JRC

Agreed. I think the way we are now set up - which is both effective and and attractive - Dirk's attributes are pretty well spot on. A more attacking, or tricky, or flahy- whatever - winger would weaken us in those games where we need to have control and tactical nous, unless they have Dirk's work ethic (unlikely - does anyone?) and game intelligence - the latter being, I think one of the reasons Rafa rates him so highly, the fact that he not only does the job he is told, but that he seems to understand clearly how his role fits in strategically. (In this he is like Zenden, only better as a player) Maybe, as mentioned, he would complement, and release, a more attacking RB, or a more traditional RW could effectively replace him in games against 'smaller' teams who park the bus, where shape is less important than forward momentum and options, but right now, and especially in Europe, Dirk is just about ideal.

F365 are claiming that Chelsea suffered most fromthe Ref - the Drogba penalty (even while admitting he fouled Carra, and Carra got the ball, and it was outside the area!), the penalising Terry for a foul on Reina (Even though Drogba didn't put the loose ball in, and the ball was cleared anyway!), and the Free Kick that led to our goal (even though, iirc, they won the ball back only for FFL to lose it). The 'journo' is a better gooner, though, so say no more

Quite. Because now the team that has won in the San Siro and the Nou Camp, not to mention in a must-win game in Marseille, has to go to Stamford Bridge and do at least as well as, ooh, Wigan. Or Rosenberg. If last night taught us anything, it must be that they should hold no fears for us. We were the better team, they looked disjointed and disinterested at times. They were well organized but limited, we are more than capable of scoring at least one, and of frustrating them, and getting the crowd on their backs. Believe, brothers, believe.

What I don't understand is why we decided to sit back and take the 1-0 even though we were all over them and comfortably the better side. As much as Riise is a c*** we only have ourselves to blame What, for sitting back so much we forced 2 great saves from Cech in the last 5 minutes? We didn't sit back so much as not push on too recklessly (which cost us the Adebayor goal in the last round, tbh) - i.e not everyone up for corners or free kicks. but we didn't invite them onto the edge of our box or anything.

While he's wearing the shirt, he should get the support. He can go in the summer, mind.

At one point very late on the 4th official literally ran out from the dugout area to the side of the pitch to catch the ball and throw it to Chelsea so they could take a throw-in quickly. I thought it must be Clarke or Tenkate at first, he jumped up so quickly - couldn't believe it was the official. I also can't believe some pundits are saying the Ref had a good match, becasue he let things flow. He constantly pulled up nothing challenges, then missed much worse ones. At least he wasn't card happy, but when Terry should have been booked - for leading with his elbow - he did nothing.

Although them being knocked out 3 times on the trot by the same team at the same stage is quite improbable, the hard part of that - the reason why it is improbable - is first getting to the point where they have been knocked out 2 times on the trot b-t-s-t-a-t-s-s. From that point on, it's decidedly less improbable. And if I'm not mistaken, that is where we currently stand. Probability, or 'The Law of Averages' offers them no succour, I'm glad to say.

Even after we drew 1-1 at the Emirates - generally agreed to be a good result for the away team - , a lot of people were arguing that Arsenal were in a strong position to come to Anfield and win. (Which, to be fair, for about 30 seconds of the 83rd minute, they were). Do the job right tonight, and the advantage is ours. Get it wrong, and we'll just to have to pull something out at the Bridge. np.

...thus even sweeter! Remember- Roma '84.

True, they're raising finance from shareholders to improve their capital position, exactly so they CAN lend money to people; but it's also true that it ain't going to be cheap or easy to arrange.

Or what we think of him playing a weakened team at OT - becasue he thought they couldn't win anyway - and they created loads of chances as Utd struggled, all of which fell to an unknown debutante who messed up. A win or draw there would have kept them up, a defeat for Utd may have upset their momentum and prevented them getting another title, something we do feel strongly about. OR - the weakened team we put out at Sheffield on the first day of the season because we had a qualifier in the week? Would they have got that point if we had put a full strength team out?

That is something that still amazes - and scares - me. For 45 minutes I watched from the East Stand the carnage on the pitch, the ad board stretchers, the unmoving bodies with coats over them - and the obscenity of Police with dogs forming a security cordon - but somehow couldn't connect it with actual deaths. I heard 5 dead mentioned as we were leaving the ground, and people shouted it down, then 12 confirmed on the radio in the car; I stopped on the outskirts of Sheffield to try to call home and told this to the queue at the phone box, and they refused to believe me. There was a kind of collective denial, or cognitive dissonance going on. Hillsborough left an indelible mark on me psychologically, although I was never in any immediate danger - more the might-have-beens (I was in the dreadful crush at the Arsenal semi in '81, and decided then that sitting was not such a bad idea, even for a dedicated Kopite), and particularly the evident distress and subsequent relief in my wife/sister/mum's voices when I finally got through on the phone, around 5 o'clock, and how for some that call - and relief - never came; but perhaps that denial - not really appreciating that I was sat/stood in a football stand impotently watching the last breaths of 96 people in front of me - protected me and others from the demons that haunted and still haunt many that were closer to it. JFT96. RIP. YNWA.

Except the issue is not the ethicality of £500K bonuses, nor their prevalence in the CEO world that Parry inhabits, but the poster's attempt to use the bonus as evidence of Parry's venality and impropriety in 'choosing' G&H - when the bonus, we were led to believe, was payable on completion of any deal, whomsover that be with, including DIC; and as such, clearly not the decisive or determining factor it was claimed to be.

If - when - Parry leaves LFC, despite the received wisdom of forum lore, he will have very few problems finding lucrative remuneration somewhere else - very possibly more than at LFC, and almost certainly with less hassle than he currently has. Him wanting to stay on - both at takeover time and now - is much more likely to be about his undeniable affection for the club - he was a fan, still is- and maybe at the moment, the belief that he has an important role to play in protecting the club's interests and long term future.

That's effectively a statement of heresy or apostasy on here - and this forum is positively hippy-liberal-anglican compared to the fundamentalism on other sites. Truth is, I can vouch from personal contatcts in the game that he is very well regarded for his professionalism, integrity, intelligence and - whisper it - ability, and those that accuse him of looking after number one, or lining his own pockets - if that was what he wanted, plus less hassle, and wasn't bothered about what happened to LFC, he could almost certainly have f*cked this whole pantomime off by now and gone earning more money at the FA or PL if he wanted to. Fwiw, I think his skillset is not specifically marketing oriented, more admin & finance - which is fine for a CEO -, but the failing in not getting those skills on board is probably his - except weren't Granada supposed to offer that; and how much did we, as fans, really want us to be a slick, market-focussed commercial business anyway? Either way, the hyped-up clownification of Parry is by-the-by at this point. He will move on soon enough, I suspect, and we will maybe know then if we are better off; but for now, Hicks wants him out for his own reasons, and that's good enough to want him to stay in my book.

You can add in hid failure to give Babel anything when Emerton constantly kicked, pulled, pushed him etc.

You're own post contains the essence of the disparity; that Parry is a 'clown' is now accepted almost without demur, but some of the arguments are based on allusions, circumstantial evidence, anecdotes etc, and some of the threads in the past arguing against him have contained a lot of wild speculation, whilst some of the business logic and grasp of finances has not been of the best. I'm not saying there aren't valid or principled criticisms of his time, nor that, in fact, we would not, on other circumstances, be better off if he were to go - but G&H are pretty ruthless businessmen - whatever agreements they gave Moores, they have shown no compunction about dishonouring them, so why didn't they BOTH - when they spoke with each other - sack such an obvious incompetent? An 'accepted' 'clown'? It's not like it wouldn't have been any less popular 12 months ago? It's because Hicks' latest move is nothing to do with Parry's performance good or bad, but everything to do with currying favour with fans - I wouldn't be surprised if the notorious letter contained forum fonts, smileys and text language, so much does it sound, by most accounts, like a cut & paste job from just about any LFC board - whilst trying to engineer a stronger position for himself in the ongoing struggle. Just as those who doubt Rafa objected to Hicks' maneouvres in November even if they approved of the possible outcome, we should not grant him the benefit of our doubt on this. Get Hicks out, and then let us see what happens to Parry. (I'm not convinced, from stuff I've heard, that DIC would necessarily dump him anyway btw.)

The PR is more aimed at the fans, imo. The supposed charge card that Hicks has made against Parry could have been taken verbatim from what has long passed as received wisdom on the boards. As has been mentioned by others, those charges are a mixture of truth, half-truth, apocrypha, anecdote, miscomprehension and downright falsehood. Parry is by no means perfect, but he is a long way from the 'clown' stereotype that is peddled here; but I'm sure Hicks recognises how well the Anti-Parry stuff goes down. The stories of email contact by Jr with 'fans groups' only confirms his plan for me. Truth of the matter is, he could have made this decision last year quite easily - he only wants it now because Rick is helping Gillet in blocking him. Don't let any hatred, contempt or lack of confidence for Parry sway you on this. This is not the time to wish him gone.

His first possible move to Chelsea was 2004, when Rafa arrived and he was away with Terry and FFL at the Euro 2004. As someone suggested above, maybe the Daily Mail peddled story that he only stayed because of death threats got it the wrong way round - maybe he was looking to leave because of them. This stuff was the time that Gerrard moved in with Houllier for a period, iirc. I always understood the story of his car being followed and smashed up in front of him was because Alex was an Ex of the threatener, but didn't know if the whole story was apocryphal anyway; this proves that a substantial part of it was not - although not sure of timings, because he was at the 2001 Cup Final celebration with Ellison, I think. FFS, am I posting on an LFC site or Pobbitch? Sorry, lost it there for a moment.

Not knowing which being how I came to make a total pr*ck of myself by celebrating after 90 minutes of the Home Leg against Sheffield United....

That the ref was from Luton

It happened this season on TV in a Watford game. Player A took short corner to B who played it back to him, short, but upfield (away from the goal line) so that A ran round the back of him to cross. At the point that B played it, A was by the corner flag and offside; even though he received the ball further back and the pass was 'backwards' he was correctly given offside. FWIW, noone from Sky understood it, but it was correct.

Lucas lacks the hypermobility that Masch offers, and which might be important against a high tempo pressing midfield. It may be the most important Derby since 2005, but we won that one - and still finished 5th, other consolations aside.

But what about 'Second Season Syndrome'? Or the 'Difficult 3rd Album', to mix the context? Torres will almost certainly have a patch of poor form at some time, he's only human....hold on, surely some mistake? Sorry, I got confused.