comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by The Gaffer (U22336)
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ Depends on whether you believe if the FA have said voiding is off the table.”
Here in lies the problem. They either don’t want to believe what’s been said by the FA etc or they’re sticking their fingers in their ears and blatantly ignoring it.
It’s become so tiresome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where have the FA said voiding it is off the table.
I havent seen anything to this effect, but that's not to say it hasnt been expressed by the FA - so an up to date link would be useful
The basic issue it that the league will have to restart under different rules. That needs agreement. Currently there is no agreement. If none can be found, i dont think anyone can say with any certainty that the FA/EPL have any ability to force teams to restart in these circumstances - This is not about H&S its about changing the rules part way through the season. I think it is likley that there is no legal/contractual way of forcing this on teams, it can only be done by agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be the same but no crowds
Still the same rules, 11 vs 11, and the team with the most goals wins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny seeing mostly Spurs fans pipe up about this. Didn’t see so much of a problem with the rules when Spurs were allowed to use two home stadiums, including neutral venue Wembley, not so long ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is Spurs using a neutral venue any kind of advantage. I think you will find that most Spurs fans didn't want to go to Wembley and didn't particularly enjoy it. It was a hindrance to most fans and the club. Most clubs play 100% of their home games at their home ground, Spurs didn't.
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by The Gaffer (U22336)
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ Depends on whether you believe if the FA have said voiding is off the table.”
Here in lies the problem. They either don’t want to believe what’s been said by the FA etc or they’re sticking their fingers in their ears and blatantly ignoring it.
It’s become so tiresome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where have the FA said voiding it is off the table.
I havent seen anything to this effect, but that's not to say it hasnt been expressed by the FA - so an up to date link would be useful
The basic issue it that the league will have to restart under different rules. That needs agreement. Currently there is no agreement. If none can be found, i dont think anyone can say with any certainty that the FA/EPL have any ability to force teams to restart in these circumstances - This is not about H&S its about changing the rules part way through the season. I think it is likley that there is no legal/contractual way of forcing this on teams, it can only be done by agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be the same but no crowds
Still the same rules, 11 vs 11, and the team with the most goals wins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny seeing mostly Spurs fans pipe up about this. Didn’t see so much of a problem with the rules when Spurs were allowed to use two home stadiums, including neutral venue Wembley, not so long ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is Spurs using a neutral venue any kind of advantage. I think you will find that most Spurs fans didn't want to go to Wembley and didn't particularly enjoy it. It was a hindrance to most fans and the club. Most clubs play 100% of their home games at their home ground, Spurs didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn’t say there was an advantage. Just precedent for both neutral venues and changing the rules part way through the season.
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by The Gaffer (U22336)
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ Depends on whether you believe if the FA have said voiding is off the table.”
Here in lies the problem. They either don’t want to believe what’s been said by the FA etc or they’re sticking their fingers in their ears and blatantly ignoring it.
It’s become so tiresome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where have the FA said voiding it is off the table.
I havent seen anything to this effect, but that's not to say it hasnt been expressed by the FA - so an up to date link would be useful
The basic issue it that the league will have to restart under different rules. That needs agreement. Currently there is no agreement. If none can be found, i dont think anyone can say with any certainty that the FA/EPL have any ability to force teams to restart in these circumstances - This is not about H&S its about changing the rules part way through the season. I think it is likley that there is no legal/contractual way of forcing this on teams, it can only be done by agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be the same but no crowds
Still the same rules, 11 vs 11, and the team with the most goals wins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny seeing mostly Spurs fans pipe up about this. Didn’t see so much of a problem with the rules when Spurs were allowed to use two home stadiums, including neutral venue Wembley, not so long ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is Spurs using a neutral venue any kind of advantage. I think you will find that most Spurs fans didn't want to go to Wembley and didn't particularly enjoy it. It was a hindrance to most fans and the club. Most clubs play 100% of their home games at their home ground, Spurs didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
Actually, there were people who were saying exactly that. I seem to remember Sean Dyche was vocal in his views around it, aswell as others.
I personally think that is nowhere near what is being proposed. It could be debated (even though I made my opinion clear) whether Spurs or any other club were given an advantage or disadvantage. I.e Spurs played infront of more fans v not at their own ground. Or opposition get to play at Wembley v infront of more home fans. there always seemed to be a balance. I would say that it was 1 game for certain teams, whereas Brighton have the most difficult home games to come, all without that home advantage.
IMO, Brighton are the biggest losers in all of these and have every right to feel its unfair. I don't see any other club having quite the same argument.
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
“ IMO, Brighton are the biggest losers in all of these and have every right to feel its unfair. I don't see any other club having quite the same argument.”
Brighton have won 4 of their 14 home games this season. If home advantage counted so much surely they would’ve won more at home this season?
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
-----------
Fair enough. cant even argue many of your points to be honest.
All I will say is, its say 5 or so posters on here that churn out their opinions consistently and therefore it probably feels like its "loads" of spurs fans. Plus, id probably say that Spurs and Liverpool are represented on this site (in terms of numbers) the most. You are always going to be drawn to the comments that you don't agree with, that's why you feel most Spurs fans disagree with your opinion. Or you take it as a dig at your club because 5 or so posters do that.
Im saying, one club playing at a neutral ground has hardly any impact on the final 9 games all being played at neutral grounds. Especially, in Brighton's example, where they are extremely disadvantaged by it.
I have shared my opinion by the way. Wait for the season to be resumed WITH fans. Otherwise, cancel the season but allow the new season to consider points boosts based on this seasons points.
We all have opinions, not all of ours are based on what it means for Liverpool.
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
-----------
Fair enough. cant even argue many of your points to be honest.
All I will say is, its say 5 or so posters on here that churn out their opinions consistently and therefore it probably feels like its "loads" of spurs fans. Plus, id probably say that Spurs and Liverpool are represented on this site (in terms of numbers) the most. You are always going to be drawn to the comments that you don't agree with, that's why you feel most Spurs fans disagree with your opinion. Or you take it as a dig at your club because 5 or so posters do that.
Im saying, one club playing at a neutral ground has hardly any impact on the final 9 games all being played at neutral grounds. Especially, in Brighton's example, where they are extremely disadvantaged by it.
I have shared my opinion by the way. Wait for the season to be resumed WITH fans. Otherwise, cancel the season but allow the new season to consider points boosts based on this seasons points.
We all have opinions, not all of ours are based on what it means for Liverpool.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good post
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ IMO, Brighton are the biggest losers in all of these and have every right to feel its unfair. I don't see any other club having quite the same argument.”
Brighton have won 4 of their 14 home games this season. If home advantage counted so much surely they would’ve won more at home this season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cant replicate a side fighting for survival at the very end, knowing a win is required and the fans treating it as a cup final. Its different.
Plus, those big games at home infront of loud crowds are what could turn one result into three. We will just never know.
I am convinced you will not even consider there position. You know what you want and what you feel is fair and are probably unlike to consider other teams who may feel it as unfair.
I haven't even considered Spurs in all this. Im trying to be completely neutral in my opinion.
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don't know how you dress yourself bud.
No I was talking about the hypicrisy of certain Spurs fans moaning about integrity. Do you get anything right?
comment by Hendo's Trophy Shuffle (U1217)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only one of those fixtures that was meant to be home was against Burnley. It got switched to away, we lost 2-0.
Massive advantage we gained there
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don't know how you dress yourself bud.
No I was talking about the hypicrisy of certain Spurs fans moaning about integrity. Do you get anything right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why bring up their stadium then?
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don't know how you dress yourself bud.
No I was talking about the hypicrisy of certain Spurs fans moaning about integrity. Do you get anything right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why bring up their stadium then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's that aspect that is the basis of the hypocrisy. Obviously.
Go and have a lie down.
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don't know how you dress yourself bud.
No I was talking about the hypicrisy of certain Spurs fans moaning about integrity. Do you get anything right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why bring up their stadium then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's that aspect that is the basis of the hypocrisy. Obviously.
Go and have a lie down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But like LFC their stadium build was delayed and the league and opposing teams had to compromise,to try and have minimal effect.
Have they denied this has happened? Is that why you are calling them out as hypocrites?
What? Do you know what hypocrisy means?
I'm calling them out as hypocrites because I feel they're being hypocritical in this instance. That's it. Very simple stuff.
You really are awful at this. Go read a book mate.
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 19 seconds ago
What? Do you know what hypocrisy means?
I'm calling them out as hypocrites because I feel they're being hypocritical in this instance. That's it. Very simple stuff.
You really are awful at this. Go read a book mate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In what way are they being hypocrites,because you feel they are so therefore they are.
I think they are not so therefore they are not.
That was easy
But like LFC their stadium build was delayed and the league and opposing teams had to compromise,to try and have minimal effect.
-----
Same thing except this time we have to do it because of Covid.
comment by The Gaffer (U22336)
posted 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ Depends on whether you believe if the FA have said voiding is off the table.”
Here in lies the problem. They either don’t want to believe what’s been said by the FA etc or they’re sticking their fingers in their ears and blatantly ignoring it.
It’s become so tiresome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where have the FA said voiding it is off the table.
I havent seen anything to this effect, but that's not to say it hasnt been expressed by the FA - so an up to date link would be useful
The basic issue it that the league will have to restart under different rules. That needs agreement. Currently there is no agreement. If none can be found, i dont think anyone can say with any certainty that the FA/EPL have any ability to force teams to restart in these circumstances - This is not about H&S its about changing the rules part way through the season. I think it is likley that there is no legal/contractual way of forcing this on teams, it can only be done by agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be the same but no crowds
Still the same rules, 11 vs 11, and the team with the most goals wins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree on that basis. if its just behind closed doors. But the neutral venues issue make a lot of teams with a lot to lose very uncomfortable.
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 19 seconds ago
What? Do you know what hypocrisy means?
I'm calling them out as hypocrites because I feel they're being hypocritical in this instance. That's it. Very simple stuff.
You really are awful at this. Go read a book mate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In what way are they being hypocrites,because you feel they are so therefore they are.
I think they are not so therefore they are not.
That was easy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This may help you
hypocritical
adjective
behaving in a way that suggests one has higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 19 seconds ago
What? Do you know what hypocrisy means?
I'm calling them out as hypocrites because I feel they're being hypocritical in this instance. That's it. Very simple stuff.
You really are awful at this. Go read a book mate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In what way are they being hypocrites,because you feel they are so therefore they are.
I think they are not so therefore they are not.
That was easy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This may help you
hypocritical
adjective
behaving in a way that suggests one has higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's basically a definition of you
Sign in if you want to comment
Football's back baby
Page 12 of 14
10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14
posted on 12/5/20
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by The Gaffer (U22336)
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ Depends on whether you believe if the FA have said voiding is off the table.”
Here in lies the problem. They either don’t want to believe what’s been said by the FA etc or they’re sticking their fingers in their ears and blatantly ignoring it.
It’s become so tiresome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where have the FA said voiding it is off the table.
I havent seen anything to this effect, but that's not to say it hasnt been expressed by the FA - so an up to date link would be useful
The basic issue it that the league will have to restart under different rules. That needs agreement. Currently there is no agreement. If none can be found, i dont think anyone can say with any certainty that the FA/EPL have any ability to force teams to restart in these circumstances - This is not about H&S its about changing the rules part way through the season. I think it is likley that there is no legal/contractual way of forcing this on teams, it can only be done by agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be the same but no crowds
Still the same rules, 11 vs 11, and the team with the most goals wins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny seeing mostly Spurs fans pipe up about this. Didn’t see so much of a problem with the rules when Spurs were allowed to use two home stadiums, including neutral venue Wembley, not so long ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is Spurs using a neutral venue any kind of advantage. I think you will find that most Spurs fans didn't want to go to Wembley and didn't particularly enjoy it. It was a hindrance to most fans and the club. Most clubs play 100% of their home games at their home ground, Spurs didn't.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by The Gaffer (U22336)
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ Depends on whether you believe if the FA have said voiding is off the table.”
Here in lies the problem. They either don’t want to believe what’s been said by the FA etc or they’re sticking their fingers in their ears and blatantly ignoring it.
It’s become so tiresome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where have the FA said voiding it is off the table.
I havent seen anything to this effect, but that's not to say it hasnt been expressed by the FA - so an up to date link would be useful
The basic issue it that the league will have to restart under different rules. That needs agreement. Currently there is no agreement. If none can be found, i dont think anyone can say with any certainty that the FA/EPL have any ability to force teams to restart in these circumstances - This is not about H&S its about changing the rules part way through the season. I think it is likley that there is no legal/contractual way of forcing this on teams, it can only be done by agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be the same but no crowds
Still the same rules, 11 vs 11, and the team with the most goals wins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny seeing mostly Spurs fans pipe up about this. Didn’t see so much of a problem with the rules when Spurs were allowed to use two home stadiums, including neutral venue Wembley, not so long ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is Spurs using a neutral venue any kind of advantage. I think you will find that most Spurs fans didn't want to go to Wembley and didn't particularly enjoy it. It was a hindrance to most fans and the club. Most clubs play 100% of their home games at their home ground, Spurs didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn’t say there was an advantage. Just precedent for both neutral venues and changing the rules part way through the season.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by The Gaffer (U22336)
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ Depends on whether you believe if the FA have said voiding is off the table.”
Here in lies the problem. They either don’t want to believe what’s been said by the FA etc or they’re sticking their fingers in their ears and blatantly ignoring it.
It’s become so tiresome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where have the FA said voiding it is off the table.
I havent seen anything to this effect, but that's not to say it hasnt been expressed by the FA - so an up to date link would be useful
The basic issue it that the league will have to restart under different rules. That needs agreement. Currently there is no agreement. If none can be found, i dont think anyone can say with any certainty that the FA/EPL have any ability to force teams to restart in these circumstances - This is not about H&S its about changing the rules part way through the season. I think it is likley that there is no legal/contractual way of forcing this on teams, it can only be done by agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be the same but no crowds
Still the same rules, 11 vs 11, and the team with the most goals wins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny seeing mostly Spurs fans pipe up about this. Didn’t see so much of a problem with the rules when Spurs were allowed to use two home stadiums, including neutral venue Wembley, not so long ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is Spurs using a neutral venue any kind of advantage. I think you will find that most Spurs fans didn't want to go to Wembley and didn't particularly enjoy it. It was a hindrance to most fans and the club. Most clubs play 100% of their home games at their home ground, Spurs didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
posted on 12/5/20
Actually, there were people who were saying exactly that. I seem to remember Sean Dyche was vocal in his views around it, aswell as others.
I personally think that is nowhere near what is being proposed. It could be debated (even though I made my opinion clear) whether Spurs or any other club were given an advantage or disadvantage. I.e Spurs played infront of more fans v not at their own ground. Or opposition get to play at Wembley v infront of more home fans. there always seemed to be a balance. I would say that it was 1 game for certain teams, whereas Brighton have the most difficult home games to come, all without that home advantage.
IMO, Brighton are the biggest losers in all of these and have every right to feel its unfair. I don't see any other club having quite the same argument.
posted on 12/5/20
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
posted on 12/5/20
“ IMO, Brighton are the biggest losers in all of these and have every right to feel its unfair. I don't see any other club having quite the same argument.”
Brighton have won 4 of their 14 home games this season. If home advantage counted so much surely they would’ve won more at home this season?
posted on 12/5/20
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
-----------
Fair enough. cant even argue many of your points to be honest.
All I will say is, its say 5 or so posters on here that churn out their opinions consistently and therefore it probably feels like its "loads" of spurs fans. Plus, id probably say that Spurs and Liverpool are represented on this site (in terms of numbers) the most. You are always going to be drawn to the comments that you don't agree with, that's why you feel most Spurs fans disagree with your opinion. Or you take it as a dig at your club because 5 or so posters do that.
Im saying, one club playing at a neutral ground has hardly any impact on the final 9 games all being played at neutral grounds. Especially, in Brighton's example, where they are extremely disadvantaged by it.
I have shared my opinion by the way. Wait for the season to be resumed WITH fans. Otherwise, cancel the season but allow the new season to consider points boosts based on this seasons points.
We all have opinions, not all of ours are based on what it means for Liverpool.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
-----------
Fair enough. cant even argue many of your points to be honest.
All I will say is, its say 5 or so posters on here that churn out their opinions consistently and therefore it probably feels like its "loads" of spurs fans. Plus, id probably say that Spurs and Liverpool are represented on this site (in terms of numbers) the most. You are always going to be drawn to the comments that you don't agree with, that's why you feel most Spurs fans disagree with your opinion. Or you take it as a dig at your club because 5 or so posters do that.
Im saying, one club playing at a neutral ground has hardly any impact on the final 9 games all being played at neutral grounds. Especially, in Brighton's example, where they are extremely disadvantaged by it.
I have shared my opinion by the way. Wait for the season to be resumed WITH fans. Otherwise, cancel the season but allow the new season to consider points boosts based on this seasons points.
We all have opinions, not all of ours are based on what it means for Liverpool.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good post
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow
posted on 12/5/20
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ IMO, Brighton are the biggest losers in all of these and have every right to feel its unfair. I don't see any other club having quite the same argument.”
Brighton have won 4 of their 14 home games this season. If home advantage counted so much surely they would’ve won more at home this season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cant replicate a side fighting for survival at the very end, knowing a win is required and the fans treating it as a cup final. Its different.
Plus, those big games at home infront of loud crowds are what could turn one result into three. We will just never know.
I am convinced you will not even consider there position. You know what you want and what you feel is fair and are probably unlike to consider other teams who may feel it as unfair.
I haven't even considered Spurs in all this. Im trying to be completely neutral in my opinion.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don't know how you dress yourself bud.
No I was talking about the hypicrisy of certain Spurs fans moaning about integrity. Do you get anything right?
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Hendo's Trophy Shuffle (U1217)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only one of those fixtures that was meant to be home was against Burnley. It got switched to away, we lost 2-0.
Massive advantage we gained there
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don't know how you dress yourself bud.
No I was talking about the hypicrisy of certain Spurs fans moaning about integrity. Do you get anything right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why bring up their stadium then?
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don't know how you dress yourself bud.
No I was talking about the hypicrisy of certain Spurs fans moaning about integrity. Do you get anything right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why bring up their stadium then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's that aspect that is the basis of the hypocrisy. Obviously.
Go and have a lie down.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 3 minutes ago
It not about Spurs. Wembley is arguably the most famous football ground in the world. Id be amazed if some players didnt get a lift from that and Spurs form was pretty shocking. You then have rival teams going to Spurs and playing them at a different ground, different atmosphere and likely even a different pitch size.
Not one Spurs fan on here gave a toss about integrity then.
--------
Its completely different. But, you have a very selective memory if you think Spurs fans didn't care. Most Spurs fans did not want it to happen. The integrity of the game was hardly impacted. For every argument you have "for", there is an equal one "against". But it pointed out by others, and spurs fans.
Plus, no way was going to Wembley any form of advantage to Spurs. We had come from an unbeaten WHL the season before. Most Spurs fans feel that staying at WHL one more season could have potentially given us another title challenge. So no, of course Spurs fans wouldn't mention integrity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Im not trying to have a pop but words mean things.
I've not stated about happiness of fans, Spurs getting an advantage. I mentioned it meant different situaitons for different clubs and therefore the integrity absolutely was put in question and you simply saying it was "hardly impacted" doesn't really was. It also went explicity against what the FA said and they changed that to get games done.
To my knowledge not one Spurs fan on here questioned the integrity of it all. Sure I could be wrong about that but what I am certain about is that Spurs fans are by faer the most vocal on here about that issue which given the above is pretty funny although dressing it up in the wrapping of safety is pretty nauseating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about when Liverpool's stadium upgrade in 2016 was delayed by a few weeks and teams had to accomodate LFC by playing games at home first when they should have played LFC away first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I didnt moan like a b!tch then either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought you were going on about integrity,especially not playing fixtures at venues where they should have been played
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don't know how you dress yourself bud.
No I was talking about the hypicrisy of certain Spurs fans moaning about integrity. Do you get anything right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why bring up their stadium then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's that aspect that is the basis of the hypocrisy. Obviously.
Go and have a lie down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But like LFC their stadium build was delayed and the league and opposing teams had to compromise,to try and have minimal effect.
Have they denied this has happened? Is that why you are calling them out as hypocrites?
posted on 12/5/20
What? Do you know what hypocrisy means?
I'm calling them out as hypocrites because I feel they're being hypocritical in this instance. That's it. Very simple stuff.
You really are awful at this. Go read a book mate.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 19 seconds ago
What? Do you know what hypocrisy means?
I'm calling them out as hypocrites because I feel they're being hypocritical in this instance. That's it. Very simple stuff.
You really are awful at this. Go read a book mate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In what way are they being hypocrites,because you feel they are so therefore they are.
I think they are not so therefore they are not.
That was easy
posted on 12/5/20
But like LFC their stadium build was delayed and the league and opposing teams had to compromise,to try and have minimal effect.
-----
Same thing except this time we have to do it because of Covid.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by The Gaffer (U22336)
posted 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 5 minutes ago
“ Depends on whether you believe if the FA have said voiding is off the table.”
Here in lies the problem. They either don’t want to believe what’s been said by the FA etc or they’re sticking their fingers in their ears and blatantly ignoring it.
It’s become so tiresome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where have the FA said voiding it is off the table.
I havent seen anything to this effect, but that's not to say it hasnt been expressed by the FA - so an up to date link would be useful
The basic issue it that the league will have to restart under different rules. That needs agreement. Currently there is no agreement. If none can be found, i dont think anyone can say with any certainty that the FA/EPL have any ability to force teams to restart in these circumstances - This is not about H&S its about changing the rules part way through the season. I think it is likley that there is no legal/contractual way of forcing this on teams, it can only be done by agreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be the same but no crowds
Still the same rules, 11 vs 11, and the team with the most goals wins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree on that basis. if its just behind closed doors. But the neutral venues issue make a lot of teams with a lot to lose very uncomfortable.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 19 seconds ago
What? Do you know what hypocrisy means?
I'm calling them out as hypocrites because I feel they're being hypocritical in this instance. That's it. Very simple stuff.
You really are awful at this. Go read a book mate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In what way are they being hypocrites,because you feel they are so therefore they are.
I think they are not so therefore they are not.
That was easy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This may help you
hypocritical
adjective
behaving in a way that suggests one has higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.
posted on 12/5/20
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Colemanballs (U22246)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 19 seconds ago
What? Do you know what hypocrisy means?
I'm calling them out as hypocrites because I feel they're being hypocritical in this instance. That's it. Very simple stuff.
You really are awful at this. Go read a book mate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In what way are they being hypocrites,because you feel they are so therefore they are.
I think they are not so therefore they are not.
That was easy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This may help you
hypocritical
adjective
behaving in a way that suggests one has higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's basically a definition of you
Page 12 of 14
10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14