Taking Sides: Liverpool vs Everton

I only saw the last half hour, but Liverpool looked easily the better team. Having said that, Everton were down to ten men. And Liverpool's goal scorer shouldn't even have been on the pitch. And Carragher could easily have been sent off too. And the Everton 'penalty' right at the end and right in front of the ref was about the most blatant I've ever seen not given. Maybe Twatenurg was about to give it, but Gerrard had a word with him and he changed his mind. No, that can't be right, because Gerrard had been subbed for being too passionate.

Yeah Liverpool were a lot better at that point but only due to 10 man Everton and tiredness on Everton's part.

Before that they were horrendous. Still, a game like that might give them a confidence boost.

Some good news

Yeah, that makes me feel a whole lot better. I've checked the BBC website and it would appear that we still lost.

(I suppose it's a little better than previous derby-wreckers like Thomas, Poll and Courtney being put forward for World Cup duty. Where they shone, obviously. Still time for Battenburg - who is only 32, damn him - to rise mysteriously to the top of his profession though).

'Z-Cars'

Actually, not good news after all

these things even out over the course of a season, just keep repeating that to yourself.

I know how annoying that sounded after Liverpool Vs Chelsea. But now it does seem less so!

Ronan, I said at the time that the Chelsea decision - and the ott outcry about it - would end up working in Liverpool's favour cos refs would be shitscared of making a similar mistake, appearing on the front page of all the papers, getting dropped and being forced to phone up rafa to apologise (how many managers have had that courtesy since?).

these things even out over the course of a season, just keep repeating that to yourself.

They don't seem to even out over the course of a lifetime, in the case of this particular fixture. But we'll see what the next 30-40 years bring, eh?

Football, like everything else, is all about contingencies and even though Bitters like me will point to five or six Clatterbridge decisions in the 2nd half which ranged from dubious to criminally negligent, you can only really go from Dodgy Incident #1 and extrapolate from that. So, Hibbert stays and Gerrard bends in a free-kick, inspiring his team-mates to a 3-1 win over 11-man Everton. Kuyt doesn't try to kill anyone and Everton never get near the Liverpool box for the rest of the game. There, that's "better".

They don't seem to even out over the course of a lifetime in the case of this particular fixture

http://football.guardian.co.uk/championsleague200708/story/0,,2264605,00.html

that is:

The slur could only go unanswered for so long and, with Internazionale added to Liverpool's list of routine European conquests, Steven Gerrard yesterday rebuked Rio Ferdinand's theory that Champions League success is no longer the mark of a great team.

Gerrard chose not to mention his Manchester United rival by name as he basked in Liverpool's victory at San Siro but believes Ferdinand displayed a deliberate lack of respect with the recent declaration that the Premier League title is a more accurate barometer of quality than the Champions League.

...

"People have said that teams have won the Champions League that are not great, but I think we can let our record answer that," he said. "We have been to the final twice in three years and we have won some big games in some important stadiums across Europe, and we have produced the performances of a great European side.

"In Europe we are a force. We do not fear anyone. We have got great experience in Europe, we have been there and we know what it is all about. I don't want to say who we want to play and who we don't but I think we can let the rest worry about us, because we have got the pedigree in this competition."

--

THE SLUR COULD ONLY GO UNANSWERED FOR SO LONG

"Borussia Dortmund one of the greats of European football" says diving Scouse cunt

Aren't they?

Merseyside police will today hold discussions with Liverpool and Everton regarding alleged incidents during Sunday's local derby match at Anfield. The investigation will focus on claims that Phil Neville, the Everton captain, was spat at and punched by Liverpool supporters as he prepared to take a throw-in, while Liverpool skipper Steven Gerrard was forced to endure abusive chants about his daughter.

The alleged episodes occurred during the second half of Liverpool's 1-0 win, a result which saw Rafael Benítez's side consolidate their hold on the final Champions League qualifying berth. Dave Lewis, Merseyside police's football liaison officer, will lead the talks. "Police will be speaking to the clubs involved today," confirmed a spokesman for the force.

The inquiry was opened at the behest of Everton, who have expressed disappointment about the hostility directed at Neville and also at Benítez's post-match remarks about the abuse aimed at Gerrard. "We felt it necessary to try to involve the safety officers and police because we cannot have a situation where supporters are having physical contact with professional footballers during the game," said Everton's spokesman Ian Ross. "We want to make sure that doesn't happen again at the Merseyside derby or any other game.

"Whilst we would never condone the singling out of individual players for vitriolic insults, it is a shame that Mr Benítez chose to ignore the actions of his own club's supporters. Not only was Joleon Lescott subjected to an afternoon-long barrage of quite disgusting and quite audible abuse, Phil Neville was seemingly spat at several times and was also punched in the back by a supporter as he took a throw-in.

"We have asked Merseyside police and our safety officer to look into the matter. In calling for Everton supporters to respect his players, Mr Benítez should, perhaps, remember his comments of 12 months ago when he sought to belittle one of world sport's oldest and most respected institutions by describing us as a 'small club'. Respect is a two-way street."

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2269902,00.html

--

I have just realized that the last sentence sort of implies that it's *no wonder* Everton supporters didn't "respect" Mr Benitez's players, as he has only driven one way down that two-way street - and in a dangerous fashion, at high speed, veering across the lanes and knocking over mailboxes and parking meters.

basically, fuck football.

In no other sport would this be even marginally tolerated.

I mean it's like a religious war conducted by 13 year olds.

...over a round bit of calfskin and some fishing nets. Brilliant!

People who actually go to these games (I haven't been to a derby match in over 20 years) say that the atmosphere is the about the most unpleasant it's ever been for this fixture. There's still no crowd segregation (the only Prem match where this is relaxed?) and most of the vitriol is directed at the players (twas ever thus; Clemence always used to get an ovation from the Gwladys Street end pre-game but, after that, it was relentless swearing), but I think there's a real air of malice around now. I certainly hate Liverpool more than ever!

Oh, the sudden, unabashed, cheery vitriol of that post's last line.

I could def see a lot of mouths moving and people standing up & yelling/singing whenever an opposing player took the sideline. And seeing as it was at Anfield....

I was thinking about how this dichotomy had developed in the incredibly nigh seven years since this thread started.

Everton: progress; they don't give the impression of being that big a club, don't spend very ostentatiously (but do occasionally spend a lot), but are very hard to beat (probably not much fun to watch for neutrals, or perhaps I just don't pay attention) and have become European regulars; compete for CL, let alone UEFA, places practically every season. This feels like an achievement.

Liverpool: still plainly one of the Great Clubs of Europe, and the world; still one of the few clubs with a chance of winning the title; and magnificent exploits in Europe, as well as various cup wins in the last few years. But what taints it, maybe, is the ownership issue of the last year or two. Of all the English clubs to become the carved-up turkey of a couple of right-wing US absentee millionaires, well, Liverpool wouldn't have seemed that likely, if only because of some kind of historic image of the city and the club's working-class local playing stock, boot room tradition etc. I guess all clubs, including mine, are rich men's playthings nowadays, but if I were a Red I wouldn't feel very happy with how this has gone - there is something wrong at the top of the club, however well the team do. (And I would love them to win tonight.)

still one of the few clubs with a chance of winning the title

Are they really? They've only been within 10 points of the league winners twice in the seven years since this thread started.

but are very hard to beat (probably not much fun to watch for neutrals, or perhaps I just don't pay attention)

I think we're a much more attractive attacking side than we were 2-3 seasons ago. Granted, with three-quarters of our forward line injured and no Cahill, we're starting to revert to the scrapping-for-a-point, hoof-it-forward stereotype.

still one of the few clubs with a chance of winning the title

But that's just it, isn't it? That's their role within the elite: The Team That Never Wins The Title. 18 years now, the last 10-12 of them spent as Perennial Title Contenders.

The bottom line is, I think, that we slightly overachieve (given our resources) and Liverpool slightly underachieve. Liverpool are the 2nd-biggest spenders in English football and I'd guess that we're somewhere between 6th and 10th. The gulf in wealth between the clubs* means that any apparent league parity is only fleeting (EFC's 4th-place in 2005 followed by a season in which the gap was something like 30pts; our fading finishes in 2003 and, as looks likely, this season). I imagine it would be immensely frustrating to be a Liverpool fan in the Houllier/Benitez era if it weren't for those outrageous Cup triumphs. What's missing from the Moyes era is precisely that - a Cup run; we had two half-decent goes at it this season.

* - I'd be interested to know quite how far back this inequality can be traced. In the early-'60s Everton were the richer club (thanks to Moores); obviously Liverpool had a decade of almost unchallenged supremacy from '73 onwards but, in those days, how did that translate into revenue? The notion of the Global Brand was barely known then. Was there much between the clubs in the mid-late '80s? Is it all down to Heysel (didn't that hurt Liverpool as much/more?) and Peter Johnson's mismanagement of the EFC finances? Aside from better league placings, LFC didn't exactly achieve much 1995-2001 to open up a Man Utd-style gap in turnover vs the rest of the league but that's how it seems to have transpired. LFC just keep spending because it's always there to spend. Hard to see how the gulf between the clubs can ever be bridged as long as Liverpool keep doing enough to secure the CL place each season.

I usually think of the summer of '87 as some kind of turning point; Kendall off to Spain, and the two hottest properties in English football - Barnes and Beardsley - go, not to the reigning champs, but to Anfield.

Although, (Barrow)-in-Furness, you had beaten the Reds to the rum punch of England's third hottest property just a few months earlier:

--
It wasn’t long before Division One’s bigger clubs approached Leeds for his services. Everton and Liverpool both offered £840,000 in 1987, and cash-strapped Leeds accepted. Ian chose Everton as his next team, even though he had agreed terms with Liverpool, and moved there in January 1987. Ian helped his new club to win the title in his debut season. His never-say-die attitude was well received by the Everton fans it wasn't until Ian played as an emergency right-back that he flourished for the club. This transformation to a defender happened so quickly with such ease and in February 1989 he was called up into the full England squad for a friendly international in Greece. Unfortunately however Snodin was forced to withdraw because of injury and his problems became worse only a few weeks later when he was carried off during a game against Sheffield Wednesday with a serious hamstring problem. Despite lengthy periods of rest and several operations, Snodin struggled to regain his fitness and spent the whole of the 1991-92 season on the sidelines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Snodin
--

(Actually I don't remember him as a defender, not long-term anyway.)

But was Snodin the last player to choose Everton over Liverpool on Big Club vs Big Club grounds, ie. the sense that Everton were even more likely than LFC to Win Trophies?

Wayne Clarke signed (with Stuart Storer) in either 1987 or 1988, didn't he?

I usually think of the summer of '87 as some kind of turning point

deserves repetition for its own sake.

Agree with your para re. finances: in those days (up to 1990s) NO top-flight team was that far ahead of the others. I think the Twin Merseyside Giants were probably quite financially close together, and LFC's break into vast wealth comes after the 1980s - and thus after their best days on the pitch.

Wayne Clarke signed (with Stuart Storer) in either 1987 or 1988, didn't he?

March 1987. A winner at Highbury and an Easter Monday hat-trick vs Newcastle helping to clinch the title while Sharp was out injured. A derby winner the following season of course; wasn't selected for the '89 Cup final and was swapped for Mike Newell(!) shortly after that. Strength in depth? One in, one out, more like.

Amazed to discover (via premsoccerstats, I think it was) that Stig Bjornbye had the 2nd highest number of Premiership assists in 96-97! I'm not making this up! Why would I?

The really big change in wealth came at least in part after the home clubs were allowed to keep all the gate receipts, I think.

No-one could make it up. Except you.

I was just thinking about Clarke's goal at Highbury: this is the 20-yard lob over Lukic, some time in March I think? That goal was on ITV highlights, Brian Moore commentary I think.

Curious the high local drama of that 3.1988 derby: it must have been a wonderful occasion for an Everton fan (though it must have been a wonderful season for a Liverpool fan).

Stig Bjornbye crosses, Fowler heads it home was a common Liverpool goal back then

The really big change in wealth came at least in part after the home clubs were allowed to keep all the gate receipts, I think.

That makes sense; Everton's gates in the early '90s were pretty dire - dipping below 20,000 on occasion. I don't know how long the Park End was out of commission but that didn't help - even a full house was only about 34,000.

Curious the high local drama of that 3.1988 derby: it must have been a wonderful occasion for an Everton fan

There were two derby wins apiece that season; you may remember McMahon and Beardsley settling the Anfield league derby. Everton also won at Anfield in the League Cup (Gary Stevens daisycutter, Grob unsighted) but Liverpool won at Goodison in the FA Cup (Ray Houghton flicking home a driven cross). By the time Everton beat Liverpool again in the league, Beardsley had crossed the park.

I just about remember all those games - certainly the first LFC win (McMahon's was sort of dinked over the keeper after Barnes's through-ball, Beardsley's thrashed in on the turn from edge of the box ... is that right?). If I didn't have any memory of the others it would be odd - though I might need youtube to refresh it.

But my point re. Clarke's goal was (of course?) that it ended the unbeaten run when it looked like going on all season, and a Blue must surely have taken a rare degree of glee from this? David Lacey headline the next day: 'A Little Local Trouble For The History Men'.

LFC didn't exactly achieve much 1995-2001 to open up a Man Utd-style gap in turnover vs the rest of the league but that's how it seems to have transpired

I don't think it mattered especially that Liverpool were unsuccessful at that time. I think one of the big differences between nowadays and the pre-Prem days is that clubs make a lot more money out of their non-match-going support, whereas back in the 80s the vast bulk of income would have come through gate receipts. So in the 80s I expect Liverpool would have only been marginally wealthier than Everton as their crowds probably weren't much higher (I can't be bothered checking, but I'd expect Liverpool's crowds were about 20-30% higher on average than Everton's). But during their relentless and spirit-crushingly tedious glory years through the 70s and 80s they built up a huge fanbase of glory-hunting cunts all around the country, most of whom would have never been to Anfield. Whereas the city of Liverpool itself might be split 50/50 betweens reds and blues (I guess - I have no idea), I would expect non-Merseyside Liverpool supporters to outnumber Everton by at least ten-to-one, probably much more. Once clubs started to make serious money out of armchair supporters it was always going to benefit Liverpool.

Whereas every single Man United supporter was born within a short bus journey of Old Trafford.

I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort - it's a very similar situation with United and City.

Congratulations to Liverpool on their supporters for a 1-1 draw in the quarter-final.

I hope they win the second leg and progress.

ref having a bit of a nightmare.

liverpool look so much better when they go ahead.

you're a chirpy fella today, alan green

me no chirp

will ye have a podgy irascible irishman?

Britishman.

he was born on the isle! on the soils of home. will ye not kiss the soils?

also snap qn: should i go and watch charlton even though that wd involve missing the first 30 minutes at least

British soils.

stolen soils! will ye have a sheffield wednesday at home?

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

so what has happened, in this match ???

What a marvellous fightback from Liverpool (2-3 at City)!

Hansen now saying it's a 3-horse race for the title after all, and he's never seen them play so much as a team under Benitez.

Love the irresponsible gossip here - can you imagine Lawro out for a drink with Stevie G, and the latter telling Lawro these things?

Speaking on The Last Word on Today FM, Lawrenson said he discussed Keane's predicament with Steven Gerrard after the game and claimed the Liverpool captain suspects his team-mate could be sold in the forthcoming transfer window. "I hate to name drop," said Lawrenson, "but I was having a drink with Gerrard on Saturday and we talked about Keane. They share the same agent [Struan Marshall] and quite honestly he thinks something is going to happen with Keane in January. Sounds like he could be moved on."

While Marshall declined to comment Liverpool issued a statement last night denying the pundit's version of events. A club spokesman said: "Mark Lawrenson's remarks are his interpretation of a private chat between the two of them. They do not accurately reflect Steven's opinion of ­Robbie Keane and they certainly do not tally with Steven's recollection of the ­conversation itself."

Lawrenson's assessment of Keane's time at Liverpool did not end with ­predictions for January, with the former Anfield defender casting doubt on Benítez's wisdom in signing the striker to begin with.

"He [Benítez] got it wrong. If Liverpool were playing a Champions League final, FA Cup final or a massive game that they had to win tomorrow, you know Keane wouldn't start. He'd not get in the team. Why pay £20m for a player who doesn't suit the formation or system? He's not going to improve at 28.

"You just wonder if Tottenham will come back and do a bit of a deal and Liverpool would go for someone else."

Also this agent is perhaps the only person I can think of who is actually called Struan.