Discussion in 'General LFC Discussion' started by Beanokelly, Oct 8, 2015.
No the LFC TV one. It was very good, Channel 4 not great.
HATE hearing about him speak of leaving at end of his contract in the press today :-(
4 years will fly by...
The press are pricks, they have their milestone stories they look for, eg will you will the premier league, when are you leaving...they have to get the doomongary headlines...
What a man. What a bloody man.
Not 100% certain he'll leave in 2024. He'd never leave before getting to at least 10 years surely
Has the video of last nights justifiable rant from Jurgen surfaced or just the quotes?
Sliderry bastards censoring that. Never liked Shreeves. Always thought him a bit of cnut
I seen it on Twitter last night but can't find it now.
I saw it on YouTube last night but it’s blocked now
Shreeves was alright, he didn't cut it or decide not to show it. In many ways I can understand Sky not showing it giving who they had in the studio. Evra is a nut and Lundberg has never been on sky as far as I know. They couldn't have discussed it even they wanted too.
Evra is a loose cannon and they have decided that that makes for great tv. I'm sure Neville would have added his 2 sense in a manner where by what he says is of the most importance in the room but all of this directly involves them so cut Jurgen pronto. Has it made their website as a talking point?
David Jones is really starting to grate now. Maybe its just me.
Couple of sites have the Black screen up with "Video unavailable due to Sky copyrights"
Found it https://extra.ie/2020/11/23/sport/s...s-angry-rant-sky-sports-didnt-want-you-to-see - sounds not great but at least you can hear firsthand what was said
I saw the video on YouTube the other night also.
It is definitely not the club's who decide or agree on the fixtures as Shreeves seemed to suggest, it is the TV companies that pick it but it is the PL and FA that allow it imo.
Fair play to Klopp for speaking out. Poor by Sky for not showing it. But this isn't the first time this list of fixtures has happened, and it won't be the last.
Be interesting to see how Sky handle Jurgen in future. I can see them turning on them as that was highly
Embarrassing for them. A defeat or a few draws, they will ramp up the crisis club narrative they go with every few weeks. Jurgen well able to handle them.
To be fair to Geoff Shreeves when he was saying "you agreed to it" ,I think he was talking about the clubs and he's right. TV companies pay absolute fortunes for a product and they should be allowed to use that product in the way they can get the best value from it. Its up to the clubs to protect their players and there's nothing stopping them insisting on more say over scheduling when they're negotiating the contract. But it would make their product worth less and they're not willing to accept less money to have that control,so I've always said Klopp and the other managers issue should be with the owners,not the TV companies.
But with the covid situation and the fixture load this season,this is the first time I've been able to get on board with Klopp on taking on the TV companies because the effect on player welfare has gone beyond whats reasonable. If we described it as far more people are getting hurt than should be(which is exactly what's happening)rather than saying players are picking up more injuries,then in any other walk of life Klopp would have overwhelming support. But sympathy for footballers getting hurt is always thin on the ground,he's a big club manager and no matter what recommendation comes from the big clubs,the first instinct from the rest of football is to fight against it.
We'll manage our injuries better than everybody else will manage theirs because we have Jurgen Klopp,and come February/March when certain managers are worried about their jobs because their teams results have dropped off a cliff,they might be regretting not backing him now.
I don't think this is the last will hear of this in the coming wks but I really hope klopp gets the backing from the bigger managers to this as sky can't censor everyone. Dont mind the fools like fathead Bruce who still want 3 subs, he clearly doesn't have the intelligence for a debate.
Bruce wanting 3 subs isn't as inherently stupid an opinion as you might think, the extra subs is certainly a move which favours the bigger clubs who have stronger strength in depth in their squads
I don't think Bruce is stupid for favouring 3 subs,he might not even be wrong. 37 points is a successful season in his eyes and he can do that with 3 subs,so why offer anybody else an advantage he doesn't need? But I think there's a good overall argument that smaller clubs can benefit from 5 subs just as much as bigger clubs. I don't know the actual stats but in my opinion in individual games against smaller clubs,bigger clubs benefit more from the other teams fatigue than from the impact of their subs. Let's say its Liverpool v West Ham and they're holding out with their well drilled 10 men behind the ball. An extra sub or two does very little for us in that situation. We want to keep our most dangerous players on the pitch and we'll often still need that lapse in concentration from an opposing player. But freshening up as many minds and legs as possible could make a big difference for them. I reckon its the one time the winger switches off and doesn't track back,or the midfielder let's a player run etc. that makes the difference in those matches more so than whats coming off the bench for the attacking team. And its the physical and mental fatigue that the big team has inflicted on you that leads to those lapses.
The big clubs will be taking advantage of the 5 subs more often than not when the games wrapped up. The smaller teams can take the same attitude in those games where they're done for and in the games they have wrapped up which granted,will be less often. Both teams benefit further down the line. But they'll both suffer more injuries without that benefit and the big teams will handle those injuries better. The benefits to the big clubs are obvious but managers will lose their jobs because of injuries they could possibly have avoided. Players will miss out on moves which will hit clubs finances at a time they're already stretched and somebody might get relegated who could otherwise have stayed up. Steve Bruce is entitled to think solely of Newcastle but the fact he doesn't want to take the chance to keep more of his players healthy basically sums Newcastle up under him. I said on Saturday that if I was a Newcastle fan I would rather be relegated than watch his team every week. Nobody can tell me those fans weren't having more fun when they were in the Championship than they are now. Everything he prioritises when sending his team out is gutless,and his stance on this issue is just another example of that.
Even shit teams like Newcastle are packed with internationals. I'd hazard a guess that before the Chelsea game their goalkeeper was away with the international team for 3 games, Schar, Almiron, Fraser, Hendrix, Lewis, Ritchie, Yedlin and a couple probably with u21s. I'm sure they were all delighted to play the full 90 when the legs were packing in half an hour earlier.
I was listening to a sports show the other day and this 3 subs rule was brought up, a very valid point was raised in relation to the smaller clubs, basically that this is short sightness from them, as wait till the Xmas schedule kicks in plus throw in the fa Cup come January alot of these clubs when their tryin to get over the magic 40 point mark to stay up, most of their squads are tired , they could need the extra subs then. Look what klopp said the other day at the start most clubs were against now most are for it because they have seen the affect its having on the teams.
The argument from the "smaller teams" that the big boys will benefit more is a little naive if you ask me.
Newcastle play us/City/Chelsea/Utd (I'm deliberately not including Arsenal and Spurs as I dont think they have the squads for it to make that much difference) with the 3 subs in force - what happens the vast majority of the times? Yep they get battered. Having to play against 5 subs isnt really going to make that much difference to the lower teams against the highest levels of teams.
It may very well make a difference to those same lower teams as the season goes on as a lot of those teams spend the majority of their time chasing the ball - how is having an extra few subs NOT going to benefit them in the long run.
Ive heard the statement "it will only let the big boys get further ahead" from Bruce, Dyche, Moyes (although he has changed his tune) several times - news flash boys - theyre already SO far ahead of you giving them an "advantage" by allowing 5 subs - as they do in 4 of the other big 5 leagues - isnt going to make a lick of difference.
Your Brightons, Burnleys, Palaces etc are only competing in the same league as the top 5/6/7 (depending on whos narrative we believe) in name only. I dont mean that to sound elitist as God knows we fell into that bracket not so long ago but its a simple truth.
Liverpool having 5 subs to make on a Saturday morning after a Wednesday night away european fixture shouldnt both Steve Bruce or Sean Dyche but it does, why? who knows or cares at this point.
Its not that many years ago that there was general outcry about why the English teams couldnt compete in Europe, Now theyre not only competing but regularly reaching semi's and finals and winning (Go us) them, so the obvious thing to do is to handicap them in their home league and make competing on a European front next to impossible