• Liverpool Message Board

  • Greg Greg Dec 31, 2012 13:09 Flag

    who armchair really supports?

    just interested to know who everybody thinks armchair really supports?

    my money is on chelsea. what does everybody else reckon?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Not sure he even knows..

      The easy answer is, wealthy sheiks and 80k seat stadiums, so don't rule out City..

    • No I recon he's a Red, just maybe the PlayStation version where you can buy and sell who you want, and pesky things like balancing the books to avoid becoming the latest Leeds or Pompy is not relevant. But that mindset does seem to be similar to a certain Blue side from West London, and a lighter blue side in Manchester!

      • 1 Reply to dsteer_lfc_68
      • It´s said to be cruel to mock the afflicted and, in Armchair´s case, this is true! So, a word in his defence.

        Far as I can see he is, like me, an aging true red LFC supporter who still basks in the memories of the great days of yore when we were winning titles and trophies for fun.

        In those glory days there were of course no Sheiks or Russians around piling billions into the game. Today, the game is different as all of us have realised - but not Armchair it seems! He fails to make the connection between the Liverpool of the First Division days and the Liverpool that try to compete today on what is patently not a level playing field.

        Hence his childlike belief and constant suggestions that we "should be like Chelsea and Man City" - in other words, have owners who buy success and with players on 200k a week coming out of our ears. Regards his complaints about Brendan, I think he expects him to deliver weekly miracles in the way of management which ain´t possible given the resources we currently (don´t) have!

        So, give poor old Armchair credit for his support past and present, pity his frustrations and criticise his sanity if you like but not his loyalty - that´s a step too far to be fair!

    • He supports nobody - simple. He might be a 'fan' but I have never heard him not whinge. Even mourinho would only get 5 games! And the financials of a club? Forget it we should be pouring a billion in every year.

      • 1 Reply to Loki
      • I think like it was once said, maybe Hobs, it would have to be an insanely genius person to not be a fan, and come up with the material he does, so routinely and perfectly.. You couldn't script it, and if that is the case, bravo! Magnificent..

        That said, I'm not sure, but I think the bigger picture/issue is that while he may be a true supporter, I don't think he understands or digests, that the support goes beyond that of what's happening for 90" on the pitch, and the dynamics of management, running a club, financials and all the other pieces that end up as the product on the field..

        You're right though with Mourinho, and Guardiola too, just because I'd vomit at Jose'.. if they'd started 1 pt in 4, like we did, and then had a couple of inconsistencies, they'd be shown the door, along with the owners, and Anfield, in favor of anything bigger and better, which does not even exist in the realm of reality..

    • I find this thread a little bit unpleasant. My take is that Armchair is as much a Liverpool fan as any of the rest of you, or me being a Chelsea fan. He has his own views which other people can disagree with, can get annoyed with sometimes, as I have. But he's entitled to his views and to express them.

      For me, he's probably the most amiable contributor to this board and he puts up with a great deal of crap thrown at him (more than I get) without ever complaining or retaliating. I think a thread like this has a hint of bullying about it and doesn't sit well with the YNWA slogan you lot like to liberally adorn your posts with.

      Go Armchair. Tell it like you see it.


      • 1 Reply to Robert M
      • This was a genuine question. If it offends, i apologise. I just find armchairs continual whinging, season after season a little bit hard to get along with, particularly when he persists in making massive sweeping generalisations, and statements with little or no grounds in truth. Liverpool are not what they were at the moment, everybody knows that. i personally dont think changing managers every half season, who have not had a chance to build there own team or develop playing styles to there full potential should be disgarded. for somebody who talks about 'one step forward, two steps back' i would have thought armchair might be on the same page on that. either way, happy new year, and heres hoping 2013 is a winner.

    • No problems.. Squirl..

    • I also see this thread as a little unpleasant and un called for. Army is fine. My only frustrattion is having to say the same things a few times but that's the person in the Armchair.

      With regar to your points on Rodgers, I would say and agree with Squirl that things are pretty much on par with the players that we have. There's more than two ways to the top from here but the two extremes are..

      1. The club does a City or a Chelsea by throwing enormous money at players to sign.

      2. You build a youth system that is simply years beyond anyone elses and produces a constant stream of gems.

      neither is easier and and the most obvious way is to mix the two by buildinfg the clubs spending power allowing bigger money signings while also focussing on youth.

      To make things a touch more complex we've also had to completely remodel the club and the squad. That's still going on with a number of players that simply haven't lived up to or just aren't the quality we're looking for.

      So for me the team is kind of where you'd expect it it to be based on the players available withe the added bonus of being a yound squad that will improve, cheap to run, and is starting to play a style of football that we'd all love to see at Anfield.

      I'm sitting tight and will continue in my mission to get Armchair to see things my way. But if he still wants the 100,000 seater stadium built by the billlionaire who owns the cornershop in Armchair World than that's fine too.

    • ...''I'm sitting tight and will continue in my mission to get Armchair to see things my way''...

      FACISM at its best.............what a co ck.............

      you claim he is alrite yet want him to see your way of thinking.............egotistical qunt you be.

      now, back to reality.....why havent you answered me about coming to the Old Roan like you claimed you would??...........POOP POOP

      and let me on that 132 yr old daughter of yours, i dont mind a granny......................hahahahhahahahaha

    • Isn't that the whole point of having a debate you pompous skid mark, i.e. trying to convince someone of your point of view? So funny that you cant even grasp that concept. Oh I do chuckle at you. He can still have his opinion and even try to convince me that his is right if he wants. Well actually he does by posting on here.

      To think I've actually seen a couple of half decent posts from you on here. I've even agreed with you on the fact that we're a mid table team with mid table players etc. I actually think you're pretty clueless now.

      if there's one ego here mate it's yours, complete with 50 lbs/sq in stamped on the inside.

      Old Roan? you'll have to enlighten me
      I don't have a daughter. Must be one of Rooney's cast offs that you have in mind. Been there too have you?

    • OOPS
      wrong Colin....hahahahahahahah, i stand corrected.....

      Definition of debate


      a formal discussion on a particular matter in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward and which usually ends with a vote: last night’s debate on the Education Bill

      an argument about a particular subject, especially one in which many people are involved: the national debate on abortion [mass noun]: there has been much debate about prices

      [with object]
      argue about (a subject), especially in a formal manner: MPs debated the issue in the Commons [no object]: members of the society debated for five nights

      [with clause] consider a possible course of action in one’s mind before reaching a decision: he debated whether he should leave the matter alone or speak to her

      NOWHERE does it say or intimate you have to convince the other person of your point of view, thats for others to decide...........thats because that action dosent define the word DEBATE..............


    • Who was this aimed at?

    • View More Messages