format, but the Arsenal example is an interesting point. They have done nothing for years, yet use the also ran money to cement their place in the top 4, even if it is looking increasingly precarious. For me it should be top two and cup winners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 For me it should be the champions of each country and the reigning champions, as it used to be. Why should failure be rewarded? I can't stand the tv and money involved. Anyway the powers that be got their European league, just like they always wanted. I have very little interest in the competition anymore. When you can turn up to a champions league game playing your reserves, there is something wrong. It should be a straight cup knock out, none of this league bullshit. It really is a pet hate of mine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 I think I'm right in saying that every win in a Champions league game is worth a couple million pounds. That seems to be the only reason for groups. Why don't they just make it a straight knock out from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Why don't they just make it a straight knock out from the start. Because the UEFA Cup was shit like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Because the UEFA Cup was shit like that. Or big clubs were made to look not so big. Knock out is far more exciting than the shitty league setup they have now. It is a piss poor imitation of the European Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 Or big clubs were made to look not so big. Knock out is far more exciting than the shitty league setup they have now. It is a piss poor imitation of the European Cup. The Europa League is better as it is now, joke competition or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.