comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 17 minutes ago
Whatever
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's me told. There's no stopping Bobby when he's in full literary flow
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Maybe if the FA actually lived up to their mantra of 'supporting grass roots football' and the bigger clubs took less of the pot then the smaller clubs would get more cash and not have to resort to taking sponsorship deals from more unscrupulous sources.
Don't blame the club as a whole. Blame the owners or whoever it was who signed off on the sponsorship deal.
The players aren't really at fault. They have just been part of the biggest night in the club's history. What do you expect them do do, refuse to play against PL opposition because that rag's name is on the shirt?
Jeez, get real. Hating on a tiny club because someone involved with the club signed a sponsorship deal with a lying rag is not very charitable towards the players and staff who had nothing to do with the deal is it?
If all of the PL / Championship clubs took 10% less from the pot each then these little clubs possibly wouldn't need to take these sponsorship deals.
"You are an absolute disgrace to humanity, and fingers crossed you step in front of a bus pretty soon"
"Feck me, the poor precious fairies are out in force this morning"
Fantastic stuff.
Don't blame the club as a whole. Blame the owners or whoever it was who signed off on the sponsorship deal.
---------------
Don't blame the sun reading/sponsorship accepting world as a whole, blame Kelvin McKenzie and his clique
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 11 minutes ago
Don't blame the club as a whole. Blame the owners or whoever it was who signed off on the sponsorship deal.
---------------
Don't blame the sun reading/sponsorship accepting world as a whole, blame Kelvin McKenzie and his clique
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I'll still blame the readers of the rag for believing the shіte that was written and using it to tarnish the reputation of the entire city of Liverpool and the memories of the victims.
Also the fans of opposition clubs who used the stories as a stick to beat LFC fans with.
Also the apologists who believe the blame lies solely with MacKenzie (you didn't even spell his name right) and his as you put it 'clique'.
The rag was responsible for a lot of hurt and suffering but still there are people like yourself who are willing to let the rag off as "it was all down to MacKenzie and his clique".
So you think every employee was complicit in all the vile stories?
You don't think some will have been appalled?
Get a grip
I didn't spell his name right
Jesus Christ
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 2 minutes ago
So you think every employee was complicit in all the vile stories?
You don't think some will have been appalled?
Get a grip
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No but the paper was. No one's saying everyone down to the tea lady was involved. But still after the lies printed by that rag, and the effect it had on the City's reputation, it's understandable it'll never be bought by us.
Don't know why others, who weren't effected, need to stick their noses in.
comment by Coutinho's Happy Feet (U18971)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 2 minutes ago
So you think every employee was complicit in all the vile stories?
You don't think some will have been appalled?
Get a grip
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No but the paper was. No one's saying everyone down to the tea lady was involved. But still after the lies printed by that rag, and the effect it had on the City's reputation, it's understandable it'll never be bought by us.
Don't know why others, who weren't effected, need to stick their noses in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well there was an article created demonising a non league club for having the temerity to accept sponsorship money from a newspaper, so unless the OP was just after pats on the back then it was a bit of a waste of time wasn't it
But still after the lies printed by that rag, and the effect it had on the City's reputation, it's understandable it'll never be bought by us.
-------
That's fair enough, I wouldn't expect anything less, but why should Sutton United miss out on much needed revenue?
Maybe Liverpool's billionaire owner should have stepped in and offered them an alternative so they didn't need to deal with the sun
I judge anyone associated with the paper... i know its not rational but I will never forgive them and that is my opinion. I have been incredibly hurt by the things they have printed and although my reasons may not have the correct logic for some, emotional responses rarely do.
I dont expect others to feel the same just as I dont feel the need to justify my opinion at length to anyone.
comment by Scouse-Heart (U3234)
posted 3 minutes ago
I judge anyone associated with the paper... i know its not rational but I will never forgive them and that is my opinion. I have been incredibly hurt by the things they have printed and although my reasons may not have the correct logic for some, emotional responses rarely do.
I dont expect others to feel the same just as I dont feel the need to justify my opinion at length to anyone.
------------------------------------------------------------------
there are loads of kelvin McKenzie type thinkers out there unfortunately I think they should exterminated
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 10 minutes ago
But still after the lies printed by that rag, and the effect it had on the City's reputation, it's understandable it'll never be bought by us.
-------
That's fair enough, I wouldn't expect anything less, but why should Sutton United miss out on much needed revenue?
Maybe Liverpool's billionaire owner should have stepped in and offered them an alternative so they didn't need to deal with the sun
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't think anyone would deny Sutton United much needed extra funds. However if you're expected us Liverpool fans to condone the sponsorship for yesterdays match it's not going to happen.
The point all the bitters are missing here is that many Sutton fans were not happy about them being sponsored by the Sun either.
They expressed their disappointment a the deal on a club forum and their comments were promptly deleted.
It's not about Liverpool fans.
This is small local club with good links to their community who have taken a major decision without consulting that community, and have actively tried to quell dissent about it.
Selbs
This is what one Sutton Utd fan said, sums it up IMO.
"For many of us, this goes against our whole ethos of being a volunteer-run community club,” the supporter added. “Many of us have gone on record as expressing our serious concern at the choice of sponsor, especially in light of the fact that post-Hillsborough, we regard them as a toxic brand that no football club, especially not a non-league football club which is justifiably proud of its independence, should do business with. We would have much rather they had come to their own community for an extra injection of cash rather than go with the Sun, which many of us see as absolutely toxic.”
But Bobby probably thinks he's in the wrong.
You haven't listened to a word I've said have you?
It's the sun so all debate is null and void
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 1 minute ago
You haven't listened to a word I've said have you?
It's the sun so all debate is null and void
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah... but if you read above im happy to admit that!
Little club taking much needed money from an awful newspaper.
WRONG
Club with revenue in the 100s of millions taking money from kit suppliers that rely on sweatshop labour.
OK
agree with the paper being a disgrace not just over Hillsborough but a lot of other things but what did Liverpool expect, maybe a compromise would have been maybe offer the same amount or maybe more than the sun were to Sutton as a goodwill gesture? is that allowed by the fa?
Im confused as to why Liverpool would be offering Sutton money? maybe if we were playing them but we were not!!?
it will all blow over in a couple of days and they'll still have the money
comment by bertrand small (U19359)
posted 16 hours, 56 minutes ago
Typically scouse response to an ordinary sponsorship deal. I suppose they have stopped Sky subscription and only eat fish and chips out of derek hattons memoir pages. The whole city is a disgrace and detested by all other fans as was shown when they blew the league despite the older journos telling us that we all wanted them to win. Every real United fan wanted City to win the league over them because of the no new stop whinging and farking whiny accents.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll actually educate you mate
First off you say LFC and all their fans should boycott Sky cause Murdoch owns it, 2 issues with that,
1. It would basically mean that fans would not get to see over 50% of live Liverpool games.
2. Sky Sports have never employed enemy number 1 in McKensie or slandered Liverpool fas / the familes over Hillsborough.
It's not that simple see, the fightis against a particular part of the Murdoch empire, the part that specifially slandered with The Truth headline, and more so the chief editor of the time McKensie.
The majority of people working at the Rag now had now part of whathas heppened, and the club has acknowledged the recent ban is noting to do with this new generation of journalists, it's a long battle fought and once a legal ruling was made exonerating the fans that day the rag have yet to take full responsibility for their actions.
Also why the actual anger being swon bu you towards a campaign to shut down something that does nothing for the public but spread lies and demonise people for no reason.
The papers refusal to admit their front cover was pure lies, (especailly not featuring the story after the juducical enquiry on it's front page was an absoulte disgrace).
I really annoy off when posters liek you throw out stupid, illinformed lines liek this, you just don't understand the ins and outs so go fecking educate yourself.
The fight to ban this rag needs all the support it can get, not petty, illinformed comments from the likes of you to teypoint score over a rival club.
Sad litte pathetic man
Small by name, small by nature
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 5 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by bertrand small (U19359)
posted 16 hours, 56 minutes ago
Typically scouse response to an ordinary sponsorship deal. I suppose they have stopped Sky subscription and only eat fish and chips out of derek hattons memoir pages. The whole city is a disgrace and detested by all other fans as was shown when they blew the league despite the older journos telling us that we all wanted them to win. Every real United fan wanted City to win the league over them because of the no new stop whinging and farking whiny accents.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll actually educate you mate
First off you say LFC and all their fans should boycott Sky cause Murdoch owns it, 2 issues with that,
1. It would basically mean that fans would not get to see over 50% of live Liverpool games.
2. Sky Sports have never employed enemy number 1 in McKensie or slandered Liverpool fas / the familes over Hillsborough.
It's not that simple see, the fightis against a particular part of the Murdoch empire, the part that specifially slandered with The Truth headline, and more so the chief editor of the time McKensie.
The majority of people working at the Rag now had now part of whathas heppened, and the club has acknowledged the recent ban is noting to do with this new generation of journalists, it's a long battle fought and once a legal ruling was made exonerating the fans that day the rag have yet to take full responsibility for their actions.
Also why the actual anger being swon bu you towards a campaign to shut down something that does nothing for the public but spread lies and demonise people for no reason.
The papers refusal to admit their front cover was pure lies, (especailly not featuring the story after the juducical enquiry on it's front page was an absoulte disgrace).
I really annoy off when posters liek you throw out stupid, illinformed lines liek this, you just don't understand the ins and outs so go fecking educate yourself.
The fight to ban this rag needs all the support it can get, not petty, illinformed comments from the likes of you to teypoint score over a rival club.
Sad litte pathetic man
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well said
Sign in if you want to comment
Liverpool fan supporting Arsenal
Page 2 of 3
posted on 21/2/17
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 17 minutes ago
Whatever
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's me told. There's no stopping Bobby when he's in full literary flow
posted on 21/2/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/2/17
Maybe if the FA actually lived up to their mantra of 'supporting grass roots football' and the bigger clubs took less of the pot then the smaller clubs would get more cash and not have to resort to taking sponsorship deals from more unscrupulous sources.
Don't blame the club as a whole. Blame the owners or whoever it was who signed off on the sponsorship deal.
The players aren't really at fault. They have just been part of the biggest night in the club's history. What do you expect them do do, refuse to play against PL opposition because that rag's name is on the shirt?
Jeez, get real. Hating on a tiny club because someone involved with the club signed a sponsorship deal with a lying rag is not very charitable towards the players and staff who had nothing to do with the deal is it?
If all of the PL / Championship clubs took 10% less from the pot each then these little clubs possibly wouldn't need to take these sponsorship deals.
posted on 21/2/17
"You are an absolute disgrace to humanity, and fingers crossed you step in front of a bus pretty soon"
"Feck me, the poor precious fairies are out in force this morning"
Fantastic stuff.
posted on 21/2/17
Don't blame the club as a whole. Blame the owners or whoever it was who signed off on the sponsorship deal.
---------------
Don't blame the sun reading/sponsorship accepting world as a whole, blame Kelvin McKenzie and his clique
posted on 21/2/17
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 11 minutes ago
Don't blame the club as a whole. Blame the owners or whoever it was who signed off on the sponsorship deal.
---------------
Don't blame the sun reading/sponsorship accepting world as a whole, blame Kelvin McKenzie and his clique
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I'll still blame the readers of the rag for believing the shіte that was written and using it to tarnish the reputation of the entire city of Liverpool and the memories of the victims.
Also the fans of opposition clubs who used the stories as a stick to beat LFC fans with.
Also the apologists who believe the blame lies solely with MacKenzie (you didn't even spell his name right) and his as you put it 'clique'.
The rag was responsible for a lot of hurt and suffering but still there are people like yourself who are willing to let the rag off as "it was all down to MacKenzie and his clique".
posted on 21/2/17
So you think every employee was complicit in all the vile stories?
You don't think some will have been appalled?
Get a grip
posted on 21/2/17
I didn't spell his name right
Jesus Christ
posted on 21/2/17
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 2 minutes ago
So you think every employee was complicit in all the vile stories?
You don't think some will have been appalled?
Get a grip
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No but the paper was. No one's saying everyone down to the tea lady was involved. But still after the lies printed by that rag, and the effect it had on the City's reputation, it's understandable it'll never be bought by us.
Don't know why others, who weren't effected, need to stick their noses in.
posted on 21/2/17
comment by Coutinho's Happy Feet (U18971)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 2 minutes ago
So you think every employee was complicit in all the vile stories?
You don't think some will have been appalled?
Get a grip
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No but the paper was. No one's saying everyone down to the tea lady was involved. But still after the lies printed by that rag, and the effect it had on the City's reputation, it's understandable it'll never be bought by us.
Don't know why others, who weren't effected, need to stick their noses in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well there was an article created demonising a non league club for having the temerity to accept sponsorship money from a newspaper, so unless the OP was just after pats on the back then it was a bit of a waste of time wasn't it
posted on 21/2/17
But still after the lies printed by that rag, and the effect it had on the City's reputation, it's understandable it'll never be bought by us.
-------
That's fair enough, I wouldn't expect anything less, but why should Sutton United miss out on much needed revenue?
Maybe Liverpool's billionaire owner should have stepped in and offered them an alternative so they didn't need to deal with the sun
posted on 21/2/17
I judge anyone associated with the paper... i know its not rational but I will never forgive them and that is my opinion. I have been incredibly hurt by the things they have printed and although my reasons may not have the correct logic for some, emotional responses rarely do.
I dont expect others to feel the same just as I dont feel the need to justify my opinion at length to anyone.
posted on 21/2/17
comment by Scouse-Heart (U3234)
posted 3 minutes ago
I judge anyone associated with the paper... i know its not rational but I will never forgive them and that is my opinion. I have been incredibly hurt by the things they have printed and although my reasons may not have the correct logic for some, emotional responses rarely do.
I dont expect others to feel the same just as I dont feel the need to justify my opinion at length to anyone.
------------------------------------------------------------------
there are loads of kelvin McKenzie type thinkers out there unfortunately I think they should exterminated
posted on 21/2/17
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 10 minutes ago
But still after the lies printed by that rag, and the effect it had on the City's reputation, it's understandable it'll never be bought by us.
-------
That's fair enough, I wouldn't expect anything less, but why should Sutton United miss out on much needed revenue?
Maybe Liverpool's billionaire owner should have stepped in and offered them an alternative so they didn't need to deal with the sun
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't think anyone would deny Sutton United much needed extra funds. However if you're expected us Liverpool fans to condone the sponsorship for yesterdays match it's not going to happen.
posted on 21/2/17
The point all the bitters are missing here is that many Sutton fans were not happy about them being sponsored by the Sun either.
They expressed their disappointment a the deal on a club forum and their comments were promptly deleted.
It's not about Liverpool fans.
This is small local club with good links to their community who have taken a major decision without consulting that community, and have actively tried to quell dissent about it.
posted on 21/2/17
Selbs
This is what one Sutton Utd fan said, sums it up IMO.
"For many of us, this goes against our whole ethos of being a volunteer-run community club,” the supporter added. “Many of us have gone on record as expressing our serious concern at the choice of sponsor, especially in light of the fact that post-Hillsborough, we regard them as a toxic brand that no football club, especially not a non-league football club which is justifiably proud of its independence, should do business with. We would have much rather they had come to their own community for an extra injection of cash rather than go with the Sun, which many of us see as absolutely toxic.”
But Bobby probably thinks he's in the wrong.
posted on 21/2/17
You haven't listened to a word I've said have you?
It's the sun so all debate is null and void
posted on 21/2/17
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 1 minute ago
You haven't listened to a word I've said have you?
It's the sun so all debate is null and void
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah... but if you read above im happy to admit that!
posted on 21/2/17
Little club taking much needed money from an awful newspaper.
WRONG
Club with revenue in the 100s of millions taking money from kit suppliers that rely on sweatshop labour.
OK
posted on 21/2/17
agree with the paper being a disgrace not just over Hillsborough but a lot of other things but what did Liverpool expect, maybe a compromise would have been maybe offer the same amount or maybe more than the sun were to Sutton as a goodwill gesture? is that allowed by the fa?
posted on 21/2/17
Im confused as to why Liverpool would be offering Sutton money? maybe if we were playing them but we were not!!?
posted on 21/2/17
it will all blow over in a couple of days and they'll still have the money
posted on 21/2/17
comment by bertrand small (U19359)
posted 16 hours, 56 minutes ago
Typically scouse response to an ordinary sponsorship deal. I suppose they have stopped Sky subscription and only eat fish and chips out of derek hattons memoir pages. The whole city is a disgrace and detested by all other fans as was shown when they blew the league despite the older journos telling us that we all wanted them to win. Every real United fan wanted City to win the league over them because of the no new stop whinging and farking whiny accents.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll actually educate you mate
First off you say LFC and all their fans should boycott Sky cause Murdoch owns it, 2 issues with that,
1. It would basically mean that fans would not get to see over 50% of live Liverpool games.
2. Sky Sports have never employed enemy number 1 in McKensie or slandered Liverpool fas / the familes over Hillsborough.
It's not that simple see, the fightis against a particular part of the Murdoch empire, the part that specifially slandered with The Truth headline, and more so the chief editor of the time McKensie.
The majority of people working at the Rag now had now part of whathas heppened, and the club has acknowledged the recent ban is noting to do with this new generation of journalists, it's a long battle fought and once a legal ruling was made exonerating the fans that day the rag have yet to take full responsibility for their actions.
Also why the actual anger being swon bu you towards a campaign to shut down something that does nothing for the public but spread lies and demonise people for no reason.
The papers refusal to admit their front cover was pure lies, (especailly not featuring the story after the juducical enquiry on it's front page was an absoulte disgrace).
I really annoy off when posters liek you throw out stupid, illinformed lines liek this, you just don't understand the ins and outs so go fecking educate yourself.
The fight to ban this rag needs all the support it can get, not petty, illinformed comments from the likes of you to teypoint score over a rival club.
Sad litte pathetic man
posted on 21/2/17
Small by name, small by nature
posted on 21/2/17
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 5 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by bertrand small (U19359)
posted 16 hours, 56 minutes ago
Typically scouse response to an ordinary sponsorship deal. I suppose they have stopped Sky subscription and only eat fish and chips out of derek hattons memoir pages. The whole city is a disgrace and detested by all other fans as was shown when they blew the league despite the older journos telling us that we all wanted them to win. Every real United fan wanted City to win the league over them because of the no new stop whinging and farking whiny accents.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll actually educate you mate
First off you say LFC and all their fans should boycott Sky cause Murdoch owns it, 2 issues with that,
1. It would basically mean that fans would not get to see over 50% of live Liverpool games.
2. Sky Sports have never employed enemy number 1 in McKensie or slandered Liverpool fas / the familes over Hillsborough.
It's not that simple see, the fightis against a particular part of the Murdoch empire, the part that specifially slandered with The Truth headline, and more so the chief editor of the time McKensie.
The majority of people working at the Rag now had now part of whathas heppened, and the club has acknowledged the recent ban is noting to do with this new generation of journalists, it's a long battle fought and once a legal ruling was made exonerating the fans that day the rag have yet to take full responsibility for their actions.
Also why the actual anger being swon bu you towards a campaign to shut down something that does nothing for the public but spread lies and demonise people for no reason.
The papers refusal to admit their front cover was pure lies, (especailly not featuring the story after the juducical enquiry on it's front page was an absoulte disgrace).
I really annoy off when posters liek you throw out stupid, illinformed lines liek this, you just don't understand the ins and outs so go fecking educate yourself.
The fight to ban this rag needs all the support it can get, not petty, illinformed comments from the likes of you to teypoint score over a rival club.
Sad litte pathetic man
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well said
Page 2 of 3