comment by Chicken (on a Basketball) ©™ (U1043)
posted 2 minutes ago
T K o T thought West Ham deserved praise from Premiership teams for West Ham finishing 3rd in the 2nd tier - now that is a joke.
--------------------------------------------
What an idiot you are.

I for one am glad to see West Ham back, they are a good club. Why wouldn't they deserve praise? It's difficult to get out of the Championship when relegated as you have to sell your best players.

"Whilst i think Liverpool fans are in the wrong here, they've got far more right to comment on a Top 4 Premiership position than a West Ham Yoyo FC fan."

More nonsense. Another one of your great logical arguments was that people didn't consider Liverpool contenders for forth and therefore, they weren't. So what is it, only Spurs, United, City and Arsenal fans are taken into consideration?

You're a fool. You've went 600 pages talking absolute crap and there's no way anybody can wan the argument as you're just too stupid to understand you've been proved wrong and made to look like a complete and utter idiot.

'As i said, Hull were 5th in the Prem for a longer period a few seasons back than Liverpool were 4th in this, but again no-one had them down as genuine contenders.'

Why not? Simple answer - history!

'Liverpool's history does not make them any different. The situation was what it was. And the finishing position for Liverpool is what it is.'

See how you contradict yourself!

' Liverpool were never in contention - that was the debate. And it proved to be right throughout the season from this article on.'
See now you're saying we were never in contention not just genuine contender! This is blatently wrong!

So what is it, only Spurs, United, City and Arsenal fans are taken into consideration?

===================

How many more times do i have to repeat myself?



Please read back for clarification that i said nothing of the sort. I have said this numerous times since ..and i dont know how much plainer i can put it ...i predicted 6 teams who would be genuine contenders for 4th, so how can they all finish 4th?




CutMeAndIBleedRed,

At the time that this article was written (hence the debate) Liverpool were not, and proved to not be, genuine contenders for 4th.

I predicted 6th teams who would be genuine contenders for forth

This proves you don't even know what it means.

I'm out, you're just too stupid and the saying is right:-

'Never argue with an idiot, he'll only take you down to his level and beat you with experience.'

'At the time that this article was written (hence the debate) Liverpool were not, and proved to not be, genuine contenders for 4th.'

Sorry - did you miss my last post - you seem to have ignored most of it!

There'sOnlyOneReds

I predicted 6th teams who would be genuine contenders for forth

This proves you don't even know what it means

===========================

Come on then, what does it mean, if it doesn't mean what i put, which was that any of 6 teams could realistically have finished 4th.

I dont see whats wrong with that to be honest.



Actually, i bet you're thinking "..you cant fit 6 teams in 4 positions ".

Be honest, that was your come back wasn't it?



You can have more than 1 genuine contender for the 1 position you know. Hence United & City were "contending" for the 1 position right up until the last kick of the season.

If you can't see that a team who have only finished outside the top 5 twice in 16 years and were currently 2 point - that's TWO POINTS, TWO - off the 4th spot are genuine contender

-----------------

This whole debate started on the 18th January. On the 18th January, when Chicken made his comments about Liverpool's chances of finishing top four, Liverpool were 5 points behind 4th place.

RipleysCat - thanks for your input - but this debate rumbled on - out league position went up and down during this time - mostly due to games in hand, but never the less doesn't detract away from the basic argument we have!

RipleysCat,

Exactly.

Then shortly after that Liverpool gained a couple but then slipped way out of genuine contention, which is what i said would happen.

Even biased pundits like Hansen & Lawro gave up on Liverpool finishing Top 4 at this point in the season - this is why i was so surprised that certain Liverpool fans were still so (i know its a patronising word but i dont mean it this way) blinkered.

17 points behind is quite a distance to claim that they were "genuine" contenders in January.

Before the season started? I can kind of see why the expectancy was there, but in January? No chance of it.

'17 points behind is quite a distance to claim that they were "genuine" contenders in January.
Before the season started? I can kind of see why the expectancy was there, but in January? No chance of it.'

So at the beginning of the season you can see it - half way through when we are around the 4th spot and had been all season up to then you can't? Errrrrrr - eh?!

Again - contadicting yourself!

CutMeAndIBleedRed

I can see why fans might have, how can i say it, a certain expectancy because of all the money KD spent (so i put my hands up to slightly contradicting what i said on that before).

However, at the time of this article (which is what the whole debate is/was about) Liverpool were not genuine contenders & they proved as much. FACT!

Back in January, no one would know for certain how the league would have ended up. But that doesn't mean that we can't make predictions as to how we think it will end up. Back in January, you stated that you didn't regard Liverpool as a contender for 4th, instead citing Chelsea and Arsenal as more likely possibilities for finishing in this position.

At the end of January, Liverpool reduced the gap between themselves and the 4th placed team to 4 points. The gap was never smaller than that again. By the end of February, the gap was 7 points. By mid March it was 10 points. By the end of March 13 points. By the end of April the same. The end of the season the gap was 17 points.

To me, that doesn't sound like a team who were genuine contenders for 4th from mid-January onwards (when you made your comment). Hindsight would therefore dictate that the opinion you stated back in January in regards to Liverpool has been shown to be correct.

RipleysCat,

Thank you.

Common sense at last.

RipleysCat/Chicken

Now I have two of you making the same mistake! There is a huge difference between a prediction and being a genuine contender at a given point of time.

Let me give you an example: You think your wife if going to give birth to a Boy because you held your wedding ring over her belly and it spun round. in nine moths time you do indeed have a boy - your prediction was correct. At the time of your prediction, having a girl was still a distinct possibility (i.e. a genuine contender) and your prediction and the eventual outcome does not change this in any way shape or form. When your wife has the baby, at this time it would be ridiculous to say nine months ago it could have been a girl cos at that time you know the outcome - this STILL doesn't change the possibility nine months ago BEFORE you knew the outcome.

To state how liverpool did AFTER the discussion is irrelevant. You should look at how we had done BEFORE the discussion - at up to that point we were in sniffing distance of 4th THE WHOLE TIME! At that point - given this fact, our proven track record for achieve a fourth place finish, and the distinct possibility that several new players would eventually start to gel (which they didn't!) saying we were not genuine contenders - that is we had a genuine possibility of coming 4th - would be plain wrong. What you both need to do is block out what happened AFTER this event and the end result as these are irrelevant - hence the phrase 'hindsight is a wonderful thing'!

I can guarantee you that the odds for Liverpool finishing 4th around that time would have reflected us as genuine contenders - maybe not favourites, but still genuine contenders

Ripley for the first time ever, you're wrong.

Being a genuine contender has absolutely nothing to do with the end but of the time at which you're looking at the situation.

For example, at the beginning of the season, I had and I'm sure you would have had, Chelsea as not only top four contenders but league contenders. Their final league position doesn't come into it.

Having spent a lot of money and being around the forth position at the time, Liverpool were contenders for forth, when we stated such on this article, this then become more so the following week with us being only two points behind, Obviously within a short time after we were out of contention but being in contention, probably would have changed many times throughout the season.

Regardless, he was wrong, saying Liverpool weren't in contention at the time he stated it. He was on the WUM, as he always is.

CutMeAndIBleedRed / There'sOnlyOneReds,

Even your own board have come out & said their minimum requirement is Top 4, and that you SHOULD have at least been contenders for it last year but werent.

How can your own board see it, plus on the basis of what was said on here back in January & the summary RipleysCat has given, how can you not?

comment by Chicken (on a Basketball) ©™ (U1043)
posted 14 seconds ago
CutMeAndIBleedRed / There'sOnlyOneReds,

Even your own board have come out & said their minimum requirement is Top 4, and that you SHOULD have at least been contenders for it last year but werent.
----------------------------------------------------
Yes and I agree with that. But you fail to understand what contender means. If somebody is say it now, then we weren't a contender, I have stated this myself, numerous times as reason Kenny should have been sacked. However, at the time, we were debating, we were in contention.

Why is your view from Januray 2012 different to now?

comment by Chicken (on a Basketball) ©™ (U1043)
posted 2 minutes ago
Why is your view from Januray 2012 different to now?
------------------------------------------------
In January we were close to forth, now not only are we far from forth but have no games left to catch up.

Oh right, i think i read your post wrong. I thought you were being grown up by saying you wouldnt be contenders for the next campaign - not for a campaign that has already finished, where you finished 8th.

'Even your own board have come out & said their minimum requirement is Top 4, and that you SHOULD have at least been contenders for it last year but werent.'

Yes we should have been contenders but weren't - we finished 8th!! The key word here is SHOULD - i.e. past tense, said in hindsight, with the final table in front of them NOT POINT IN TIME. POINT IN TIME. POINT IN TIME!!!! I need to repeat that several times cos you seem to keep missing it! At that POINT IN TIME we HAD NOT finished 8th and we WERE NOT 16 point away from 14th! We WERE a handful of point away, WE WERE surrounded by team with inconsistencies in their results and WE WERE a team with a LONG proven track record for coming 4th.

'How can your own board see it, plus on the basis of what was said on here back in January & the summary RipleysCat has given, how can you not?'

How can you STILL not see the difference between THEN and NOW. Like I said - you need to block what happened after from your mind cos it is IRRELIVANT.

' I thought you were being grown up by saying you wouldnt be contenders for the next campaign'

Odd statement to make - what has being grown up got to do with it?! Optimistic maybe, deluded maybe but not childish! Like I say - I still would have as as outside contenders for 4th next season, this may change after a summer of activity. I would bet my bottom dollar that anyone in football would still mention Liverpool in the battle for 4th, even if only to say they aren't in it!

CutMeAndIBleedRed

Your board said you SHOULD HAVE BEEN, as in during the season, not as an after thought.

The fact he said you should have been, means that you wasn't.

There was no hidden agenda or tricky words to disguise what was meant.

comment by Chicken (on a Basketball) ©™ (U1043)
posted 32 minutes ago
Oh right, i think i read your post wrong. I thought you were being grown up by saying you wouldnt be contenders for the next campaign - not for a campaign that has already finished, where you finished 8th.
------------------------------------------------
I would say we are contenders for the next campaign. There are about 8 teams in contention, however that will change many times throughout the season, I expect.

'Your board said you SHOULD HAVE BEEN, as in during the season, not as an after thought.'

IN HINDSIGHT!!!!!
Do you think at the start of this debate our directors would have come out and said :We are not in contention?!!!!!

The first month of the season is part of the season - do you think after one month they would have said were weren't in contention - our league possition of rhtis month was: 4,5,6,1,3,4,1,3!!!

This really isn't difficult to get!

January wasn't the first month of the season, it was half way through.