What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

OT: Association Football

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
150,981
did any actually have heritage linked to Liverpool in the UK?

there was one pom and the rest were Aussies and the pom was from London, so none that I was aware of

they all play football as well as cricket
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
150,981
wouldn't say i'm on bandwagon when i started following the EPL and Liverpool back in the early 2000s and similarly to Parra, they hadn't won an EPL title in decades.

I think a lot of Aussies started following them because its here Harry Kewell and Viduka were playing at the time when broadcasting finally allowed us to see Aussie players on the international stage

yeah, no doubt that had a lot to do with it which is a good thing

don't know what its like where you live but they are like f**king rabbits up here, they're everywhere

one of my pub mates has a Scouser doona cover for his bed and scouser posters all over his walls, he's obsessed
 

bazza

Referee
Messages
29,991
there was one pom and the rest were Aussies and the pom was from London, so none that I was aware of

they all play football as well as cricket
person from London supports Liverpool FC - checks out
The only other option would have been Man U
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
84,988
Still billion worth of playing talent up against some kids
Liverpool’s team was older than Chelsea’s. Inexperience is literally the reason Chelsea are struggling. In that cup final Liverpool used 10 players over the age of 24 while Chelsea had only 7. The average age of the sides was 24 vs 23. For the starting 11 it was 25 to 23.
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
150,981
Liverpool’s team was older than Chelsea’s. Inexperience is literally the reason Chelsea are struggling. In that cup final Liverpool used 10 players over the age of 24 while Chelsea had only 7. The average age of the sides was 24 vs 23. For the starting 11 it was 25 to 23.

so not really much difference then
 

eels_fan

First Grade
Messages
6,882
Liverpool’s team was older than Chelsea’s. Inexperience is literally the reason Chelsea are struggling. In that cup final Liverpool used 10 players over the age of 24 while Chelsea had only 7. The average age of the sides was 24 vs 23. For the starting 11 it was 25 to 23.
Chelsea is struggling because they spent hundreds of millions on shit players, not the age of their squad.

how many of Chelsea’s players had less than 20 games of first team experience ? None.

how many of Liverpools had less than 20 games? 5

Liverpool had 7 walk up starting 11 players missing
 

King-Gutho94

Coach
Messages
11,621
Chelsea are mediocre there fans just have to deal with it now after being spoilt for 20 years.

Just like Manchester United are since Ferguson left mediocre left hovering between 3th-7th.

Nothing gives me joy like those clubs suffering a bit of struggle after decades of success.
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
150,981
the difference being ManU's achievemtns were on the up and up as old Foreskin Face was a very good operator

Chel$ki on the other hand........
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
84,988
Chelsea is struggling because they spent hundreds of millions on shit players, not the age of their squad.
They spent hundreds of millions on future stars, which is why they cost so much in transfer fees. Established stars often don’t cost so much in fees, because they are so expensive just in salaries.
how many of Chelsea’s players had less than 20 games of first team experience ? None.

how many of Liverpools had less than 20 games? 5
That’s a fairly arbitrary cutoff. Now compare how many from each team had 100+ premier league games.
Liverpool had 7 walk up starting 11 players missing
That’s just means they have a better team, as you’d expect from a club that wasn’t forced to miss a couple of transfer windows. Chelsea was f**ked over by the UK sanctions imposed on Abramovich, and their Champions League winning squad was dismantled. The new owners have since gone with a youth policy rather than signing established stars. Liverpool already have plenty of those.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
84,988
Chelsea are mediocre there fans just have to deal with it now after being spoilt for 20 years.

Just like Manchester United are since Ferguson left mediocre left hovering between 3th-7th.

Nothing gives me joy like those clubs suffering a bit of struggle after decades of success.
The Glazers spend less than the previous owners, which is why Ferguson won less after they bought the club. But Chelsea’s new owners seem committed to spending, at least for now. The January transfer window was fairly quiet but the real test will be how they spend in the summer.
 

Latest posts

Top