The Fish

Gross spend is relevant here. If they were a midtable club surviving by recruiting and selling well just to stay afloat, then sure, Net spend is important. When their gross spend is approaching £1b you can't cry poverty. This isn't Brighton or Leicester. Liverpool have been consistently in the top 4 clubs in this country for ages with all the benefits that brings. Last 24 years, they've never finished below 8th and have only finished below 5th on 7 occasions. They are one of the elite clubs and have spent accordingly. They can afford to drop £76m on a centreback or £56m on a 'keeper because they're the final pieces of the puzzle. West Ham would need to buy spread that kind of money over 3 or four players just to stay midtable. Chelsea, Man City have had to spend a fortune, just to catch up with them. Liverpool are bitching because the head start they had has been eroded. The "we can't compete" line is horseshit. They didn't land Haaland, fine, whatever, they still spent £60m+ on Darwin Nunez. They literally are competing, they're still spending a fuck ton of money and their owners are perfectly capable of putting more money into the club if they wanted to. "We can't compete". Fuck off Mr Ed

Why is it carried on into other fixtures though? There's no reason for me to think United means Manchester if they're up against Leeds, or Newcastle, or Rotherham. Hell, we chant Yanited! at games, are we giving them support from afar? Are we bollocks. It's Man City and ManYoo, and it forever will be. Anyone saying otherwise should take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror and try to work out where it all went wrong.

They do, so do Leeds fans. Man Utd, or Man U, and Man City. I can kind of understand it if it's the Manchester derby, or even when Man Utd play Liverpool or whatever, but in a fixture between two Uniteds, don't refer to one of them as "United", it's needlessly confusing.

Got him jabbed as soon as I could. 6 pints of Bhuna out of 6. Highly recommend. Would do it again.

Says the coward who does this exact thing on Football Manager games. The rank hypocrisy is disgusting.

Win him back with a knickerbocker glory and prawn crackers

Any validity to that tweet was obliterated by signing off with Au contraire.

You were particularly swayed by the Kangaroo arsehole stuff weren't you? You big pervert.

Blind voting. You don't for a party, or a leader. The manifesto pledges are on the ballot, you check the promise you like. Party with the most backing for promises wins, and if they fail to deliver on those promises they're dropped off in the Jungle and fed Kangaroo arsehole.

Jesus what's worse, Liz and her Lettuce, or CT and his Mushroom?

That Romaines to be seen. She's made a decision, Butterhead is still a bit Frisée.

Pretty strong evidence to back up their claims that Sunderland fans are classier than we are.

Just like free speech, isn't it? "We want Free Speech! " "Tories are scum" "No, not like that!"

No, no thank you.

Andrey Santos: The Next Gem From Vasco’s Academy? – Breaking The Lines

6 months of people asking where he gets his ginger hair from because neither of us have red hair. I include my mam in that group. 6 months of him being ginger and nobody knowing why, before my mam casually remarks that she had red hair when she was a kid. Like... Mam, YOU were one of the people who asked where he could possibly have gotten the ginger gene from. It was you, copper top! Not even like her hair changed colour early doors, she found a picture of her in her teens with red hair. How do you forget something like that?!

We're morphing to a more plant based diet, and we tend to buy our meats from the local butcher. That's about as far as I'm currently willing to go.

Well he's a ginger, and he's definitely inherited my long body, short legs. So we're all gravy baby.

Look at us, discussing how best to describe a players position. Instead of pushing back and forth on this, we could just agree that he's a Mezzala and be done with it.

Right, and that's good business, but the point I was making is that they've paid out nigh on a BILLION pounds on players in the last ten years. And they were finishing on average 3rd. They aren't an under dog, they haven't done it the hard way, they've bought success just as much as the rest of the Elite. Yes, they've made good deals, getting good money back on the likes of Suarez, Coutinho (c£200m from Barcelona), Sterling and Benteke (c£90m for the pair). But the thing I'm saying is that there's a narrative that, plucky little Liverpool are challenging the big spenders with a shoestring budget. This is bollocks, they've spent nearly a billion pounds on players in the last 10 years, to build upon a team that was already up there challenging anyway. They're no different to Chelsea, Man City, Man Utd and the rest of them.

This judgement is surely less about the monetary punishment and more about a line in the sand?

Nah, Joelinton plays further forward, he is aggressive and disruptive, but he usually operates on the left of the midfield three, ahead of the deeper lying player.

I don't totally disagree but Bruno has, perhaps surprisingly, been out deepest lying player in the last two games. Or at least that's what the heatmaps say. 100% would have an out an out defensive midfielder instead of Joe, Longstaff or Willock.

In the last 10 seasons they've spent just shy of a billion. Only Arsenal, Chelsea, Man Utd and Man City have had a bigger outlay.