my sex life to that list?

Ta.

I'd like to add the apostrophe.

Manners

and

small, interesting shops

I picked up one of those forecast sheets from the bookies yesterday and I was amazed that they had Blackpool at 9-1 to win at a ground where Sunderland drew 2-2 and Northampton won in the League Cup recently.
Exceedingly generous odds and someone must have made a substantial profit out of it.

I'd add The Times to The Observer in your list.
And Record Collector.
Mojo.
And the pop chart.

Where did it all go wrong? All I know is that I refuse to join the growing clamour to oust Hodgson. He's a decent man trying to steer a sinking ship through a storm.

The sooner the club is sold the better, though I fear that administration, points deductions and relegation loom.

add Test Match Cricket to the list

Could they do a Leeds?

Wonder what price they were at the start of the season to be relegated?

That one caller to a phone-in said he wanted to bring back the 'attacking football' of Benitez.

..Martin O'Neill, or he'll end up at Old Trafford.

has fully explained to me the clamour for Dalglish. Someone who hasn't managed for a generation, had relatively little success without money and who has no track record in Europe. No that the last will be a problem this season or next.

Echo and the Bunnymen "Never Stop"

I hope it isn't Liverpool. Given their history, and the fact that there'll be lots of people who, as young lads, supported them in the good times and who have now gone on to earn a goodly bob or two and who might now be tempted to step in, I think they'll be OK.

Without wishing particularly to offend any Liverpool fans here, watching their downfall from the outside is all rather enjoyable.

It provides a nice Karmic balance with that incredible dominance they enjoyed in the seventies and eighties. Not to mention all of those dodgy penalties at Anfield. ;)

I think the Observer is still a great paper. I like how it's slimmed down; the sport section (especially David Hills's Said & Done section) is good, the magazine has had some great features recently, the Review is excellent, and it has David Mitchell and Victoria Coren, two of my favourite columnists.

and as a season ticket holder of 20 years and regular for 35 years (I'm 43)....

I'm finding it almost impossible to explain what is going on at MY (and it is mine and I make no apologies for believing that) club at the moment.

The ownership is obviously an issue, the lack of a 65,000 seater stadium is obviously an issue, the poor Benitez signings are obviously an issue, the fact that Hodgson is out of his depth is obviously an issue, a disillusioned Torres is obviously an issue, Gerrard not being able to win EVERY game on his own is obviously an issue, but for fuck's sake - Northampton and Blackpool beating us at home in the same week, when do the players start to accept some fucking responsibility?

I am sick to death of gobshite, piss poor players like Ryan Babel pontifi................oh god I can't be arsed, I'ts late and I've 'talked' about it enough this afternoon.

Night night.

I hate to admit it but the quality of the writing's gone up recently, and unlike previous years where they've focussed almost exclusively on Hoxtonite trendies, this year the magazine seems to have pulled out its finger and actually discovered decent new music. From all over the world, not just the US and the UK, although they do fill most of the pages.

I would replace it on your list with the once great Uncut, but is now so predictable as to what will be inside (a classic artist!, new americana!, meandering oscar winning films!) that there's no point picking it up anymore. Sad really.

I have a bet with a friend that they won't win anything significant over the 3 seasons from 2009 / 10. I think they are in serious danger of falling off the top perch and Sir Alex's career won't end in the blaze of glory even non-Man U fans like me believe he deserves.

Sadly I think they are going to have a long, hard season. Take Stevie G out the equation, add to it sicknote Torres, and what is left ?

I think they will still finish mid-table, but in a Premier League that, in terms of quality of football, has been in decline for quite a few years, that is a travesty in itself. Never has the argument for a reduction from 20 to 18 Premier League clubs been more strong. Blackpool v Stoke; Wigan v Wolves. Not exactly mouth watering prospects come Saturday afternoon(or Saturday evening;Sunday lunchtime and teatime; Monday night !). Traditional footy, with its 3pm Saturday died long ago!

as Grant alluded to in a tweet on Sunday, part of the problem with Liverpool is this unshakeable belief in the recent history of the club entitling it to future success.
Such a cult has sprung up around those quasi leftist 'Sons of Sean Dundee' supporters' groups that sees the club pulling in two ways: those thirsting for a return to the past and the board's hunt for a modern backer.
The former wants a solution from inside the tradition of the club (Dalglish et al touted as managers plus local ownership) which is utterly barmy given the realities of modern globalised football. With the exception of some massive mutualised clubs, successful clubs are now the preserve of big money owners.
The latter have over estimated the potential of the global markets to sustain investment which delivers success. European football does not have any examples of shareholder clubs, at the elite level, delivering long term sustained success. When the markets crash, the investments have to crash.
Football requires long term cycles of investment, the modern markets however have peaks and troughs which bring ever alarmingly closer together periods of crisis.
Liverpool needs a big money owner, but how many will come forward when Chelsea and Man City are about to show that Premiership football is not an investment but a hugely (and perhaps immoral) vanity project?
As a Merseyside-resident, with Reds as mates, it gives me no pleasure to tell Liverpool fans that the future is bleak, through no fault of their own. It's back to pre-1965 for them. It may be best to let the rest go bust and build again.

It seemed like most of the Don Revie team had a crack at managing Leeds and all were hopeless. Dalglish had success last time but I fear he would struggle this time.

Edde Gray was an accomplished manager and brought forward a lot of good young players, Allan Clarke did do a good a job but both were victims of the state of the club at the time. As Leedsboy quite rightly says, we are are special in the art of cocking things up (how many clubs can be 4-1 up at home and end up losing 4-6 !). Back to Liverpool though; they are now reaping the results of having signed too many bad players over the past few years and Benitez far oustayed his welcome there. They are one of the big football institutions and how they have got to where they are should never have happened with the profile and support they have. But it just goes to show, you have twits in charge of any club, you'll suffer eventually.

... to turn Liverpool around. As much as his time at Fulham was a success, it took them a while after he joined to get them going - and only escaped relegation on the last day (and winning 4 of the last 5 games to get them into that position).

As for O'Neill, he's always struck me as lacking that extra little bit of tactical nous to go to one of the top 4 clubs. He succeeds by motivation and bringing the best out of players - but his teams always seem to just run out of steam as it gets to the end of the season - especially at Villa.

His qualities worked at Celtic as it's enought to beat the other clubs - and is suited to cup games.

If Liverpool did appoint O'Niell, I think he'd get them to the Top 4 - but if they want to win the Premier League, then he's not quite the man I'd choose for them.

From my perspective, Hodgson's 'problem' is that he's been very successful at managing middle-ranking national and international teams*. (Yes, I know he managed Inter but I think the highest they finished in Serie A under him was 5th, wasn't it?)

The sort of teams where a 0-0 draw away to Utrecht (or the international equivalent) was, quite rightly, seen as a fantastic result.

That's not going to cut the mustard at Anfield, given that Liverpool still think of themselves as being part of the "Big Four", so he'll need to change his mindset. It'll be interesting to see whether or not he has the capacity to do so.

* Halmstad, Bristol City, Örebro, Malmö, Neuchâtel Xamax, Switzerland, Inter Milan, Blackburn, Inter Milan (again, briefly), Grasshopper, Copenhagen, Udinese, UAE, Viking, Finland, Fulham

love the profoundly scouse self-mythology/persecution complex interface here. it's only a bad football team

Liverpool have released a statement:

"The Board of Directors have received two excellent financial offers to buy the Club that would repay all its long-term debt. A Board meeting was called today to review these bids and approve a sale. Shortly prior to the meeting, the owners - Tom Hicks and George Gillett - sought to remove Managing Director Christian Purslow and Commercial Director Ian Ayre from the Board, seeking to replace them with Mack Hicks and Lori Kay McCutcheon."

Hopefully we'll have new owners in shortly then.

But that video urging Hicks to go is embarrassing and gets to the self satisfied nature of the supporters' groups who have sprung up at Anfield.

The Liverpool situation sounds even more bananas now.
Two executives have been sacked by the owners, as written above, but it appears they're trying to push through one of the deals anyway.

I've no link with the football club (and they clearly didn't deserve to pip QPR to the title all those years ago!) but this whole situation seems to be about more than just Liverpool FC as, if LFC fall, I fear the whole house of cards could tumble.

How has LFC's debt increased six-fold since 2007? Ludicrous.

Would never happen at Fortress Portman Road.

Ulp.

Everyone knows that Bill Shankley made a pact with the devil in the early 60's. How else would anyone explain the incredible number of refereeing decisions going their way over the years, the unbelievable luck in key games, the obvious rigging of cup draws etc. etc.
It would seem that their time has run out now, cue the over the top reaction from their previously smug, whining fans. No doubt if they do get relegated they will manage to get themselves reinstated due to some obscure clause in their pact with Old Nick & Sky TV, in a similiar way that they bent the rules a couple of years ago in the Champions League. Keep up the good work Woy. And yes, I am a bluenose.

Back to the original theme....what about the declining quality of 'Outnumbered' in the last series ? Lets hope 'The Inbetweeners' quit after this series, otherwise they're in danger of going the same way.

If tonight's headlines are to be believed.

...can I say that I'm really enjoying the endless vox pops with the Liverpool fans outside Anfield?

It's the best comedy accent in the world, isn't it?

It's like being trapped in a never-ending sketch from the Harry Enfield show.

But with a lot more anti-American content.

...although Liverpool are suffering at the moment what Manchester City went through in the 90's was even worse. And you still have one or two players who can turn a game with a flash of brilliance. You won't go down and down again like we did.
I've still got Torres in my fantasy team. Give Royboy some time for Shankly's* sake. Red Sox fans are the ones who won nothing for years and this guy Henry brought them the World Series.
Or go to Underhill Saturday afternoon and talk to my mates who support Bradford City. And travel 400 miles every fortnight to home games.

*He's not God, he's more important than that

I was born in the summer of '86, wearing a Liverpool FC kit, a few months after the League and Cup Double. My family aren't from Liverpool, and I'm the only one who's lived there for an extended period of time (university), we've not been to many matches for reasons of practicality, cost and (in my case recently) employment, yet we (the males) have been supporters all our lives, and it irks me when people question a fan's right to support their chosen football club, as though they don't conform to the unwritten rules (i.e. not being a local, not going to every single match et al). My father supports Liverpool FC, and like any football-supporting father, he passed this preference down to his sons. I grew up with a desire to learn all things past and present about Liverpool FC, and instead of educating me in government approved subjects, my father would test me on my ability to remember the 1965 FA Cup winning line-up, for instance- Lawrence, Lawler, Byrne, Strong, Yeats, Stevenson, Callaghan, Hunt, St John, Smith, Thompson.

Luckily for him, he grew up witnessing the glory days of Shankly, Keegan, Dalglish and Rush. I, on the otherhand, have grown up in slightly harsher climates. In my lifetime, Liverpool have won the league twice, in 1988 and then again in 1990. That's twenty years ago when they last won the league, yet I'd rather have another twenty years of failure than another three years of Tom Hicks and George Gillet.

I'm not foolish enough to believe we can have another 'Honest' John (Houlding, McKenna or Smith), and I know that David Moores was slightly out of his depth financially in comparison to the likes of Roman Abramovic, which was one of his reasons for selling the club. I know that, in order to compete in today's football market, you need money to survive. I'm not fond of the attitude that's displayed by rival supporters on here, but mostly outside of this blog on the 'Have Your Say' forums of the BBC and YouTube; and would prefer to see a balanced criticism of the situation, rather than one that lets petty rivalries, or stereotypes get in the way. A club doesn't deserve to be in a financial mess because a referee awarded them a dodgy penalty thirty-four years ago. Nor does a football club deserve to be in perennial decline because they were almost unbeatable during the 1970s and 1980s. Does this mean Manchester United should expect a similar kicking if they reach a similar state in the future? I should hope not, and they do not deserve it either.

In 2007, we'd spent fifteen years in the shadow of our East Lancashire neighbours, having enjoyed bragging rights over them for the majority of two decades, and we knew we needed the financial muscle to be able to compete in the transfer market with the likes of Chelsea and Manchester United. So,of course we were happy when Hicks and Gillett took over, we trusted the judgement of Rick Parry and David Moores, and the new owners promised good things; yet they've broken so many of those promises and that's why Liverpool supporters want them out; not because we've not won anything under their ownership. They promised a new stadium would be built (something we desperately need, but due to iconography of Anfield don't necessarily want ), yet they've not even started digging; the only thing Hicks and Gillett like to dig for is gold. They promised the supporters that they wouldn't laden the club with debt, yet we're now over £350m in the red. They couldn't afford to buy the club with their own money, so they've just borrowed money in the club's name and saddled us with the responsibility of getting rid of it. That's what bothers me, the fact that when they (hopefully) piss off, somebody else has got to come in and clear the shit they created. I'm cautiously optimistic about the prospect of NESV owning the club, not because they're American, or anything like that, but because I (as a supporter) don't wish to see our club ruined. The phrase 'once bitten twice shy' springs to mind. Should their takeover bid be a success, I wish them well.

In three years, Hicks and Gillet have had more arguments with each other than a couple in the middle of a messy divorce. Which begs the question, why did they agree to purchase the club together in the first place, and why has it not come as a surprise that their ownership has been a shambles? Now, I don't wish for the following text to appear as though I'm hero worshipping Rafa Benitez, because he did a lot of things that annoyed me; growing that terrible goatee being one of them, but he was our best manager since Kenny Dalglish, and any right-minded football fan will agree. He was also, to his credit, one of the first to stand-up to Hicks and Gillet and criticise their policy. The way they reacted, and treated Benitez in the aftermath was a disgrace, and under the circumstances I think Rafa came out of the situation by far the better man. Liverpool FC don't have spats in the newspapers, they don't go behind the manager's back and ask Jurgen Klinsmann if he'd like the non-vacant manager's job. Benitez is a far better manager than Hodgson could ever be, and whilst he was often frustrating with his selection policy/substitutions, his tactics were often spot on. Under his 'negative' tactics, Liverpool had their most successful season in the Premiership yet, and points wise, 2009/10 wasn't even the club's worst performance under Benitez; that occurred during his first season in charge. In fact, we were only five points (and four positions away) from that of our total in 2006/07. People are too quick to criticise his tactics and his transfer record, yet nobody seems to applaud him tightening up the defence, and he was honest enough to admit when he'd bought somebody who wasn't quite up to the standard and got rid of them fairly quickly.

We were tipped for the title at the beginning of last season, having come second the year before, but we've gone downhill so rapidly since then that it feels like we're the furthest we've ever been from winning the league. On the pitch, nothing much has changed other than the fact we've sold Alonso and Mascherano within the last fifteen months (and replaced them with players we seemed to have signed to make Lucas look good). Torres looks disinterested every week, and his form has been below-par for about a season now. He appears to give up all too easily these days and I will be very surprised if he's here this time next season. We've spent the last ten seasons relying on Steven Gerrard to pick us up when the team starts to crumble, but even he can't be expected to save the day every weekend. Glen Johnson should be employed further forward, as he's often useless as a defender these days- in fact, our whole defence has been a shambles all season. Say what you want about Benitez and his Zonal marking system, at least we never looked this amateurish at the back when he was in charge; the only thing that's stopping us from being bottom of the table is Pepe Reina, whose been our best player for the last two years, and is arguably the best 'keeper in the league.

There are far too many players who aren't performing up to the standards we should expect, whether this is because of their ability or their morale, I don't know, but I'm guessing (using the likes of Torres as an example) it's the latter. Tottenham were in trouble a few seasons ago, and they've not had a radical squad overhaul over the last two seasons, yet (and credit's due where credit's due) they're now in the Champions League. On paper, Liverpool's squad is as good as anyone's except those of United, Chelsea, Manchester City and Arsenal, yet over the last two weeks we've lost to both Northampton Town and Blackpool at Anfield.

Bill Shankly once said this, about his ambition for the club: " My idea was to build Liverpool into a bastion of invincibility. Had Napoleon had that idea he would have conquered the bloody world. I wanted Liverpool to be untouchable. My idea was to build Liverpool up and up until eventually everyone would have to submit and give in." It's depressing to think only he kept his word.

Boom, there it is.

.

Well, it gets on mine. Listening to the gibberish from Liverpool fans over the last few days has been like a re-run of Old Firm fans bleating about access to the English Premier League and the riches therein that would bring the Glasgow hordes to the promised land of a thousand year reich ... (or maybe 500 years each with an appropriate number of stabbings in the city centre) ...

There is an illogical syllogism that goes something like, "We're pure dead brilliant, us, we've got history us, thereby we *deserve* to have access to shitloads of money in order that we can compete with Man Utd, Chelsea, Real, Barca and that mob, so some millionaire *must* give us billions of cash to buy players, pay wages and build a shiny new stadium..."

It's delusional.

don't talk about an entitlement to playing in the Premiership because we are 'pure, dead brilliant.'
I think the anger is focussed on the fact that Celtic and Rangers can record average crowds three or four times greater than many of those in the EPL but still struggle to sign players due to the Sky factor.

1. That video is truly cringeworthy

2. Liverpool and Everton are really shooting themselves in the foot by refusing to consider sharing a new stadium. There's a point when sentimentality just gets in the way of common sense. Groundsharing seems to work when both clubs are of similar size and I'm sure both teams could pretty much fill a new stadium, especially as it would allow them to keep ticket prices down

3. Am I correct in believing that Major League Baseball has a draft system and controls on salaries? If so, I would imagine that league success is more realistically attainable in the MLB than the Premier League.

is that they are slipping behind on all fronts - league position, attracting players, relatively small stadium, lack of European football - and others will make secure their place ahead of them. Liverpool will then become a Villa or an Everton, second tier who look like they might crack it but don't, season after season.

As an Arsenal man I appreciate that we have won f-all for years but we have a good chance to do so, season after season.

that Liverpool are lucky. They are going through a financial crisis whilst the market for talent is still buoyant so a lot of their player investment is still holding a strong value.

Compare with Leeds who had to sell a squad full of talent during the one season that, due to the ITV Digital debacle, the transfer market disappeared. And Liverpool took advantage of that by underpaying for Harry Kewell.*

*Although, with hindsight, that's not true. But they didn't have hindsight at the time so it is true.

in today's Times in which he is typically forthright and blunt and common sensical. He points out that most "owners" don't actually own the club: the banks do.

He also has a very good suggestion for what to do with the Sky millions. Don't give it to the clubs, who'll spend it on inflated wages, but give it the FA. The FA will then dish it out against receipts for building your new academy, moving ground etc etc.

almost 20 years ago when Football Focus featured an interview with Liverpool's new chairman, successor to the gentlemanly Sir John Smith.

Onto the screen loomed a Thatcherite spiv complete with shiny suit, 'tache & mullet, straight from central casting.

When it emerged that he was, in fact, a scion of the Everton bank-rolling Moores dynasty, I knew an era had ended.

coming home to roost...

To see one of the so-called "big four" slip into the Championship for a while. Anyone round here remember Man Utd in the old Second Division?

Could be good for the game as it might stop all those wealthy businessmen from their legalised money laundering...

For LFC supporters. Possibly for all football supporters too, depending on how much they hate Liverpool. The high court have approved the sale.

Farewell Tom & George.

There seems to be an automatic assumption that Liverpool has somehow cemented its place as a big club. Yes, it's been one for the last 35 years, but that doesn't mean it has any special come-what-may entitlement to remain one into perpetuity.

We shouldn't forget that there was a time - within living memory, even, for some bloggers here - when the "Big Four" would have meant Bolton, Blackpool, Wolves and Preston North End. And only a couple of decades before that, Sheffield Wednesday and Huddersfield Town are probably where Torres and Gerrard's granddads would have chosen as the most fitting places to dubbin their hi-top Predators.

For Liverpool to go the way of Leeds would be a great shame for the supporters, obviously, but what it wouldn't be is what I've seen it being considered as quite often recently: a perversion of the natural order of things.

And movement in the opposite direction can be equally dramatic, yet nobody claims it's "just not right" or "unfair". When I were a lad in the North West, Wigan Athletic was one of the Premier League stalwarts - the non-league Northern Premier League, that is.

I have just read the statement from the Liverpools dynamic Texan duo's lawyer, he must be a relative of Lionel Hutz.

is a claim for damages, apparently.

Moving on from cheap, opportunistic puns (always hard for me!), this article gives an interesting perspective on the (now confirmed) new owners. Also a different slant on the prevailing 'a new stadium must be built' narrative...

Liverpool's hopes of building a new stadium stalled during the ownership of George Gillett and Tom Hicks, but despite a brief flirtation with a "new Fenway", the Red Sox happily remain at their historic home ballpark - even while many other Major League Baseball teams have moved.

Opened in 1912, Fenway is the oldest MLB stadium in use. And while a young Liverpool player's ambition may be scoring in front of the Kop, a prospective young slugger making it through Boston's minor league system will probably have dreamt of hitting a home run over the "Green Monster" - the famous 37ft high left-field wall at Fenway.

If I was a Liverpool fan I would be quietly optimistic right now.

Good call Roy

They won't, but I'd really like Liverpool to get relegated this season ... then possibly disappear in a scintillating, quantum burst of self-important particles, flying apart at lightspeed, never to reform, forcing retarded pundits to face up to their own analytical shortcomings ...

They really get on my nerves these days ...

And I am not from Manchester; I am not even from England ...