I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna really really really wanna zigazig ha.

I don't know if the 'Spice Boys' label is true, or whether it was just a convenient tabloid tag to explain why Liverpool weren't winning titles.

Ruddock may say it's true, but most of the others say that they used to see the Man United players in the same Cheshire clubs they frequented, and on the same days.

The white suits were offered free by Armani, through David James, and McAteer says they didn't actually know they were going to be white until they arrived.
Like Fowler says, if they'd won that Cup Final, there would have been a bit of banter about the suits, but otherwise nobody would have bothered much about it.

Really difficult to tell, with cartoon, tabloid tags. There may be some truth in it (and Ruddock and Collymore are both ocean-going, fully-certified n0bheads), or it could mostly be b0ll0x.

Jamie Redknapp was more into Eternal I believe.

The truth is the European ban ended the Liverpool dominance as players went abroad (or Scotland). When the ban was lifted, along with the relaxed rules on foreign players and the PL, United got the jump on everyone. Liverpool were stuck with tradition, and with a manager who struggled to adapt to the new world of football, preferring to bring players like Michael Thomas and David James to the club rather than the Cantonas and Schmeichels United were bringing into their club.

I don't think the European ban ended our dominance.

I think it was more to do with the failure of the club to modernise from top to bottom.

We had grown stale and accustomed to a certain way of doing things always working.

We were behind the times, on and off the pitch, and it was going to catch up with us eventually.

The likes of Houillier and Benitez modernised us a lot on the pitch, the training ground and the academy but off the pitch we are still playing catch up now with our old stadium and failing to make the most of our commercial capabilities.

We didn't have anyone at the club who realised what the impact of the PL would be financially and how we could capitalise on that.

The European ban lead to a fair number of top British players moving abroad from the English top division. The English league was becoming an inferior product, which is what led partly to the PL being born. Plus the Bosman rule and he EU rules changing the game.


There may a be a bit of coincidence that United came into prominence at this time and Liverpool fell behind, but the European Ban did have an effect that in part led to the PL and Sky money coming into the game. It was, I would say, the door opener.

The truth is the European ban ended the Liverpool dominance as players went abroad (or Scotland).
=======================================================
Who went abroad? Souness went to Sampdoria, but that was in 1984, and Liverpool won 3 titles, and 3 FA Cups after that, and got to another EC final.

Rush went to Juve, but didn't stay long, and Aldridge scored a hatful of goals while he was gone, and Liverpool remained successful.

And who the feck went to Scotland?
Gillespie went to Celtic after the ban, and after it was clear he was no longer first-choice.

Steven and Stevens both swapped Liverpool for Glasgow.

Sorry, just reread my post and I had more words in my head than on the screen.

My point was meant to be that the ban changed English football, a lot of good players left England for Europeam football (including Scotland). Then the PL came into being, along with Sky money, completely changing things.
My first post was a little too short handed.

The Euro ban was the catalyst for change, and Liverpool got left behind in the changes that followed.


In short

a lot of good players left England for European football ======================================================
How many is "a lot"?

comment by Wessie Road (U10652)
posted 2 minutes ago
a lot of good players left England for European football ======================================================
How many is "a lot"?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
More than "a few" but arguably less than "loads".

I think it was only a few, in reality.

Also Liverpool did buy players from abroad. People like Rosenthal, Hysen, Piechnik.

If there was a fault it wasn't in not buying players from abroad like other clubs did, it was in not buying the best ones.

The Euro ban was the catalyst for change, and Liverpool got left behind in the changes that followed.
------------------------
Serves 'em right for causing the ban in the first place

TBF I think it was a collaborative effort.

nah

Heysel was obviously the catalyst, but in isolation, if there had never been a single bit of trouble involving English fans before then, I doubt we would have been banned for that alone.

Killing 39 people and injuring up to 600 more, in my opinion would have got Liverpool a European ban for that alone.

"the darkest hour in the history of the UEFA competitions"

Especially when fans were found guilty of manslaughter and imprisoned for it.

To think UEFA would have let you carry on playing "for that incident alone" is quite callous.

Liverpool, yes.
But Arsenal, Everton, Norwich, Wimbledon, Spurs etc, etc?

It's not callous at all.

English fans were causing trouble everywhere at that time.

And there was far more to the whole incident than simply misbehaving Liverpool fans causing deaths.

Try reading a book.

Try reading a book? What a cretinous thing to say.

I know what happened.

Juve weren't banned from Europe, because their fans weren't the ones climbing in to neutral zones of the stadium.

Juve fans weren't convicted of manslaughter either.

Granted, if the stadium was in better nick, its highly unlikely the deaths would have occurred and it is now obvious the game should have been thousands of miles from there.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Regarding why we were less successful after the 70s and 80s i think we've covered. A big reason we didn't win as much as we should have during the 90s under roy was D James. There's a reason he's nicknamed calamity james and we should have won a lot more than we did. Roy sadly stuck by him for soooo long mistake after mistake. We had Fowler and Mcmanaman at there peak. Redknapp despite his injuries was a goal scoring mid.

Juve weren't banned because their fans weren't the ones climbing in to neutral zones of the stadium.
===========================================================
Yes, that's true.
Juve fans were the ones already standing in the "neutral" area of the stadium, and LFC complained about that long before the game. What the feck is "neutral" about that?

LFC did not want the game played at that stadium, and did not want that end of the stadium segregated into a so-called "neutral" area (or anything else).

Of course Liverpool fans would have been banned, but the point I think being made was that English fans in general probably wouldn't have been banned if they hadn't been rampaging around for 20 years before that, both with the national team and the club teams.
Thatcher asked for them to be banned.

The victims of Heysel were the 39 and their loved ones, but if this is turning into another "oh, woe is me, my club was the real victim" thread, then excuse me if I don't feel a lot of sympathy for that.

Fair enough if that wasn't your intention, but I've seen so much of that sheite, and the celebration of Heysel as a point-scoring event is not all that edifying, tbh (though I don't think that was necessarily the original intention when the ban was first mentioned in this thread).

Only one reason for our fall from grace. We replaced the players who had achieved so much with players who weren't as good. Simple.

Only one reason for our fall from grace. We replaced the players who had achieved so much with players who weren't as good. Simple
==========================================================

100% agreed.