Bleacher Report - Articles by David Gore

Liverpool 4-0 Stoke City: The Reds Backlash

David Gore — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:33:13 -0400

Tony Pulis warned his team about a Liverpool backlash following their disappointing 2-1 defeat to Tottenham Hotspur on opening day, and he was right to be concerned.

Against Spurs, he watched a disjointed Reds struggling for form and understanding. It was a team missing Daniel Agger and it saw the other two centre-half options, Jamie Carragher and Martin Skrtel, take each out early in the game, which the two men never really recovered from.

Skrtel was missing from tonight's game as a result, meaning a chance for 18-year-old Spaniard Daniel Ayala at centre-back alongside Carragher. But in truth, the youngster was not likely to be tested in the first half.

Much like last season's encounter at Anfield, Tony Pulis set his team out to stop Liverpool. A brave move perhaps, given the stick managers often get from opponents, pundits, and fans for "parking the bus," but a necessary one nonetheless.

As much as we may admire underdogs that attack the so-called giants, league football is all about points. When you're a manager of a side that's bound to be fighting for survival week in week out, all you have to care about is scoring points however you can. Spoiling games isn't pretty, but it is entirely crucial against teams like Liverpool.

Stoke's 4-5-1 formation was always going to be difficult to break down, and last season Liverpool failed to do so twice. This year was made a little easier though, thanks to the start the Reds were denied, controversially, in this fixture last year.

Lucas and Steven Gerrard linked well all game, with the Brazilian working hard to stamp his name on the team sheet and fill the Xabi Alonso-shaped hole in midfield, before new boy Alberto Aquilani gets his chance, and he saw a rasping 20-yard effort held well by Thomas Sorenson in the opening stages.

A minute or two later, and Lucas again linked with the forwards and set Gerrard on his way, before the skipper sent the ball across to Torres, who finished easily past the stranded Potters' keeper.

Stoke reorganised and set up their brick wall defence once again, and it fell upon the shoulders of another new signing to break the status quo.

Glen Johnson's signing might have left a few "experts" scratching their heads as to Rafa Benitez's thinking, thanks to the price tag and no new cover for Fernando Torres arriving at Anfield. But the former Pompey man displayed exactly what he'll bring to the team, and why he's so much more important than a squad-player striker.

Bursting runs on the right led to most of Liverpool's openings, and Torres and Kuyt both saw chances saved before Johnson hammered a scissor-kick home on 44 minutes to put Liverpool 2-0 up before the break.

Pulis is an excellent and determined old-fashioned manager, and he sent his team out in the second half determined to give as good as they were getting. That instantly put the Reds on the back foot and forced Johnson to clear off the post, as former Everton man James Beattie sent a shot across the area.

But it was Liverpool who took control again with a strong midfield display of South American pairing Lucas and Mascherano, together with Johnson's marauding runs down the right and Benayoun's usual clever and intricate work coming from the left, combining well with young left-back Emiliano Insua.

Twelve minutes from time, Mascherano put Gerrard in behind Stoke and the captain turned sublimely against the floundering Etherington, and then he powered low across the box for Dirk Kuyt to get Liverpool's third. And yet another fine piece of work by Johnson put substitute David Ngog in for his first of the season, and Liverpool's fourth on the night.

Stoke went home empty-handed, but they fought hard. In the end, Liverpool proved too strong and too determined to put the Spurs' result behind them, and with Manchester United losing to Burnley at Turfmoor, Liverpool's disappointing start looks like the small blip that Tony Pulis thought it would be.

The season is long, and Liverpool are up and running.

Teams:

Liverpool: Reina, Johnson, Ayala, Carragher, Insua, Kuyt (Riera 82), Mascherano, Lucas, Benayoun, Gerrard (Voronin 81), Torres (Ngog 84).

Stoke City: Sorenson, Higginbotham, Faye, Shawcross, Wilkinson, Delap, Whitehead (Pugh 69), Whelan, Etherington, Cresswell (Lawrence 62), Beattie (Fuller 62).

An Open Letter to Real Madrid Fans

David Gore — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:49:39 -0400

Before I begin, let me just own up to the fact that I never liked your team.

While I was growing up, Real were the first of the financial juggernauts, throwing around money, bankrolled by the King of Spain, wielding an axe to catch a fly.

I disliked Real, their president and their "galactico" policy so much that I started supported Atletico Madrid as my second team.

But that’s not to say that I don’t respect the club, and its history. Nine European Cups, 31 league titles and 17 Copa del Reys. The all-white of Real has inspired so many, and been worn by some of the greatest heroes of all time, like Puskas and Di Stefano.

And now, though I’m not one of you, I’m asking for your help.

Football is not what it used to be. Change happens in any field, especially a sport that moves so quickly. Players are signed for more, wages are higher, gates are larger, and interest is massive. Only a fool would try and stand in the way of change, if that change is for the benefit of the game.

Once, it was quite acceptable to score a goal from an offside position in football. That was changed, and for the better, making the game fairer. It used to be fine for a goalkeeper to pick up pass backs, but that was changed, and now games flow faster.

But some changes do more harm than good. There was an idea to introduce a 39^th game in the English Premier League, played on foreign soil. This was ridiculous, and so it was abandoned.

And now your president, Real fans—that same man who suggested the "galacticos" and once turned me and many more away from your team—is back again. Florentino Perez is spending more on players than anyone else in the world. He’s destabilising the market, damaging the sport, and sinking Real Madrid heavily in to debt during a global financial crisis.

From your perspective, there’s no reason at all to suggest that these new signings will bring any success to Real, but they will definitely damage your club’s bank accounts and credit rating. Real Madrid themselves have proven time and time again that buying the world’s most expensive players can often lead to a more trouble than it solves.

And now, to add insult to injury to football, Sr Perez is demanding to UEFA president Michel Platini that he form a breakaway European Super League, containing 20 of the continent’s greatest clubs.

His reasoning, he says, is that the modern Champions League simply doesn’t favour the biggest clubs. Of course, the fact that a competition isn’t supposed to favour anyone seems to have passed him by.

His plans would lead eventually to the biggest clubs abandoning their domestic leagues, leaving a huge chunk of football clubs floundering in financial meltdown, picking up the pieces and competing for prizes no one cares about.

The trophy you still see as your competition, the cup format European prize, would end up being replaced and discarded by Perez’s Super League format, meaning the end of the European Cup you crave every year.

Fans of the "big twenty" would be asked to pay astronomical fees to attend matches across Europe, with all the travel expenses and hotel bookings on top. Watching football would no longer be a right for the fan. It would be a luxury costing as much as a holiday, and in the current climate, few will be able to fly out to watch their team.

Records like nine European Cups, 31 league titles and 17 Copa del Reys would cease to hold any meaning, and all of Real’s glory days would be disregarded, having come in abandoned competitions and forgotten domestic systems.

The great rivalries between clubs like Liverpool and Everton, Arsenal and Tottenham, Barcelona and Espanyol, and Real and Atletico would no longer be played out.

All the integrity of football, and all the reasons we watch it and care, will dissolve under the plans of your president.

In the end, I suppose it was never Real Madrid that I disliked growing up. It was the moneymen that took a mighty, integral club and cynically did their best to exploit its name and turn it in to a cash-cow brand.

The men like Perez who believe that football exists to be a marketing vessel for themselves and their own gain and amusement.

Men who don’t believe in football, and the power it can hold over entire countries and peoples, other than to exploit that power and make more money. Men who look at Kaka and Ronaldo and see shirt sales instead of heroes.

Perhaps I’m an idealist. Perhaps I’m a dying breed in football. Maybe I’m fighting for something that’s already dead. But even if I am, I’d rather stand against ideas like the European Super League, and I appeal to you all to do likewise.

For the sake of football, and for the sake of Real Madrid.

Perez is the enemy. His plans will kill your country’s football competitions, as well as your club, and you don’t have to stand for that.

Rafael Benitez Is the Right Man For Liverpool

David Gore — Sun, 31 May 2009 16:39:41 -0400

So, it’s summer again, and as I write this I have sunburn. The redness on my arms is a sure sign that it’s time to evaluate Liverpool’s season once again.

My team finished second, narrowly missing out on their first league success since 1990. They have the best striker in the world in the shape of Fernando Torres, and the undisputed best midfielder in the form of Steven Gerrard. Everyone has new contracts, including the manager, and the talk is of moving on again, to the next step.

Everything is going well.

And yet, despite all this, I still hear people, including a very small minority of Liverpool supporters, saying that Rafa isn’t the right man for the job.

I’m about to make a very bold claim, and some of you may doubt me on it. Some of you reading this will think I’m suffering with sunstroke, but bear with me and give the following statement a chance:

When Rafael Benitez took over at Anfield, the Liverpool squad he inherited was on a similar level to the Newcastle United team that has just been relegated from the Premier League.

Bold, I know, and even I thought I was thinking silly before I looked again. But I think it holds up.

The good quality team of 2001, when Liverpool won their famous treble (technically a quintuple, as they competed in the Charity Shield and European Super Cup as a result of their actions, and won them both), had been mostly broken up by the 2004/2005 season.

Heroes like Gary McAllister, Sander Westerveld, Jari Litmanen, Nick Barmby, Robbie Fowler, Markus Babbel and Patrick Berger were all long gone, and the only major squad members brought it to replace them had been John Arne Riise, Steve Finnan, Harry Kewell and Jerzy Dudek.

Just before Gerard Houllier left Liverpool, he had agreed to sell Emile Heskey to Birmingham City, while he'd spend a large amount of money on what would turn out to be the last of his French struggles, Djibril Cisse.

And then, just after Benitez took Houllier’s place, Michael Owen decided that he didn’t want to suffer another period of transition, and left for Madrid for a very small fee, which Liverpool had negotiated fully aware of Owen’s failure to sign another few years to his dwindling contract.

So, this is the team that Benitez inherited when he joined in 2004, adjusted for Owen’s inevitable leaving, since he’d decided by that point that he was going:

Jerzy Dudek, Chris Kirkland, Patrice Luzi.

James Carragher, Stephen Finnan, Stéphane Henchoz, Sami Hyypiä, John Arne Riise, Djimi Traoré, Zak Whitbread, Stephen Warnock.

Igor Biscan, Bruno Cheyrou, Salif Alassane Diao, Steven Gerrard, Dietmar Hamann, Harry Kewell, Anthony Le Tallec, Danny Murphy, Ritchie Partridge, Darren Potter, Vladimir Smicer, John Welsh.

Milan Baros, El Hadji Diouf, Djibril Cisse, Florent Sinama-Pongolle, Neil Mellor.

In order to raise funds for new signings, Benitez was forced to then sell players from that squad and reduce the wage bill by loaning out others. Among those to leave were Danny Murphy (who was sold to Charlton Athletic), Anthony Le Tallec (on loan to Sunderland) and El Hadji Diouf (on loan to Bolton Wanderers).

And to confound matters, over the course of his first season in charge, Benitez had to cope with the loss of Vladimir Smicer, Harry Kewell, Djibril Cisse, and Steven Gerrard to injury, as well as some of the few players he was able to bring to the club, such as Xabi Alonso and Luis Garcia.

That summer, due to the massive budget constraints on a team, that had speculated a large amount of money since 2001 and achieved no prize money in return, Benitez spent just £18 million on Luis Garcia (£6m), Antonio Nunez (free), Josemi (£2m), and Xabi Alonso (£10m). This was the same summer that the new Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho spent a staggering £141 million.

The following is the Newcastle United squad that started last season:

Shay Given, Steve Harper, Fraser Forster.

Fabricio Coloccini, José Enrique, Caçapa, Sébastien Bassong, Habib Beye, Steven Taylor, David Edgar.

Joey Barton, Danny Guthrie, Damien Duff, Jonás Gutiérrez, Geremi, Nicky Butt, Kazenga LuaLua, Charles N’Zogbia, Ignacio González.

Obafemi Martins, Michael Owen, Alan Smith, Xisco, Shola Ameobi, Peter Løvenkrands, Mark Viduka, Andy Carroll.

That Newcastle had an old team, and players like Nicky Butt, Mark Viduka, Michael Owen, and Damien Duff may have faded since their heydays, is not significant, as they are still proven Premier League players with a wealth of experience between them, and are no older collectively than Hamman, Smicer, Hyypia, and Finnan were when Benitez took over.

In contrast to Liverpool in 2005, Newcastle last year went in to a campaign with proven Premier League goal scorers in the form of Owen, Viduka, Smith, and Duff, and, like Liverpool in 2005, encountered more than their fair share of injury woes.

Of course, Newcastle lacked Steven Gerrard, Sami Hyypia, or Jamie Carragher (incidentally the only three players from the pre-Benitez era still playing for Liverpool last term).

But Newcastle had more strength in depth than Benitez’s first squad, and arguably a better goalkeeper in the form of Shay Given.

While Liverpool’s main power in 2004 was their defence (which was a fairly settled back four, bolstered by the incredible performances of Carragher, who Rafa brilliantly decided to place at centre-half), Newcastle’s was in midfield and attack, where they (should have) had enough to out-class other relegation struggles around them.

The point here is not to suggest that Liverpool were relegation material, or to highlight the blatant fact that Newcastle have woefully under-achieved in 2009.

It is to suggest that the squad Benitez has now is vastly superior to the one he inherited, so much so as to be in an entirely different class. It also serves to point out the overall quality difference across all Premier League clubs in 2004, compared to 2009.

The very fact that only three of that original 2004 squad could get in to Benitez’s 2009 squad illustrates the gulf in class between then and now, and illustrates that he has rebuilt the squad and moved it to another level, also indicated by their league position.

But there’s been one small problem, and it’s one I’ve already touched upon.

In 2005, Chelsea spent £141 million. In 2006, they spent £67 million. Overall, while Jose Mourinho was in charge, he spent £225 million.

Meanwhile, just down the M62, Sir Alex Ferguson has added to his already dominant Manchester United by signing £114 million worth of talent, including youngsters Anderson (£18 million) and Nani (£17 million), as well as Michael Carrick (£19 million), and Dimitar Berbatov (£30.75 million).

In short, the job that Benitez has had to do at Liverpool has been a running race whereby two of his competitors kept moving the finishing line a bit further away each time he neared it.

Prior to 2005, the notion of a single team in England spending £141 million in one season was laughable. The Abramovich era changed a lot of things, but most importantly it gave an unexpected boost to transfer values across all clubs and players.

When Benitez took over, his team’s most successful period during the Premier League had come when they had won the UEFA Cup (which had been devalued as a competition by the Inter-Toto Cup and the success of the Champions League), the FA Cup (which Manchester United had withdrawn from in 1999-00), and the League Cup (classed as second-rate by many supporters).

They had narrowly qualified for the Champions League in 2004, an achievement so important it was seen as exactly that, an achievement, rather than mandatory, since the club hadn’t qualified for it the season before.

He found an aging squad with some players punching way above their weight, and some of the club’s prized assets bound for other clubs. He knew he’d have to rebuild the team from scratch, with limited funds available.

And all while Chelsea and Manchester United kept on pulling away faster than they had done at any time previously.

Yet now, Rafael Benitez is in charge of a team with short odds to win the league next season.

In 2004, Liverpool had no chance of fighting for first-place, and no absolute right to even be in the Champions League places. They were a team of also-rans, who had failed to build on the treble-winning squad.

They were about to enter a new period of stagnation that would have rivalled their 1990s fall from grace.

Had things continued along that course, who’s to say that Aston Villa, Everton, or someone else wouldn’t have over-taken them?

The teams now hanging around near the Champions League positions are considerably stronger now than they were in 2004, and I think it’s reasonable to assume that had something at Liverpool not changed dramatically, they could have fallen out of the fabled top four.

But they didn’t. Instead, Rafael Benitez came and rebuilt the club from scratch, quite literally from top to bottom, instigating change in the higher echelons of the boardroom down to the youth set-up.

The last manager to do that at Liverpool was from Scotland. I don’t need to remind you of his name.

And so as I settle down to apply some after-sun, I’ll lament the end of the football season, and consider the implications for next term.

Because if he’s taken us this far, in the face of everything that stood against him, I know that Rafael Benitez is the right man for the job, and that every club in the league will be watching for Liverpool in 2010.

Sami Hyypia: Mr. Liverpool

David Gore — Wed, 20 May 2009 13:39:06 -0400

When Robbie Fowler was bundled out of Anfield by Gerard Houllier in 2001, I was shocked. When Michael Owen left in 2005, I felt let down. When Fowler finally got his proper goodbye with Rafa Benitez in 2007, I was saddened.

But when Sami Hyypia leaves this summer, I'll feel like I'm losing a friend.

Those who know me know that I was born into following Liverpool. You could say that my blood's red in a couple of ways really. But throughout most of my childhood I was seeing something very different to the team my dad watched, sat in the Kop and the Paddock week in, week out in the 1970's and 80's.

A team that struggled for honours instead of winning them. A team with the shadow of the past, and of Hillsborough, hanging over its head, sometimes blocking its view of the future.

And then everything seemed to change, and it did so with the arrival of a Frenchman.

Gerard Houllier, who began the club's revival, did so by transplanting into the heart of its defence a relic of the old days: a colossus of a man from Finland, who had followed the club as a boy.

I was only 15 years old when he signed for a paltry £2.5 million. I'd never heard of him, not many had, but when I saw him on the TV I thought he looked like he could headbutt a tree, step back and shout "timber."

The old Liverpool teams during the club's glory days were always famous for their forwards. Ian St. John, Kevin Keegan, Kenny Dalglish, Ian Rush, John Aldridge, and many more.

But in truth, the old teams were built on the solidity of their defence. Gigantic, committed and determined, like gatekeepers to the goal. Men like Ron Yeats, Tommy Smith, Phil Thompson, Alan Hansen, Larry Lloyd and Mark Lawrenson.

And that's what Sami was. It was as if he'd arrived in a time machine from 1984, like football's Doctor Who, come to rescue the club from the new age of fancy strikers and huge egos.

It wasn't that he was the first name on Houllier's team-sheet. He WAS the team-sheet, and everything else was built around him like a rock solid foundation.

He captained the team in the absence of Fowler and Redknapp, lifting the UEFA Cup with Robbie in the magnificent treble year, after his performances and leadership forced the club to its first trophies since a League Cup in 1995.

When Rafa took over in 2005, Hyypia gained a new stage and a new trophy, with the Champions League victory in Istanbul. Again, it was partly down to his fine displays at the back that teams like Juventus and Chelsea failed to break the Reds down at home.

For over a third of my life, and all my adult years, there's been a giant Finn at the back for Liverpool. Always determined, always strong, always in the right place, always fighting and leading; always impeccably behaved and gloriously dutiful and loyal to his team-mates, his fans and his manager.

To me, watching this new club form from the doldrums of the old, Sami was at the heart of everything. There at the beginning of the revival, present for the greatest of moments, as important to the club as anyone.

The new Liverpool FC is built on the foundations laid by Sami Hyypia, and he is Mr Liverpool. On Sunday I'll wake up sad to know that it'll be the day that I see my ultimate childhood hero, and the statue-like symbol of my club, for the 464th and final time.

So, here's to Big Sami. I'm sure every Liverpool fan will be sad to see you go, but they'll also be proud to have had you in their team. We'll keep an eye on you and your progress in Germany, and we'll be hoping to see you back at Anfield as a coach to help continue the dynasty you helped to begin.

Sami will never walk alone.

Roy Hodgson: Diamond In The Rough

David Gore — Wed, 20 May 2009 07:05:50 -0400

Over the last decade or so, the debate on English managers has been sparked off by every period of a vacant English hot seat.

In 2000, when Sven-Goran Eriksson was appointed, the public wanted to know where all the great up-and-coming Englishmen were. Six years later, the FA, bowing to media pressure after courting and being turned down by Luiz Felipe Scolari, looked to the "best Englishman for the job," Steve McClaren, whose Middlesbrough side had just been crushed by Sevilla 4-0 in the UEFA Cup Final.

The media, and the public, were crying out for an English manager with European honours and a proven track record to take control of their team. Little did any of them know that there was one waiting in Finland.

In 1976, Roy Hodgson began his first managerial job at Halmstad BK in the Swedish Allsvenskan league. The year before he took over, Halmstad had been left flirting with relegation, only surviving on goal difference.

In his very first season in charge, however, Hodgson took the team tipped to go down and surprised the whole of Sweden by winning the league for the first time in the club's history. He then did it again in 1979.

In 1983 he left after a short period at Bristol City to return to Sweden and manage Orebro SK, who narrowly missed out on promotion to the top flight two years running. From there he joined Malmo FF, and from 1985 to 1990 won five successive league titles, two Swedish Championships, and two Swedish Cups.

When Hodgson took the helm of the Swiss national team in 1992, the country had not qualified for a major tournament since 1960. He led them to qualify for the World Cup in 1994, losing only one game along the road to the tournament (in a group that contained Italy and Portugal) and qualifying for the last 16 as runners-up in a group that included hosts the USA, as well as Colombia. They eventually lost to Spain in the second round.

He then guided Switzerland with ease to Euro '96 in England but left to join Inter Milan once qualification had been secured.

The Inter Milan side he joined was one suffering the worst period in its recent history. In a league dominated by rivals AC Milan, as well as Juventus, Inter had struggled to keep the pace during the 1990s, with an impatient chairman and a difficult set of players. Hodgson worked there for two years, reaching the UEFA Cup Final in 1997, which was lost on penalties to Schalke 04 in what would be the last ever two-leg European final.

Following short spells at Blackburn and Grasshopper Zurich, Hodgson moved to Danish side FC Copenhagen in 2000, where he won the Superliga.

Further international experience followed with the United Arab Emirates and Finland, with the latter narrowly missing out on Euro 2008 qualification, but nevertheless having a very respectable qualification campaign, finishing fourth in their group.

Then, on Dec. 28, 2007, Hodgson took the job at Fulham FC, a team on the brink of relegation. A run of results kept them up in 2008, and this season they currently lie in seventh place in the league, having beaten champions Manchester United along the way.

So essentially, here is an Englishman with a proven international and club record. He was many people's contender for Manager of the Season last year for keeping Fulham up, and this year for their excellent league position.

Maybe now his name will finally come up in the papers when the English national manager debate starts up again.

But then, I'm sure Fulham fans want to see the man from Croydon going nowhere.

Rafael Benitez: The Transfer Truth

David Gore — Sat, 02 May 2009 16:15:24 -0400

We’re always being told about Rafael Benitez’s poor transfer record.

I’ve already commented repeatedly on his lack of funds in his time at Liverpool, and the fact that he’s built an entire squad out of funds gotten from player sales, but what’s the truth about his transfer record?

Has he signed a series of duds that have drained the Liverpool transfer kitty dry? Here’s a definitive breakdown of every major Benitez signing. You’ll find how much they cost, what they sold for, and a brief history of their Liverpool careers.

I hope you’ll find it as interesting as I did, and that it sheds some light on what Benitez has done in his time at Liverpool, as part of the larger picture of building a club from the ashes of UEFA Cup mediocrity.

2004-'05

Luis Garcia (In £6m, Out £4m)—Scored some fantastic goals for Liverpool, including five on the way to the Champions League victory in Istanbul.

Xabi Alonso (In £10.5m)—Signed as a relative unknown from Real Sociedad in Rafa’s first season. Now a mainstay of the current side, courted by Europe’s elite.

Antonio Nunez (In free, Out undisclosed)—More or less forced on Rafa Benitez as part of the deal to take Michael Owen to Real Madrid in 2004, Nunez never adapted to the English game, and returned to Spain after one season.

Josemi (In £2m, Out player swap)—Signed as cover for Steve Finnan, Josemi never adapted to English life and was later swapped for Jan Kromkamp.

Fernando Morientes (In £6.3m, Out £3m)—Signed as a proven goalscorer, Morientes never quite adjusted to the English game.

Scott Carson (In £750k, Out £3.25m)—Signed as cover for Jerzy Dudek, but decided to leave when he found opportunities slim behind Pepe Reina. Sold for a profit of £2.5m.

Mauricio Pellegrino (In free, Out free)—Signed towards the end of his career to give experience to the backline. Struggled to adapt to the pace of England, but nonetheless had a major effect behind the scenes in an unofficial coaching role, which was cemented when he became first-team coach in 2008.

2005-'06

Jose Reina (In £6m)—Signed as an unknown to English fans from Villareal. Currently seen as one of the best goalkeepers in world football, who has won the Golden Gloves in England three times in four years.

Jan Kromkamp (In free, Out undisclosed)—Struggled to adapt to England and the English language, Kromkamp was sold to PSV Eindhoven after a single season.

Boudewijn Zenden (In free, Out free)—Signed as temporary cover for the left-wing in 2005, Zenden’s time at Liverpool was marked by injury.

Peter Crouch (In £7m, Out £11m)—A publicly mocked player and shock signing in 2005, Crouch became an instant fan favourite, scoring crucial goals in the Champions League, and was later sold for a tidy profit of £4m.

Dan Agger (In £5.8m)—An unknown defender signed from Brondby, Agger is now being courted by some of Europe’s biggest clubs including AC Milan.

Mohammed Sissoko (In £5m, Out £7m)—Signed as a youngster from Valencia, Sissoko fought his way in to Liverpool’s midfield, displacing Steven Gerrard to the right side of midfield. Following some impressive displays and a determined comeback after an horrific eye problem, Sissoko eventually left for a profit due to midfield competition at Liverpool.

Jack Hobbs (In £750k, Out undisclosed)—Signed as a youth player, Hobbs was allowed to leave following further acquisitions in his position at youth level.

Robbie Fowler (In free, Out free)—Signed to provide more options up front in 2005.

Paul Anderson (In free)—Another young player signed for free, Anderson is highly regarded at Anfield, though his career has so far been beset with injury.

2006-'07

Dirk Kuyt (In £9m)—A first-team player now converted to a right-sided midfielder, and a fan favourite. Scored some of Liverpool’s most crucial goals of recent seasons.

Craig Bellamy (In £6.5m, Out £7.5m)—Seen as a risk by many, Bellamy was signed to improve the attack and give pace to compliment Crouch. He scored 9 times for Liverpool, including the first in the win at the Nou Camp, and was sold for a profit.

Jermaine Pennant (In £6.7m)—Brought in to provide options on the right, Pennant fitted in nicely in his first season at Liverpool, helping his new club to the Champions League Final, in which he played a starring role. Since lost out to competition for places, with the tenacious Dirk Kuyt brought in at right midfield.

Alvaro Arbeloa (In £3m)—Arbeloa managed to displace popular full-back Steve Finnan, and has been arguably one of Liverpool’s most consistent performers in the '08-'09 season.

Nabil El Zhar (In free) – Signed as a youngster, El Zhar is growing into a first-team player, with some decent performances under his belt, and he’s still just 22 years old.

Fabio Aurelio (In free)—Aurelio has grown into Liverpool’s first-choice left-back, displacing the popular John Arne Riise in '07-'08.

Mark Gonzalez (In £1.5m, Out £4.5m)—Initially refused a work permit, Gonzalez struggled to adapt to the English game, but was nonetheless sold for three times his initial fee.

Gabriel Paletta (In £2m, Out undisclosed)—Signed as a youngster, Paletta was allowed to return to Argentina after struggling to adapt to England, and used as a makeweight in the deal to make Emiliano Insua’s loan move permanent.

2007-'08

Fernando Torres (In £20m)—Signed as a player with potential that exceeded his actual worth. Now the most valuable striker in the world.

Ryan Babel (In £11.5m)—Signed as a 20-year-old against competition from Arsenal, and expected to be a player for the future, Babel fitted instantly into the team, scoring goals from the bench. Struggled to find the same form in '08'-09, but still only 22 years old.

Lucas Leiva (In £6m)—Just 20 years old when he signed for the Reds, Lucas was the highly promising Brazilian under-20 team captain. In the two seasons he’d been at Anfield, he has yet to fully win over the Liverpool faithful, but recent displays have illustrated a marked improvement and an adaptation to the English game. At 22 years old he has a long career ahead of him.

Martin Skrtel (In £6.5m)—Another relative unknown outside of Slovakia and Russia, Skrtel has managed to displace the excellent Daniel Agger in defence and is a current first-team regular.

Yossi Benayoun (In £5m)—Benayoun has had few opportunities to impress, but has managed to do so in recent weeks with some important goals and performances. Highly regarded by Benitez and his fellow players.

Andriy Voronin (In free)—Signed as support for Torres and Crouch, Voronin struggled to establish himself at Liverpool, but played 19 times for the club.

Dani Pacheco (In free)—Signed as a youngster, now a regular for Liverpool’s reserves and one of Spain’s brightest prospects.

Javier Mascherano (In £18m)—Initially signed on loan following a disastrous and controversial spell at West Ham Utd., Mascherano is now captain of Argentina and one of the world’s most highly regarded midfielders.

Emiliano Insua (In free)—Signed as a youth, he spent most of his early career in the Liverpool reserves, but has broken through in to the first team with a series of impressive displays.

Sebastian Leto (In £1.85m)—Signed as a youngster for the future, Leto was refused a work permit by the UK authorities, despite his track record on the international stage. The player has had no chance to establish himself in England as a result, but has already proven to have great promise.

Charles Itandje (In undisclosed)—Signed as cover for Pepe Reina following the moves of Dudek and Carson out of the club.

Krisztian Nemeth (In free)—Signed as a youth player. Currently regarded as one of the brightest young talents at Liverpool.

Lauri Dalla Valle (In free)—A youngster who had previously played for Inter Milan’s youth set-up. A current regular in the reserve team, and a young talent in the making.

Damien Plessis (In free)—Signed as a youngster. Made his senior debut against Arsenal in a confident performance.

2008-'09

Robbie Keane (In £19m, Out £12m potentially rising to £19m with add-on deals)—Signed by Rick Parry for a fee beyond what Rafael Benitez wanted to pay, and stopping the Gareth Barry deal from going ahead. Made 25 appearances in all competitions.

Andrea Dossena (In £7m)—Struggled to establish himself in his first season, but nonetheless contributed to Liverpool’s stunning victories against Real Madrid and Manchester United.

Diego Cavalieri (In £3m)—Signed as cover for Pepe Reina, and has shown signs of talent in the few starts he’s had.

Philipp Degen (In free)—Signed as cover for Arbeloa at full-back, his career has stalled repeatedly through injury. A Swiss international in Euro 2008.

Albert Riera (In £8m)—A player whose inclusion is largely credited with giving Liverpool’s attack an entirely new dimension this year. Signed as another unknown player from an unfashionable Spanish club, RCD Espanyol, after being mocked for a poor loan spell at Manchester City, Riera is now regarded as one of the squad’s most important players.

David Ngog (In £1.5m)—Completely unknown, Ngog signed as a 19-year-old youngster, and has already shown tremendous promise in his few first-team showings.

I think the one key thing I noticed is the sheer amount of signings in there that were free transfers, as well as the amount of players signed young and cheap.

Many of the players were relative unknowns at the time of signing, yet have now grown to become some of the biggest names in football.

It seems to me that when you have to buy young, inexperienced potential, you're often going to get the odd player that doesn't fulfill what's expected. But then again, you'll always get your Daniel Aggers and Pepe Reina's, that come from nowhere to grow into world-class players.

Benitez has made profits on many players considered to be flops by many, and used that money to purchase men previously out of Liverpool's league in terms of fees.

Make of it what you will, but for me there's no question: Rafa Benitez is shrewd, intelligent and clever enough to improve a squad year by year, until it's capable of challenging for major honours in every trophy campaign.

Liverpool and Manchester United: The Past and the Future

David Gore — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 08:27:45 -0400

To be a Liverpool fan is often to be accused of living in the past.

Since the end of Liverpool's domination of the league (timed closely to the beginning of the Premier League era), the Reds have never been slow to remind the world what they had won, and what records they held.

Every year, they'd see some other club claim a major trophy that was once considered theirs by default.

Eighteen league titles and five European Cups.

That became the mantra of every Red, for use like a shield whenever a Manchester United fan boasted of winning something. Liverpool's dominance has been over since 1990, yet throughout that time, their fans could still argue that their team was the most successful in English footballing history.

That was the one defence against the achievements of Sir Alex Ferguson and Manchester United.

But look at the statistics, and you'll soon see that this claim is on the verge of collapse. The stats no longer sit so far in Liverpool's favour. Since the start of the Premier League, United have won 10 league titles, four FA Cups, and two European Cups.

All in all, since the two clubs were formed, Liverpool have won 58 major trophies.

Manchester United currently stand with 55.

Just four more trophies, and United are officially the most successful club in England.

They're about to match Liverpool's league title record. They're two European Cups behind the Reds, and they're favourites to win it this season. If they win the Charity Shield, they'll have matched Liverpool's trophy haul. Win the European Super Cup too, and they've done it.

Within four months, it could feasibly all be over for Liverpool's claim to being the most successful English club.

Can Liverpool stop it?

They're out of the Champions League, so they can't influence United winning that.

They're behind in the league, so it's United's to lose.

It would certainly appear that hope is growing slimmer.

But perhaps this is the beginning of the end of something more than Liverpool's cherished records.

For nearly two decades, Manchester United have risen to become an Empire. If Liverpool had the 1970s and '80s, United had the '90s and Noughties.

But Liverpool, under the stewardship of Rafael Benitez, have undergone a radical change of perspective. They have a manager, following on from Gerard Houllier, who looks to the future and has no connection to the past.

There's suddenly a new atmosphere around the club and the city, and it's one that doesn't think of records and statistics other than the ones game-by-game. Win this game, move further. Win the next game, get more points. No looking back. No more hiding behind records and boasts.

Liverpool Football Club, regardless of whether or not they keep their greatest of records, will always be a great and historic institution.

Thanks to their incredible teams of the last 20 years, so will Manchester United.

The two behemoths of English football are almost equal—side by side in historic stats and league position—and are renewing their long-lost struggle to extend their trophy hauls.

Who knows—maybe in 10 years' time it'll be United fans looking back, boasting of their fine records, as another wave of the Liverpool Empire is busy writing a new future for itself.

Phil Gartside Scores the Own Goal, Again

David Gore — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:01:41 -0400

On Oct. 23 last year, I responded to statements by Phil Gartside, the Bolton Wanderers chief, on his novel ideas for the restructuring of the English league system.

At the time, the talk fell quiet, and I believed—or rather hoped—that the issue was dead.

Turns out it isn't.

He's now intending to put that issue to his fellow FA board members, requiring just 13 of the 19 votes in order to change the entire future history of the most successful and wealthy league system in world football (including leagues below the Premier League, when compared to foreign equivalents).

So as recycling is the way to save the Earth, I thought I'd do my part to save football by re-publishing an article many of you might have missed. Enjoy.

What usually happens when the Football Association is questioned is they hide under a duvet and wait until the next big issue arises, when they can make a fool of themselves again.

So I'd like to thank Mr. Phil Gartside for once again bringing to the fore the overall incompetence of the FA board members by spouting utterly deranged rubbish in the press.

Gartside, the chairman of Bolton Wanderers and a director at Wembley as well as being an FA board member, has astutely identified a problem in the English game (one that we already knew existed and his organization has done nothing to curb) involving the rise in foreign ownership and billionaire investment that is turning the game into something of a farce.

All well and good so far. But then he goes and spoils it all by saying something silly like, "split the league in two."

"SuperPhil" reckons the Premier League would be a lot more competitive if we were to cut it in half. He proposes a two-tier league with a total of 36 teams. This, SuperPhil claims, will make it easier for the England squad as well as aiding the integration of a winter break.

He hasn't yet spotted that all his proposal actually says is that we lower the number of top-flight teams to 18. But it gets better.

He then suggests the FA stop relegating teams from this "Premier League Two" to the Championship, meaning the 36 teams would never be replaced. Gartside says this is because:

"We have already got to the situation where the three clubs that go down from the Premier League are usually the three that come up, although a couple of others might sneak in."

Clearly, those "couple of others" are Wigan, Hull City, Stoke City, Sunderland, and Reading, none of whom had been in the top flight for decades. When Birmingham City were promoted, they hadn't been in the top tier for 16 years. Derby County had been out of the Premier League for five years before their promotion.

Of the three teams relegated the season before last (Sheffield United, Charlton Athletic, Watford), not one was promoted last year.

So really, all in all, is Phil Gartside a bumbling fool who's threatening to annihilate the spirit of English league football? Or is he a criminal genius working to bring the FA down from within by sucking out any last lingering shred of public faith in their grand ideals?

I'm hoping he's the latter, because surely no one can be THAT sincerely stupid.

The Dark Cloud Of Hillsborough

David Gore — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:31:57 -0400

The clock said 14:55, and the woman could see I was watching it. She was a grey-haired lady with a peculiar mix of an accent, there to talk to me about extra training I’m scheduled to do at work. She knew full well why I was watching the clock, since she was born in Bootle.

I put my coat on as I left the office, and noticed that my hands were shaking. At the time I couldn’t figure it out. I suppose part of me wasn’t sure if Nottingham would turn out and do the right thing, or even if some idiots would try to spoil what I knew would be emotional.

Rewind twenty years to the day. I was just six when my dad was offered tickets to watch Liverpool play in an FA Cup semi-final against Nottingham Forest. He turned them down because of work.

Everyone in Liverpool seems to have known someone that went to that game. Liverpool’s a small city, maybe not in geographical size but certainly in closeness.

Like a tiny country crossed with a large village, it’s a peculiar mix of the cosmopolitan and the quaint. Everyone seems to know everyone, even if they’ve never actually met.

And I suppose that’s why I expected Nottingham not to live up to what it promised to do last week, at 3.06pm, on Wednesday April 15th, 2009. Nottingham isn’t part of Liverpool after all; it doesn’t have the same connections.

I also knew how I was feeling as I took each step closer to leaving the office. I kept telling myself that I wasn’t involved; I didn’t lose anyone in the horrors of that day. Perhaps it would have been different if my dad had taken those tickets, but that was only supposition, nothing to mourn for.

Yet I was mourning, even before I saw the crowd in Nottingham’s Old Market Square. I tried to hold back the sadness and keep my eyes from watering when I saw the turnout. The centre of Nottingham was a mass of people, some in work clothes as I was, others in football kits, and draped across the Town Hall was a banner proclaiming that the city was united with Liverpool and Sheffield to remember Hillsborough.

I took my place among the crowd, and though I knew I was a rare Merseysider amongst a crowd of Midlanders, I suddenly felt as part of something as I ever did in Liverpool.

At 3.06pm, the city fell silent for two minutes. The buses and trams halted, and the bustling city fell so quiet that all I could hear was the fountains behind me. Then came the church bells, ringing out one for each of the 96 men, women and children that never came home from Sheffield.

But it was when, at the point that the bells eventually stopped chiming, the city played our song, I finally broke and felt the tears.

The crowd, as one, sang “You’ll Never Walk Alone.” Men and women, some clutching Liverpool scarves aloft, but many others in Nottingham Forest shirts, Chelsea shirts, or Derby County shirts were singing for the dead. I don’t know if I’ll ever forget the image of a stranger in an Aston Villa shirt, proudly holding his claret and blue scarf in the air, singing Liverpool’s song at the top of his voice a hundred miles away from Anfield.

And that was it. It was at that point that I realised was why I was mourning.

I may not have known any of the dead or their families, but I was born and grew up on the banks of the Mersey, and I can tell you now that Hillsborough is like a permanent dark cloud that sits above the great city. You see it every time you go to Anfield, you feel it every year at the same time. Like a wound that will never heal, it hurts everyone that grows up in its shadow.

And when you leave the city, it leaves with you. For twenty years I felt it, but on that day, April 15th, 2009, I saw others feeling it too. People with no connection with my city all had that dark cloud above them, because it didn’t matter that the victims were Reds.

They were human beings, and they didn’t deserve to die.

To Nottingham I give thanks, and to Sheffield too. And to all those beyond the three affected cities who likewise felt the cloud, I discovered that day that you certainly didn’t walk alone.

English Football Clubs and Countries: Pick A Side

David Gore — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:15:43 -0400

My first real memory of international football is way back in 1998.

My school, bowing to student and teacher pressure, decided to show England's matches of Euro '98 in the assembly hall, and we all dropped lessons for 90 minutes each time to see it.

I won’t lie; I remember it being fun. But it was also my first taste of what's bad about watching England in public.

Even at that young age, the stereotypical England fan that I would encounter so many problems with in later life, had started to form before my eyes.

Loud and xenophobic, with a poor knowledge of the game and a thrilled over-excitement at being able to support Premier League players instead of the names at their Championship clubs, the future "pub morons on England day" surrounded me in the school hall.

They cursed the finest athletes this country had to offer for not winning well enough, or for having their penalty saved in the lottery of the shootout.

The debate over Club vs. Country seems to have enveloped the planet in recent years, especially where England's concerned. Managers pull rank, players get belligerent, and "fans" that never normally express an interest in football, bicker.

I dread international breaks for the inevitable actual physical breaks and tears that my favorite players encounter against whichever "minnows" they happen to be facing at the time.

So, Club vs. Country. It seems like we should all pick a side, so where do I stand?

I've heard a lot of talk of this supposed "6+5" rule, which would limit the amount of foreign players in any given club match.

Unfortunately, even if my footballing sensibilities agreed with it—which I'll explain my thoughts on in just a moment—my social sensibilities wouldn't.

The rule will never be sanctioned by the European Union, simply because it’s actually illegal by its own laws. Freedom of employment in EU member states is crucial to the economies of EU nations, including the UK, and a cornerstone of the entire Union.

It would be incredibly simple for a club or a player to challenge such a FIFA rule in a European court, since player contracts are employment contracts, and as such are highly protected like all employment contracts, for the sake of workers’ rights.

Whether the tabloids like it, there are damn good reasons the EU courts exist, and football is a profession like any other, which must be treated—if you pardon the pun—on the same level playing field as anything else.

Aside from politics, I don’t agree with the 6+5 rule. This type of rule does nothing for a club’s academy, and only reduces a club’s financial value as they’re forced not to field players they’re paying salaries to.

Then the club would be forced to sell those players (in many cases at a loss in transfer value) to recoup money, and given that players are a club’s primary assets, that then leaves a club in trouble. I fail to see how severely damaging clubs financially helps them to produce young talent.

I also don’t see the problem in a system that has led to the development of youngsters such as Wayne Rooney, Ashley Young, Gabriel Agbonlahor, Micah Richards, Ben Foster, Theo Walcott, and Aaron Lennon in the last few years alone.

John Terry and Frank Lampard grew to prominence during Claudio Ranieri’s “foreign invasion” of Chelsea, and Ashley Cole became Arsene Wenger’s first-choice left-back when he was recruiting half of France to play for Arsenal.

Furthermore, Steven Gerrard won the captaincy of Liverpool when Gerard Houllier was flooding Liverpool’s midfield with Europeans.

Do we really have a failing system as the doom-mongers say we do? All I know is that we have a current squad with a mixture of youth and experience, with generals like Gerrard, Terry, Ferdinand, Lampard, and Barry just peaking, old hands like David James, Emile Heskey, and David Beckham, and a whole crop of youngsters itching for their chance to impress.

England keeps on winning under Fabio Capello, an astute and intelligent manager (a rarity for England), despite injuries to major players and no place for former savior Michael Owen.

In my opinion, clubs shouldn’t have to look after the England team. International football came around a century after the first formation of English football clubs, and is still, when you take the mindless patriotism away, merely a sideshow every so often in between league campaigns.

Clubs pay player salaries, support them through injuries, nurture their growth, and hone their mentalities.

Yet they’re then expected to swallow the consequences when the national team doesn’t win the World Cup, and are told to be quiet when the star player they’ve paid £20 million for comes home with a snapped hamstring when he’s been played against medical advice.

For me, it shouldn’t be clubs being forced to fix international squads. National F.A.s should be doing all they can to help clubs, not punish them by imposing draconian and quick-fix “cure-all” ideas in order to simply pass the buck for failures inherent to the system.

It seems to be me that the "Club vs. Country" debate only seems to rear its ugly head when things don't go as well as English pub fans expect them to.

People frequently forget England won nothing in the 1970s and 80s, when there were few foreigners in the English game, but English club teams dominated Europe, and arguably they only won in 1966 because of a good manager, an easy run, and a few dodgy refereeing decisions.

Blaming "Johnny Foreigner" has always been the most convenient English excuse for all of our national failings after all.

Is it really up to Liverpool FC or Manchester United—companies in their own right who depend on having the best players in order to stay alive in the most competitive business on Earth—to fix the England team?

No, it isn’t, and it’s unfair to suggest so.

Something needs sorting, that’s for sure. But it shouldn’t be the clubs being sorted; it’s the fixtures, the attitudes, and the powers-that-be in English football that needs looking at.

And that’s where I stand.

Liverpool Cure Glasgow Syndrome

David Gore — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:13:04 -0400

In trying to narrow down the way this title race is progressing, I think it’s important to explain something about how the British sports fan thinks.

International readers of this site often have a perception of the British, which maybe conforms to a stereotype based on some element of truth. Whether it's the bowler hat, cricket phrases, and stiff upper lip, or the flat cap and Cockney accent declaring, "Gawd bless 'er Majesty," everyone has an image of what it means to be British.

But the British perception of Britishness is often based on the notion that we, as a people, are best summed up by the words "grit", "guile" and "hard-work." Rightly or wrongly, this has become almost the British version of the French hendiatris, “Liberté, égalité, fraternité.”

At this point, I’ll have to digress, and make a confession. Don’t worry; it’ll all make sense later on.

You see, I’m a Liverpudlian, and unlike many of my ilk, I lost faith. Every year, I watched the Reds fail in “their season”, and every year I saw someone else lift the Premier League trophy.

Eventually it got to the point that I ended up supporting two teams: Liverpool, and whoever was closest to pipping Manchester United to the title.

I’ve cheered Newcastle, Arsenal and Blackburn heartily in my time supporting Liverpool, when it became obvious that we were out of the running. “Anyone but United” became my mantra. If I’d died you could have put it on my headstone.

But I’m sure I wasn’t alone in that. You see, “partisan” should probably be another of those British words. Everyone in Britain, other than United fans, were probably doing the same thing, with Manchester United repeatedly being voted the Most Disliked Team in England.

Then, in 2003, they finally had a consistent title challenger. A team that filled the void left by the fading Arsenal Empire and threatened to steal United’s crown as the dominant force in English football.

The only problem was they also turned out to be a challenger for United’s Most Disliked crown, too.

You see, Roman Abramovich’s Chelsea don’t conform to the “grit, guile and hard-work” perception. To the regular football fan in England, they instantly took the back door to success, replacing the traditional British way with “cash, cash, and more cash.”

Their manager, Jose Mourinho, came extremely close to stealing Alex Ferguson’s place as the least-liked manager in the league, especially whenever his astronomical salary was brought up.

So, who was the partisan English fan going to root for? “Monopoly United” or “Chelski” were the only options: the two most hated teams in English football.

And then it became clear that Arsenal’s dramatic recent demise left only these two wealthiest clubs in England to contest the title. Teams with solid financial bases, ready to dominate indefinitely, forever.

This was all leading to what I call “Glasgow Syndrome,” the phenomenon whereby two extremely disliked clubs dominate a league so clearly that no one else cares which of them wins it.

Named for the Scottish Premier League, a confusing and entertainment-bereft national league in which the only winners are one of the two Glasgow teams, Glasgow Syndrome is the natural end-point of an unbalanced league, based primarily on private funding.

Celtic or Rangers, The Red Devils or the Deep Blue Chelsea: Either way, the title race is dull.

But then my faith was restored, and it was done so by a man from Madrid.

Rafael Benitez’s Liverpool, despite what Mr Ferguson may insist, aren’t money-bags. Yet, with grit, guile and plain hard-work, they’ve fought their way back in the Champions League, FA Cup and now the Premier League, often against the odds.

Like Valencia, breaking the dull Real-Barcelona monopoly in La Liga, Liverpool have barged in on the United/Chelsea battle, and injected new life in to a title race threatening to stagnate long-term.

For the first time in a number of years, fans of other clubs are interested. Forums are heaving. Phone-ins are full of Portsmouth fans, Spurs fans and Villa fans trying to figure out if Liverpool have what it takes to break the Glasgow Syndrome before it takes hold.

Like they did with the Champions League, it’s Liverpool who have turned another competition interesting, and, just maybe, the Premier League can finally live up to its boast of being the most entertaining league on Earth.

And if you ask me, it’s not before time. But then, I always was a bit partisan.

No One Likes Rafael Benitez, But We Don't Care

David Gore — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:21:21 -0400

The great American poet Allen Ginsberg once said that, "Whoever controls the media—the images—controls the culture." Admittedly, that's a lofty start to a sports article, but in writing about Rafael Benitez, I thought it strangely apt.

There's been a few media favourites in English football down the years. From Brian Clough to Alex Ferguson and Jose Mourinho, journalists love the cocky and the brash. It isn't difficult to understand why, I mean, a lot of journalists are freelance and get paid by the article, while newspapers rely on stories and soundbites.

With that in mind, it's pretty clear why someone like "The Special One" would be popular with them. Conversely, it's also easy to see why the opposite would be true of someone quieter, more thoughtful, or less thrilling.

The height of Rafael Benitez's media career came after the recent soundbite-full "facts" comment about Alex Ferguson, which the media converted in to the simple, newspaper-friendly headline, "Rafa's Rant."

But aside from that, why would the press like the Liverpool manager, given who they usually prefer? Down the years, he's given them very few stories away from the pitch. He's ignored the petty mind-games, refused to be drawn on speculation and arguments, and kept his cards hidden.

On the pitch, he's seemed cagey, unexciting, and extremely tactical.

If Ferguson's the general and Jose's the matador, Rafa's the chess-player. Chess enthusiasts don't make media darlings.

I hate it when football fans accuse the world of a bias against their man or their club, but the more I look at it, the more I see one against Benitez. Every time I see a game, I hear commentators questioning his style or tactics, even when he wins.

Every time I hear about his transfer record it grates on me because of outright lies and falsehoods now taken as fact by almost all quarters. Even a minority of Liverpool fans seem taken in by it all, and reacted to his new contract with suspicion and pessimism.

The common perception, that Rafa has "blown" £188m on a large amount of duds and no Premier League title, is not only a blatant misrepresentation of the truth, it's verging on a lie.

The figure seems sound, but no one figure tells the whole picture. To quote the excellent sports writer, Paul Tomkins, that is gross spend, not net spend, and doesn't take in to account the money he's taken off that figure with player sales, totalling around £80m.

So that puts the figure at around £100m spent on players, and much of that was funded by trophy-winning and match revenue simply not achieved during the Houllier years.

Tomkins has done the maths, and the most expensive squad at the moment is Chelsea, followed by United. Liverpool's squad is actually way down in fifth place, behind Tottenham and Manchester City. So where should Liverpool be in the league table?

Well Manchester City, the team just above them in squad-cost, currently lie in 10th place at the time of writing. Tottenham, above them in expense, are a place behind them in 11th.

Manchester United are top of the league, but only ahead by four points. The rough difference in squad value is £80m between United and Liverpool. That's £20m per point. Chelsea, the most expensive squad in British history, are joint second, only ahead of Liverpool on goal difference.

Then you add in to the variables the fact that, in 2004, when Rafael Benitez took over at Liverpool, Chelsea's squad was full of big-name, expensive stars brought in by the very underrated manager, Claudio Ranieri.

The squad inherited by Jose Mourinho already included Petr Cech, Claud Makelele, Frank Lampard, Arjen Robben, and Joe Cole, as well as John Terry, nurtured by Ranieri's team.

In 2004, Manchester United's squad had been graced by the likes of Ryan Giggs, Roy Keane, Paul Scholes and Gary Neville for near a decade, while Rio "£30m" Ferdinand, Ruud van Nistelrooy, Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, Alan Smith and Cristiano Ronaldo were in the first team.

The only players remaining in the current Liverpool squad from the 2003-04 season are Sami Hyypia, Jamie Carragher, and Steven Gerrard. Everyone else has been sold and replaced.

My point is that while Chelsea and Manchester United could continue to build upon already great squads, Rafa had to start again from scratch, and what's more he did it with a fraction of the budget.

In 2004, Jose Mourinho's first summer at Chelsea, he added to the likes of Lampard, Cech, and Terry by spending over £70m on players, including £24m on Didier Drogba, £19.8m on Ricardo Carvalho, £10m on Tiago, and £13m on Paulo Ferreira.

In the same summer, Alex Ferguson spent £25.6m on the 18-year-old Wayne Rooney, as well as £7m on Gabriel Heinze.

In Rafael Benitez's first summer at Anfield, he lost Michael Owen for pittance to Real Madrid, and signed Luis Garcia (£6m) and Xabi Alonso (£10.5).

All in all, Mourinho and Ferguson added to extremely well established and talented title contending squads by spending upwards of £70m and £32m respectively, while Benitez could only manage £16.5m... and won the Champions League.

His achievements speak for themselves, in dragging a UEFA Cup squad to a European Cup victory, and, through expert wheeling and dealing with squad players, now becoming the most feared team in European football.

Just four points off the league leaders after a mere five years in charge (Alex Ferguson waited seven years to win the league with United), building a new team from scratch with a limited budget and major ownership distractions.

Every time he's reached a final he's beaten sides better than his, through a combination of brilliant tactical nous and incredible knowledge of the game.

He's taken a club heavily in debt, without major financial backers or the well-established proceeds of a worldwide global "brand", and yet managed to win himself the funds to sign players like Mascherano and Fernando Torres.

Yet still, people have the nerve to ask Liverpool supporters whether they think his new contract is a good or a bad move for the club. The media may control the culture, but luckily they don't control Liverpool FC.

A Winter of Discontent: The Robbie Keane Story

David Gore — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 06:32:24 -0500

It’s odd how words gain new meanings over time. For example, “collider,” once meant an ill-fated object about to cause untold destruction by smashing into something else. Now it means a giant machine in Switzerland that could potentially end the universe.

Then there’s “Robbie Keane.” Once used to signify a dangerous player the top four defences hated coming up against, now it means a dividing line. A wedge between the fans, the board, and some even say the manager and his players.

It wasn’t always so. Once upon a time (around May last year), Rafael Benitez was busy writing his summer shopping list, and Robbie Keane was somewhere near the top. The problem is, he wasn’t the first name to be scrawled.

When he arrived at Liverpool with a fanfare owing more to his price-tag than his career achievements, Robbie Keane was lauded as the final piece in Rafa’s title jigsaw. Much like Harry Kewell, pundits and many fans mistook a former Leeds United player as the man who’d end the 18-year wait for Liverpool league glory. Of course, on reflection, and as we’ve seen this season already, no one player can mount a challenge, but £20 million seemed to be a gamble staked on Keane’s own shoulders.

But was any of that fair? And what’s more, was it even Rafa’s fault?

As I said, Rafa’s list had another name at its summit, and that name was a player who the Spaniard believed, if not would complete the team, at least would complete the midfield. That man was Gareth Barry.

Aston Villa, perhaps as predicted, upped the price on their captain, and I doubt anyone sensible can blame them. This, in itself, wouldn’t have been any problem; the funds were there for any enhanced Barry bid. Except that a certain Liverpool executive had other ideas.

Since 1998, Rick Parry has served as the chief executive of Liverpool FC. Appointed by then owner, David Moores, the unashamed Red led Liverpool through the Houllier years and played a pivotal role in bringing Rafael Benitez to Liverpool.

There can be no doubt that he is fully committed to the club he has always supported, and he is doing his best. But delve deeper, and you see that he has made a number of costly errors of judgement.

During his tenure, he has failed to capture several Benitez targets, such as Nemanja Vidic, Theo Walcott and Simao. Liverpool, one of the best supported global brands in football, has failed to keep pace with other less established brands like Arsenal FC. Tom Hicks, one half of the “Gruesome Twosome” with George Gillett, recently called Rick Parry’s time at Liverpool “a disaster,” and urged him to resign.

Of course, none of this takes in to account the transfers that did come off, such as Torres, Reina, Alonso and Mascherano, as well as managing to persuade shirt sponsors Carlsberg not to run a promotion with the Sun newspaper, something that would have left a bitter taste in any Red fan’s mouth.

But one thing that is clear is that it was Parry who decided to pay well over the odds for Robbie Keane, leaving the bank short when it came to making a move for Gareth Barry. This then forced Benitez to consider selling Alonso after interest from Juventus, since he knew he needed a left-sided player.

In the end, the lack of funds for Barry meant Benitez settled for Albert Riera, who, despite having a decent start to his Liverpool career, is not Gareth Barry.

Recently, Benitez’s contract talks broke down, and it emerged that the sticking point was transfer control, or rather, the lack of it that Rafa has had in recent seasons. The Barry/Keane saga was the final straw for Benitez, who knows that he is now taking the flak for a huge price-tag that he played no part in negotiating, while the player he really wanted is now battling hard to keep Aston Villa’s incredible season going.

Today is transfer deadline day, and it looks like Keane may go. If he does, it’ll be a sad end to a dream move for him, and another piece of the jigsaw slinking off after failed hopes and unrealistic targets.

“Robbie Keane” means a lot of things. Division, poor business and failed chances are some of them. But for me, you have to feel sorry for the man behind the metaphors. A pawn in the game between the upper management, trapped between the pitch and the boardroom, and forgotten as Liverpool march on after beating Chelsea without him.

Football Pundits: Harmless or Harmful?

David Gore — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:01:52 -0500

The above picture is of Mark Lawrenson. It was included it to remind everyone, before I begin, that he was once a great player and a fantastic ambassador for Liverpool Football Club.

In his prime, he formed a defensive partnership with Alan Hansen that, arguably, has yet to be eclipsed by any defensive pairing in the modern Premier League. His work at the back helped the team continue their dominance of England, winning five league titles, three League Cups, an FA Cup and a European Cup. His distinguished career was brought to a slightly premature end by an Achilles injury in 1988.

Twenty years later, whenever I play on the English release of Pro-Evolution Soccer 2008, I hear Lawro with a scripted commentary, being about as wooden as a mutant hybrid of Woody Woodpecker and Keanu Reeves.

Now that's fair enough, I've no problem with his participation video games, I normally turn the commentary off anyway. The scary thing is, despite it being scripted, it's actually quite an accurate portrayal of the rubbish that the once great defensive rock tends to spout.

There's one phrase that always leaps out at me. Whenever my goalkeeper makes an error in the game, Lawro chimes in with "Call himself a keeper? He couldn't keep bees."

I love this one, because it implies that being a beekeeper is easy, something which a football pundit would know absolutely nothing about.

Something else that football pundits often know nothing about is football management. Lawrenson's only experience of management comes from short, and largely unsuccessful stints as a defensive coach with Newcastle, and manager of Oxford and Peterborough United.

His former defensive partner, Alan Hansen, has even less management experience, having gone straight into punditry after retirement. On the Skysports team, Andy Gray, the most famous and successful pundit, never managed either.

Which is why I often mutter under my breath when I hear them criticising a manager's decisions on Match of the Day or Super Sunday. Andy Gray is particularly bad for it, gaining notoriety for his "magic board," on which he tried to analyse a manager's line up, often wrongly, before and during a game.

Mark Lawrenson recently added fuel to the Robbie Keane transfer saga, by betraying Steven Gerrard's confidence, and undermining his former club, by insinuating that the Liverpool captain told him privately that Keane is set for a January move, something the club and Gerrard have denied.

It seems to me that football punditry has become a selfish art. A mix of journalistic ambition and an exploitation of the game, something echoed recently by former Manchester United hero Roy Keane (a man who has managed a top-flight club):

"I was asked by ITV to do the Celtic versus Manchester United game but I've done it once for Sky and never again," he said. "I'd rather go to the dentist. You're sitting there with people like Richard Keys and they're trying to sell something that's not there."

"Anytime I watch a game on television, I have to turn the commentators off. They say 'he's playing well' and I'm thinking 'no, he's not'. My advice to anyone is don't listen to the experts, Just watch the game and gather your own opinions."

He goes on, "I wouldn't trust them to walk my dog. There are ex-players and ex-referees being given air-time who I wouldn't listen to in a pub. OK, there will be one or two who've done something in the game whose opinion you would take on board, but I'm on about every Tom, Dick, and Harry."

So they're definitely an irritation, that, like the tabloids, claim impartiality whilst influencing public opinion on the "topic of the day." After all, who'd be criticising the zonal marking system if football pundits ever pointed out the fact that teams who use it, like Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester United, Chelsea, Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan, Internazionale, and Bayern Munich, happen to be the biggest clubs on Earth right now?

What if people like Andy Gray and Mark Lawrenson offered a balanced view, by citing the fact that teams, whichever system they play, are always going to concede a few goals over a season, and men will always make mistakes whether they use man marking or zonal?

But there's another, more damaging effect that pundits can have. As Roy Keane pointed while he was still Sunderland boss, and later proved to his peril:

"I keep saying hopefully managers will be given an opportunity but the way punters are getting brain-washed every week, like a debate on every night after a bad result, it's crazy.

"We're on about league tables after a week, teams losing two games and it's a crisis and that's constantly being thrown into people's faces.

"People are getting brain-washed so what you've got to do is not to get sucked into any of that nonsense and try and focus on your job, but it's hard because people take notice of what's been said."

The saddest thing is, maybe, just maybe, that extra pressure incited by the football shows was what tipped Keane, a promising young manager, over the edge and out of employment.

Is it not time that we admit that people like Gray, Hansen, and Lawrenson are not the people we should be listening to when judging football managers? Should we not put more faith in those who've achieved success, and who's opinions are more likely to be backed up by reason and experience?

Or is it a case of those who can't manage, go into punditry?

Often, these men were great players in their history, but are they truly respectable as commentators?

In my opinion, they couldn't comment on beekeeping.

Liverpool and Valencia: The Rafael Benitez Parallel

David Gore — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 04:06:34 -0500

On 5 May 2002, Rafael Benitez led his Valencia team out at La Rosaleda.

The team had been locked away in the days prior to the game, meeting no one and conducting no interviews.

In the minds of every Valencia fan, young or old, waiting to see their team emerge from the Malaga tunnel, were the ghostly images of Di Stefano's team clutching the league trophy in '71, the last time the Che had been champions.

It had been a strange campaign throughout 2001 and 2002. The traditional favourites for the title, Real Madrid and Barcelona, both suffered problems with inconsistency, despite being tipped as certs to fight for first and second.

Valencia themselves had hardly performed with distinction, struggling to break down teams they were predicted to beat, and encountering a disappointing 0-0 home draw against Tenerife along the way. All in all, Valencia had drawn no less than five home matches, and eight away games.

But, partly due to the failure of any one side to put a run together, after thirty-six rounds, La Liga was poised.

Roberto Ayala scored early against Malaga, taking the pressure off Valencia. Fabio Aurelio scored near half-time to guarantee the win, and Valencia went far enough ahead to be crowned champions.

It had been a slog, and Valencia had fought, often without impressing. Benitez had been criticised by the Spanish press, and some sections of the Mestalla, for defensive displays and a lack of imagination in front of goal, while others justified the manager by pointing to the gulf in finances between Valencia and their rivals, particularly Real Madrid.

In 2008, Rafael Benitez has a team sat at the summit of English football, suffering negativity in the press and from fans for defensive tactics, and struggling to defeat lesser teams at home. At the same time, however, Liverpool's title rivals are also inconsistent, with Chelsea and Manchester United, both with superior funds and squad values, failing to tighten the gap on the Reds.

Could history be repeating itself?

I wonder.

Rafael Benitez: Freedom of the Press?

David Gore — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:00:26 -0500

At work, in between actually working, I tend to check the sports pages for the latest stories. When I did that today, on the Sky Sports website, I read about Rafael Benitez apparently dismissing Liverpool's title hopes by saying the other title sides must "mess up" for his team to be crowned champions.

He compares Liverpool to Valencia, who, arguably, profited from some major slip ups from real Madrid and Barcelona to win their first title in 31 years.

Now as most people who know me are aware, I'm a bit of a cynical man. I see programmes like Pop Idol and Big Brother as the scurvy of TV channels, and today's mass-produced Christmas as a jumped up Coca-Cola advert. I'm just naturally a Scrooge, questioning anything.

So I found it hard to believe that a professional who is usually so cagey would come out and make comments such as these right in the middle of a critical period for his team, and it isn't hard to read between the lines and notice a similar reservation in the way the experienced Sky Sports team wrote it up.

So I delved a little further. The story has appeared in most of the major British papers, but began its life in...

The Sun.

The original article failed to cite any sources or times, simply repeating the phrase "Benitez said..."

Anyone who listens to Benitez's press and media interactions knows his style of speech, to the extent of it being lampooned on Youtube by a Scouse amateur impressionist. He's careful, measured, very cagey and reserved. He always avoids difficult or compromising questions, and will even bend the truth rather than say something that would damage his team or players.

So the quotes in the article simply do not add up. I mean, knowing how the man talks, does any of this sound Rafa?

"For us to win the league we need Chelsea, Man United and Arsenal to mess up their season.

"It is very rare that three teams all mess up.

“So there’s no point waiting for our direct adversaries to slip up because it won’t happen."

For me, that is not Rafa. Most articles, even badly sourced ones, always cite a mythical "unnamed source" as its origin. This one doesn't even bother to do that.

So to my mind, the writer, Steve Brenner, a seasoned Sun hack, is either proving himself a really terrible and amateurish journalist, or lying directly.

Given as it is The Sun, neither would surprise me.

Edit:

Less than a few hours after writing this article, Rafael Benitez did as expected and moved to attack the report, which was apparently a complete misquotation in an interview given to a French journalist, which was then printed by The Sun in a very lazy and amateurish way, without checking or naming sources before going to print.

Of course, not all Sun readers will see the latest statement from Benitez, and many will doubt it as a retraction. Thus the tabloids make a story out of nothing again, and a man is forced to justify something he didn't say. Freedom of the press? I wonder.

Xabi Alonso Is Owed an Apology

David Gore — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:14:36 -0500

I have a confession.

You see, I'm a Liverpool fan and at the start of the season, I was disappointed that Alonso, and not Barry, would be lining up in midfield.

Before you all gasp in horror, let me just explain. In my mind, Xabi, a great hero of mine, had not adapted while the team had moved on around him. I thought, and I suspect that the management maybe concurred that Alonso's poor couple of seasons had been due in part to a problem fitting in with Rafa's new expansive attacking style, which pushed the play further forward and focused the team on Gerrard and Torres.

It seemed to me that Gareth Barry would have been a better bet, playing as part of a midfield containing two wingers and Mascherano, with Gerrard playing just ahead. This struck me as a fantastic option, and unfortunately, Xabi no longer fit. Rafael Benitez clearly thought likewise, as he considered offers from Juventus for the former Sociedad ace.

Many people would have taken the events and uncertainty of the summer and sunk off to hide in a corner. Some may have spun outward and mouthed off against their employers. In any case, after two poor seasons, very few would've done anything other than go through the motions.

But Xabi, on the other hand, may have had his best ever start to a season in a Liverpool shirt, scoring crucial goals and proving to be a diamond in the rough in a couple of average team performances. This culminated in last week's man of the match performance against the Blackburn Rovers.

These days, whenever I see Gareth Barry in the press, I get a horrible guilty feeling in my stomach, as if I've somehow betrayed a best friend by looking to someone better to hang around with.

So Xabi, my apologies. I wouldn't change you for the world.

Well, maybe improve your tackling a bit.

St. Michael: G-Owen Home?

David Gore — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 19:31:14 -0500

On the day Michael Owen's transfer to Real Madrid was confirmed, I was reminded of all the bad feeling I got when Robbie Fowler left. Batman had been discarded by Gerard Houllier, and now that a new manager and a new period of "building" was starting, Robin was making a run for it.

But as I watched it all unfold, I turned to the nearest guy to me, and assuredly scoffed, "He'll be back."

Fast forward four unsuccessful years. A part-time job as a Bernabeu bench heater, followed by a test subject for the Newcastle medical team, and suddenly, the words "Owen" and "Liverpool" are hooking together again like Velcro.

So, should Liverpool fans be dragging out their "Baby Faced Assassin" banners and giving him a fanfare, or do they have grounds for a certain amount of scepticism?

After all, when he left the Reds of his own volition, the board, with sleep-disturbing flash-backs to Steve McManaman's Bosman free transfer to Madrid, was forced to take a knock-down fee plus a surplus Real winger who only lasted one season at the club, for England's best striker and Liverpool's principal goal threat.

Now he's potentially coming back, at 28 years old, already being called a has-been by the critics. He's been dropped from the England squad, and struggles with injury.

But then there's the fee that's being mentioned. £2 million for a proven English goalscorer seems like the sort of January bargain you only see on the high-street during a recession.

His affinity with Liverpool could also mean a wage cut, and a willing acceptance of a second-fiddle role to a fit Fernando Torres.

So, what do we reckon? Open arms welcome for the Boy Wonder? Could our new Batman be about to get the old Robin? Tune in this January to find out. Same bat-time, same bat-channel.

Arsenal Will Never Surrender

David Gore — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:09:58 -0500

There's been a lot of negativity about Arsenal in the past week, and I think it needs something inspirational to occur to level it out. So, as my gift to all Arsenal fans, I'd like to provide some words of comfort, in the style of the most inspirational speaker in recent British history: Sir Winston Churchill.

Enjoy!

"When a week ago today, Mr Gallas asked the press to fix that afternoon as the occasion for a statement, I feared it would be my hard-lot to announce the greatest football calamity of our recent history. I thought, and some good judges agreed with me, that perhaps a million Gooners would be left distraught.

These were the hard and heavy tidings for which I hoped the fans could prepare themselves for. The whole root and core and brain of the Arsenal team, on which and around which we were to build, and are to build, the great Arsenal teams in the later months of the season, seemed about to perish upon the field, or to be led into an ignominious and massive failure.

Manchester City attacked on all sides with great strength and fierceness, and their main power, the power of their far more expensive attack, was thrown into the battle, or else concentrated upon Silvestre and Clichy. Pressing in upon the narrow backline, both from the right and from the left, the enemy began to fire with Robinho upon the goal. They sent repeated waves of hostile attacks, sometimes more than a five strong in one formation, to cast their shots upon the lone keeper that remained.

Our thankfulness at the dropping of Gallas and giving the captaincy to Cesc must not blind us to the fact that what has happened in Manchester and the Emirates against Villa is a colossal disaster. Our league position has been weakened, the title challenge has been lost, a large part of those player hopes upon which so much faith had been reposed is gone, many points have passed into the enemy's possession, with all the tragic consequences that follow from that, and we must expect another blow to be struck almost immediately at us, from Villa.

We are told that Mr O'Neill has a plan for invading the top four. This has often been thought of before. When Martin Jol lay in fifth in '05 with his Grand Army, he was told by someone. "It's not easy to break the top four." It will certainly be alot harder when Eduardo and Fabregas return.

I have, myself, full confidence that if all do their duty, if nothing is neglected, and if the best arrangements are made, as they are being made, we shall prove ourselves once again able to defend our top flight home; to ride out the storm of war, and to outlive the menace of mediocrity, if necessary for years, if necessary alone. At any rate, that is what we are going to try to do. That is the resolve of Mr Wenger's team - every man of them. That is the will of the board and the squad. The first team and the reserves, linked together in their cause and in their need, will defend to the death their native place, aiding each other like good comrades to the utmost of their strength.

We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in the Emirates, we shall fight in Stamford Bridge and the Riverside, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength at Villa Park, we shall defend our status, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight in Tottenham, we shall fight in Anfield, we shall fight at Wigan and in Portsmouth, we shall fight at Old Trafford; we shall never surrender!"

There you go, feeling any better?

The Wenger Bus is Coming

David Gore — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:18:54 -0500

So, Arsene Wenger saw this one, did he?

The legendary Mr Magoo has felt the need to stoke the mob fires of national fervour by calling for clubs to be investigated for withdrawing players from international duty. A very interesting development, I find, but not because of this ridiculous argument about player availability.

I'm not going to repeat all that same counter-rubbish that isn't even worth saying, because anyone who thinks injured players should be reporting to play for England is either a sadist or a crazy person.

Wenger is correct in saying that the friendly was arranged for a stupid time of year, right in the middle of the Premier League calendar and just before Matchdays Five and Six of the Champions League.

But for me, the most interesting aspect of this story is the clear and obvious way that Wenger has attempted to try and stir up the storm against his Premiership rivals, knowing full well that the English media will jump on his comments as excuse to further kick out at Manchester United, Chelsea, and Liverpool.

Wenger knows that this debate is raging primarily in England, and, as everyone knows, Theo Walcott is his only English international, and, prior to being called up, Walcott had no major injury concerns and so withdrawal wasn't an option.

Walcott was injured in training for England, and Wenger knows he has no recourse to argue the injury. The irony of course is that Wenger has always spoken out against players representing their countries in the African Nations Cup.

But, like Ferguson, Arsene Wenger has never been famous for shirking an opportunity for mind-games. As everyone knows, the FA doctors assessed all the withdrawn players and found their injuries to be genuine, so in reality, there isn't even any argument. Wenger, however, has decided that isn't the case, and it leaves you wondering exactly what his motives are.

Did he say what he said because he cares deeply about the international game? Or did he say it because he wants flack against his rivals? Given that the injuries were all certified genuine, I can only assume it was the latter.

And of course the Wenger bus will keep on rolling this weekend when, undoubtedly, some of the withdrawn players start matches for their clubs, at which point everyone will be staggering over each other to cry havoc.

But of course, as Arsene Wenger well knows, often players have niggling injuries that keep them out of just one match at a time. Steven Gerrard, for example, had an injury that would've kept him out of any game on Wednesday, even if that game had been one of Liverpool's mid-week Champions League matches.

He may well have then been fit enough for Saturday, BECAUSE he was rested mid-week to allow recovery.

I'm not saying Gerrard will play tomorrow against Fulham, in fact he probably will not as Rafael Benitez did say he'd be out for seven to ten days. But if he does play, thanks to Wenger, the press will now be calling for his and his manager's head.

Leaving Wenger smug, and the England team, once again, under fire from its own fans for absolutely no justified reason.

Liverpool: The Season So Far

David Gore — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 02:52:06 -0400

Can Liverpool win the title this season? That's the question that everyone's asking. I don't know the answers, no one does, but I do understand something about the season so far. I've read quite a few articles regarding Liverpool's title chances this year, and most of it (especially from bitter fans of other teams) has been sheer rubbish.

For a start, the notion that Liverpool are top of the league due to "luck". This seems a particularly lazy and patronising comment from people who really don't seem to understand football. To back up claims of lucky wins, people have referred to last minute goals, deflected shots, and red cards.

So let's look at it objectively.

Of the 14 goals that Liverpool have scored at the time of writing, five of those have come after 80 minutes of play, and they were in wins against Sunderland (Torres 83), Middlesborough (Pogatetz og 86, Gerrard 94), Man City (Kuyt 92) and Wigan (Riera 80, Kuyt 85). But the fact that no one has mentioned is that against Sunderland, Middlesbrough, and Wigan, Liverpool were on top for the majority of the game, and deserved to win. The second half performance against Man City was likewise dominant.

Does a late goal count as luck anyway? Surely any match event that occurs prior to the end of the allotted injury time is a legitimate event and equal in value to an event that took place in the 77th minute.

The game lasts 90 minutes for a reason after all, and I very much doubt that Manchester United fans consider their two goals in the 1999 European Cup final, with the winner coming after the end of normal time in a game that Bayern Munich could have won by a few goals in the first half, in any way lucky.

Of the deflected goals that Liverpool have scored this season, only the equaliser against Middlesbrough (given as a Pogatetz own goal) and the winner against Chelsea were deflected. All teams get deflected goals, but you don't get them unless you're forcing the attack and in the positions to shoot, which is why they never come for struggling teams.

Ask for the red card issue, no one asked anyone to foul Xabi Alonso in the games against Man City and Wigan. Against Manchester City, Liverpool had already got a goal back at that point, and when the winner came they were also on ten men after losing Martin Skrtel to injury after all substitutions were made.

In their first games of the season (difficult away fixture against Sunderland and at home to Middlesbrough), Liverpool struggled with two major players (Mascherano and Babel) missing at the Olympics, as well as Lucas Leiva. With more players than any other Premiership team receiving players back late from the Spanish Euro 2008 winning squad, Liverpool had fitness issues with quite a few first-team players, including Reina, Arbeloa, Alonso, and Torres.

Speaking of whom, I've heard it said that Liverpool will struggle without Torres and Gerrard. This is undoubtedly true were they to be missing for a few months, although Rafael Benitez planned their absences well enough against Manchester United and Chelsea.

But against Liverpool, Chelsea were missing Didier Drogba, and against a well-organised defence, their attack stuttered. If Manchester United were to lose Ronaldo and Rooney for most of the season, no doubt they'd struggle too, but they'd work hard and grind out results. The loss of a main squad member can be disastrous to any team, not just Liverpool, but they have to manage and that's what the Reds have done so far.

For me, Liverpool have done everything asked of them this season and they've done it with players missing and fitness struggles, always with doubters on every side picking at everything their team and their manager does.

They've come through adversity to snatch victories, and they've out-worked the two current favourites for the title. They thoroughly deserve to be top of the league, and only time will tell if they can continue that form to break the only record their fans care about:

18 years without a league success.

Liverpool FC: Could It Be?

David Gore — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 02:13:20 -0400

Often the only things I'm ever right about are the most pessimistic of my predictions. Whenever I show absolutely no faith in something, I'm usually depressingly correct, but as soon as I show any signs of optimism, I'm shot down like a Mexican bandit in a Clint Eastwood movie.

But at the end of the 2007-08 season, I predicted big things for Liverpool FC. I was telling everyone who'd listen that this year things would be different.

This wasn't the usual "next year, we'll be millionaires!" blind hope that football fans tend to employ as a default; I've suffered enough with that in the past, growing up in the Premiership years watching my team lose pace on whoever was the big two at the time.

By the start of last season, I'd adapted my usual pessimistic prophecy to football, and always anticipated that, come May, we'd be at best second. Of course I hoped for the top spot—but I didn't expect us to get there.

So when I felt a surge of optimism at the end of last season, I knew instantly that it wasn't just a fan's hope. It was based on fact, scientifically determined and all about cold-hearted reason.

I saw a Liverpool team, for the first time in my memory, containing a hard-working, extremely talented man in every position. No Calamity James or Sander Westerveld, no Traore or Stingray, no Smicer or Cheyrou, and no Baros or Riedle. I looked over every position last season, and found that we had top quality throughout the squad without exception.

The purchases of Dossena, Degen, and Cavalieri answered some of my only concerns with the team, but it was the signing of Robbie Keane that gave me the biggest lift. It wasn't his goalscoring record that I was happy for—although it didn't make unhappy—it was the effect that his inclusion would have on Steven Gerrard and Fernando Torres that I was particularly looking forward to.

Keane has been signed to fill the role occupied by Gerrard last season, which has allowed the captain to go back to his favoured position. Contrary to popular media belief, Rafael Benitez always wanted to play Gerrard in the middle, but the lack of a top quality right-sided player, coupled with great midfield strength, led to him adapting the versatile captain to fill a troublesome gap.

There's no doubt in Rafa's mind where he prefers Gerrard to play, and where he has the most influence on games.

Keane's inclusion meant that, while some Liverpool teams in the past have relied on forming that cliche of "the central spine", we now have a team strong throughout any starting eleven.

By the start of this season, I was convinced that we had a team capable, both skillfully and mentally, to launch a long-awaited title challenge and surprise a few doubters.

We've done that with aplomb, and this latest result speaks volumes for the ability and work ethic of our whole squad.

Doubters said that without Torres Liverpool will struggle, but we've missed him for both the games against the two title favourites, and beaten them both as other players chipped in with goals. We've broken Chelsea's ridiculous home record, which is a feat in itself and will be so well received by all English teams that they should've made a trophy for it on its own.

I'm not saying we've won the league already, or that it's a certainty. There's a long way to go and all we have is a good start, nothing more. But that title challenge I predicted is well and truly on, and, for the first time in a decade, the title is ours to lose as we sit three points clear at the top of the league.

I don't care which relegation contender Harry Redknapp's gone to (a fact that the London-based media seem to deem more important than the biggest result of the season), but I do care about who finishes top, and this year, just maybe, my optimism could be rewarded for the first time.

Gartside and the Great FA Own Goal

David Gore — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 23:48:32 -0400

What usually happens when the Football Association is questioned, is they hide under a duvet and wait until the next big issue arises, when they can make a fool of themselves again.

So I'd like to thank a Mr Phil Gartside for once again bringing to the fore the overall incompetence of the FA board-members, by spouting utterly deranged rubbish in the press.

Gartside, the chairman of Bolton Wanderers and a director at Wembley as well as being an FA board-member, has astutely identified a problem in the English game (one that we already knew existed and his organisation has done nothing to curb), involving the rise in foreign ownership and billionaire investment, that is turning the game in to something of a farce.

All well and good so far. But then he goes and spoils it all by saying something silly like "split the league in two".

"SuperPhil" reckons that the Premier League would be a lot more competitive if we were to...cut it in half. He proposes a two-tier league with a total of 36 teams. This, SuperPhil claims, will make it easier for the England squad as well as aiding the integration of a winter break.

He hasn't yet spotted that all his proposal actually says is that we lower the number of top flight teams to 18. But it gets better.

He then suggests that the FA stop relegating teams from this "Premier League 2" to the Championship, meaning the 36 teams would never be replaced. Gartside says this is because:

"We have already got to the situation where the three clubs that go down from the Premier League are usually the three that come up, although a couple of others might sneak in."

Clearly, those "couple of others" are Wigan, Hull City, Stoke City, Sunderland and Reading, none of whom had been in the top flight for decades. When Birmingham City were promoted they hadn't been in the top tier for 16 years. Derby County had been out of the Premier League for five years before their promotion.

Of the three teams relegated the season before last (Sheffield United, Charlton Athletic, Watford), not one was promoted last year.

So really, all in all, is Phil Gartside a bumbling fool who's threatening to annhilate the spirit of English league football? Or is he a criminal genius working to bring the FA down from within, by sucking out any last lingering shred of public faith in their grand ideals?

I'm hoping he's the latter, because surely no one can be THAT sincerely stupid.

The New Revival of Liverpool FC

David Gore — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 04:37:08 -0400

No one can doubt the argument that a few wins doesn't mean success. Few would seriously argue that the current Liverpool squad is the greatest in the club's history. There aren't many clued-up people who'd claim Liverpool will definitely outclass Chelsea and Man United based on a good start to the season.

But no one can argue that something feels different this year for Liverpool fans.

At first, it's difficult to put your finger on exactly what it is. After all, with the exception of Albert Riera, this year's other signings, Robbie Keane, Andrea Dossena, Philipp Degen, Diego Cavalieri, and David N'Gog haven't received consistently rave reviews, both from fans and pundits, either because of injury or taking time to settle.

So if it isn't the performance of the new signings on the pitch that's given the squad an apparent new edge, what is it?

Well I personally, unlike many people I've spoken to, think that Keane has already been an excellent signing for Liverpool. His one goal was a crucial one, stamping authority in a difficult Champions League match against PSV—but it's not his goal that I've been impressed with.

Both his teamwork and movement off the ball seem to have given Liverpool a new lease of life in attack. Of course, Steven Gerrard filled that role and did it stunningly well with Torres last season, but I felt that left him isolated, having to track back when we were struggling and less able to use his usual midfield dominance, and, as I'm sure Rafa is well aware, it's in midfield that Liverpool's strength lies.

In 2005, we won the European Cup with dominating midfield performances, which left Olympiakos, Levekusen, and Juventus flummoxed, and it was the surging out from midfield of Gerrard, Smicer, and Alonso that won us the final in the second half against Milan.

Keane's introduction has meant Gerrard can move back to his favourite position, and for me, Gerrard is the counter-balance in the Liverpool team. Wherever he goes, our attack goes. Whereas last season, 2-0 down against Man City might had led to significant pressure and Gerrard being isolated with Torres up front, this time round he was in the middle. Even when he's not on top form, he can still tip matches with his drive and captaincy.

I've always heard people argue that when things go wrong in football, blame travels upwards. To balance that out, surely when things are going right, credit should go the same way. Rafael Benitez is the man charged with noticing the issues with Liverpool, highlighting gaps in the squads, and implementing new tactical transfers. He's also the man in charge of a team's mentality.

As an example, Tottenham are massively under-performing. Certainly they're missing a top-quality focal point up front, but even so, their mentality is terrible at the moment with confidence shot. Of course, that will lead to a change of management unless something drastic happens. But Liverpool are encountering the opposite effect. Their mentality is incredible at the moment.

Never beaten, always battling, there seems to be a new-found refusal to lose and will to fight back, and I can trace that upwards to Rafa and Sammy Lee.

There's no doubt in my mind that we're showing signs of a brand new revival on top of the revival which began with Benitez joining the club, and dragging Liverpool back from the abyss of the UEFA Cup places.

At the end of Houllier's reign, we were a side heading backwards with a team including Biscan, Traore, and Cheyrou. We're now serious title contenders with a challenge to maintain against Chelsea this Sunday, rather than hope for, with a team including Fernando Torres, Javier Mascherano, Pepe Reina, Dan Agger, Robbie Keane and a player now considered to be the best midfielder in the world, Steven Gerrard. And Rafa has had to do this funding transfers with player sales, and all with a fraction of the budgets of Chelsea and Man United.

There is simply no comparison between the team that Benitez inherited and the one he's created; in talent, work ethic, and mentality, the improvement is profound to say the least.

So in other words, the reason for this season's change? It's a simple one.

Rafael Benitez of course. He's had to build a team from scratch. Only three players—Hyypia, Gerrard and Carragher—remain from the Houllier days, and he's finally reached a team that's capable, talent-wise and mentality-wise, to launch a significant raid on the title, and put Liverpool back among the top two in the Premier League.

The History Behind the Real "Football"

David Gore — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 07:14:23 -0400

While I was watching a game today, I heard a debate between an American and an Englishman as to which country's national sport, "football", is the true football.

It got quite heated at one stage, and it was clear both men were fighting for their national pride, as if the ownership of this one word actually meant something.

Of course, I stood nearby smiling to myself. I just couldn't bring myself to step in and tell them that in fact, they were both wrong.

I knew that neither American football or English Association football (called soccer in the US), are truer, because neither are, in fact, football.

At least in the original meaning. The word "football" can be traced back to medieval England, but it didn't become a recognised sport until the rise of public schools rules which began to be established in the 1600s onwards.

By the 19th Century, two schools of thought had developed regarding the way the game should be taught to youngsters in public schools. Some schools, such as Eton, believed that the "football" should be kept away from the hands, while others, like the school at Rugby, thought that it should be mainly carried.

At the time, it was perfectly fine for someone to pick up a ball and run with it, even among the schools that thought it was best to kick instead. The "handball" rule in modern soccer didn't develop until 1857—with the introduction of the Sheffield Rules, developed by the earliest professional soccer club, Sheffield FC, to set the game aside from the public school game.

The Sheffield Rules set the standard for an early form of soccer-type football, while the public schools continued to teach the rules that would eventually become modern rugby football.

While this was all going on in England, American schools were also developing their own rules of the same game played across the Atlantic, which the British and European migrants had brought with them. By the 19th Century in North America, schools were playing variants of the early rugby game, alongside the early kicking game of English schools.

Modern American football was established in 1874, during a game between Harvard and the McGill University of Montreal. The story goes that McGill played a rugby form of football, while Harvard played the Boston Game, similar to Sheffield Rules but without the rule against handling the ball.

They adapted the rules so that both teams could play a fair system during the game, and created the earliest form of American football rules, which Harvard then passed on to other American colleges, leading to the rise of college football.

So in reality, there's no such thing as a definitive "football". American football is no less football than soccer. They all have the same roots and grew out of the same process like sports evolution.

If only those two idiots had known that.

Kuyt of Patience With the Doubters

David Gore — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 06:31:42 -0400

I've heard much talk of Dirk Kuyt. Managers love him, but often fans are less impressed, and to be honest before he joined Liverpool I was unsure as to what kind of player he actually was.

It was said that he was a goalscorer, but from what I could see, he wasn't a natural finisher. People told me he was a striker, but he seemed to track back and play in midfield.

"What is this guy?" I asked myself, "what's all the fuss about?"

Then I saw him in a Liverpool shirt. The first thing he ever did on his debut was take a shot with his first touch, miles out from goal. I don't think anything sums him up better than that.

Dirk Kuyt is a grafter. He isn't a striker, a finisher, or even a midfielder. He's one of those rare type of players that were once commonplace in every top side—the honest, hard-working utility player.

There's no doubt in my mind that if injuries left Liverpool without a left-back, Kuyt would volunteer, and work damn hard. If our goalkeeper was sent off after all our subs were used, Kuyt would be the first to put his name in to take the gloves. That's what kind of player he is.

So imagine my surprise when, as I'm sat there thanking the stars to have Dirk in Liverpool's squad, I hear everlasting rumbles from supposed Reds calling for him to be axed and replaced by the quick but lightweight Jermaine Pennant.

Kuyt has the best work-rate I've ever seen in a footballer. So many times he's reminded me of a dog let loose on a park during a football match. No matter how annoying it is for the opposition players, he just wont stop chasing the ball and let them play.

He isn't the most technically gifted player, and he isn't the quickest. But none of that matters when he scores the winner late on after everyone else has got tired or given up, as he did against Everton, Liege, Manchester City, and today, against Wigan.

None of it matters when he shows the resilience and determination to put the fittest players to shame, and provide the work that gives Liverpool so many crucial late points, as he did against Manchester United.

Kuyt has gained a reputation for being a "big game player", but if you actually look at the games he plays in, you'll see that his consistent effort is one of the most important factors in almost every game he's played for Liverpool.

And that determination and honesty extends to his personal life. Never courting celebrity, he works hard for his own charity fund, shuns the limelight, and doesn't move far from his roots. He's proud of the village he was born in, helps out his boyhood team, and yet he loves Liverpool.

For me, Kuyt is a flashback to a bygone era. He isn't a Cristiano Ronaldo or a Robinho: he's not in it for the fame or the cash. He does the things the stereotypical modern footballer would never do, like track back and battle hard until the end, often when no one else has the stomach to run.

For all of those reasons, I think Dirk Kuyt demands respect, and his starting place in Rafa Benitez's team.

The Friendliest Derby?

David Gore — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 05:38:20 -0400

After this year's game between Liverpool and Everton, there was a lot of talk of how the so-called "Friendly Derby" wasn't so friendly anymore.

The suggestion in the press is that last season at Anfield, when Phil Neville was reportedly punched in the back and spat at when trying to take a throw-in and Steven Gerrard and Joleon Lescott were singled out for verbal attack, marked the beginning of the end for the family rivalry, and the traditional good nature that the fixture has been played in for so long.

But to me, that smacks of naivety on the part of people who don't really know very much about Liverpool. I mean to be honest, if you look at it from a neutral perspective, the Merseyside derby is a rivalry that...well...doesn't seem to make much sense.

All the ingredients are there for a storm of an atmosphere. You have a liberal amount of success for both teams, two of the closest grounds in world football, a shared major city that hasn't been short of deprived areas over the years, an intensely loyal couple of working class fan bases, and even a certain element of religious conflict.

Even the clubs themselves were formed after a rent dispute saw Everton turfed out of what was their ground and having to find a new home, a year before Liverpool FC were created to be their replacement at Anfield.

And yet, for some reason that no one outside of Liverpool could explain, it wasn't an Old Firm or a North-East derby. For some reason, at the 1983 Milk Cup final, Reds and Blues sang together "Merseyside, Merseyside, Merseyside" for half the game.

So, the moment something went bad, it looked to a lot of people like the goodness had gone, but in reality, the fixture is STILL one of the calmest rivalries in the world, it's just not quite as cordial as it used to be.

There's a few possible reasons as to why the nice edge has been chipped away a little bit. Everton's failure to be regarded as a top four side since the 1980s, coupled with Liverpool's recent resurgence and growing European reputation perhaps.

Maybe it's the media's misquoting of certain players and managers just to stoke up interest in the fixture, such as when Rafa Benitez was reported as labelling Everton a "small club", when in fact he was talking about how "smaller clubs," i.e. clubs that aren't as massive and consistent as Liverpool's title rivals, often make games hard by defending well.

This mis-quote was later used in an interview by an Everton official as ammunition against Benitez when he criticised the abuse that was aimed at Steven Gerrard.

Maybe it's new fans who don't understand the city's traditions, and treat the fixture the way they think derby rivalries should be treated, based on the animosity they see elsewhere in other fixtures. But whatever the reason, it needs to be stopped before it takes hold.

Although the fixture is still the friendliest derby in the world, it doesn't seem quite as friendly as it once was.

Both sets of fans all need to remember what happened on the day of Liverpool's Champions League clash against Toulouse in 2007, when Anfield echoed to the combination of applause and Z-Cars as the 11-year-old Evertonian, Rhys Jones, was honoured by Liverpool fans following his senseless murder.

As with the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, when Goodison Park, and not just Anfield, was adorned with both red and blue scarves in remembrance, it seems the true colours of both sets of supporters emerge in the wake of a crime against the city.

That's what the clubs and the derbies are all about, not the odd pathetic action of a few idiots on both sides.

Liverpool FC: The Song

David Gore — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:26:54 -0400

Today I buried my grandpa. Not for fun; we weren't at a beach or anything, he'd passed away.

At the end of the service, You'll Never Walk Alone was played. I cried. And then I realised something.

I finally felt like I could put my finger on what sets Liverpool fans apart from supporters of other clubs. It isn't our past success or even Anfield, although both are obviously important.

I think it's our greatest song that defines our club more than anything else, because, unlike the songs of other clubs, You'll Never Walk Alone defines each and every individual fan, not just the team.

Because it's such a well-known and moving song, it's been used for so many people's celebrations or, as in my grandpa's case, funerals. That means that it takes on a deeply personal meaning for a lot of people, Liverpool fans or not.

Songs like Z-Cars, for the likes of Everton fans, are iconic, but few Evertonians would associate Z-Cars with anything other than watching their team play.

You'll Never Walk Alone stands for so many people as a personal anthem that represents something that's happened to them individually, away from football. So when it's played or sung at Anfield or anywhere else, it means so much to all Reds fans that it transcends football and becomes an identity.

But there's another couple of reasons for why You'll Never Walk Alone is so special. One of them has to do with the toils that the city of Liverpool went through in the 1980s, when its optimism and vibrancy was replaced by strikes and a ghost-town during the Thatcher years.

It's easy to identify the "storm" of the song to the devastation that the Tory government forced on the city that the club stood for.

But there's something else, above even that, and that's to do with what happened in Sheffield in 1989.

The lyrics of You'll Never Walk Alone, written in 1945, fitted so perfectly to the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster that it almost felt like fate. In the aftermath of Hillsborough, among the mourners who flocked to Anfield to pay respects, the song became a kind of eulogy, sung on behalf of the 96 innocent victims to the people left behind.

In that moment, it stopped being a football song and became something like a hymn of Liverpool FC, which itself became a kind of living monument to the people who could no longer watch their beloved team.

I think that it's that identity, linked so strongly to the lyrics of You'll Never Walk Alone, that makes Liverpool FC the most unique sporting club in the world.

Liverpool: The City and Its Club

David Gore — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 07:35:26 -0400

After seeing a post about keeping “Wooly-backs” away from supporting the Reds, I got a bit bothered. I’ve seen a few things from supposed Liverpudlians now that’s left me feeling weird, and made me wonder if some younger fans might be forgetting what Liverpool is—not so much the club, but the city that the club represents.

I think it’s important for people from Liverpool, and fans from other places too, to understand the history of the city and the identity it made.

Liverpool’s main football club is a symbol of what made the city, simply because of the fans that represent it. As you all know, one of the major ideals of Liverpool fans is that they should be different from fans of other clubs.

We have our own songs that no one else sings, including an anthem no one else can match, and we don’t just adapt the same clichéd, boring old terrace chants like other fans do (“cam on Chewsea, etc”).

I think that’s because of the kind of city the fans came from. Liverpool is regarded as being different to everywhere else in Britain, and the old saying goes that it’s always looked out to the sea rather than in to the land. Even now that’s still true, but I’m afraid that some young people might be forgetting what it means.

Liverpool was the main port during the days of the Empire. People from all over the world ended up there for one reason or another, and, like the British version of New York, Liverpool grew up on a foundation of being a “world city”, unlike the closed off factory towns like Manchester and Birmingham.

The city had the first Chinese and black communities, and the largest Irish community in Britain.

I grew up on the Wirral and, like everyone else on the peninsula, don’t have to go back very far to find Scouse family (my dad—so not far at all).

As a kid, I used to sit on the front and look out across the Mersey at the Liverpool skyline. Sandwiched between Wales and Liverpool, the Wirral became as non-English as anywhere could be, absorbing the disgust towards London from Welsh miners and Scouse dockers alike.

When I was still a boy, I didn’t notice anything insular about Scousers at all. After all, most of my friends were Scousers, and most people on the Wirral worked in Liverpool and suffered the same during the 80s and 90s.

Liverpool’s downfall in the Thatcher years led directly to poverty in the Wirral that turned a lot of it into ghost towns, and people from the Wirral were stood beside Scousers in the strikes.

But as I grew up, I noticed that there is a labelling of non-Scousers that I didn’t appreciate. It’s not nastiness, not at all, but Liverpool seemed to close ranks during the Tory years (for obvious reasons), and suddenly the Liverpudlian province of the Wirral found itself on the outside of the divide.

Liverpool isn’t Manchester, and it didn’t grow up isolated and insular. Liverpool was Liverpool because it was the only place outside London that WAS everyone, and everything. Unlike being a Manc, or a Geordie, anyone could be a Scouser as long as they stood by the city in solidarity, like the authority-suspicious slaves, merchants, and refugees from across the globe did over a hundred years ago.

I think that Liverpool’s identity is amazing, better than anywhere else in the country. This is reflected in the identity of its football fans, and the fact that, by and large, we’re not as suspicious of fans hailing from across the island, or even the world, as fans of other clubs. Now that Merseyside has repaired itself, often alone, I think its now opening the gates, and Liverpool’s becoming the New York of England again.

I just hope that leads to what happened in the Victorian era, when Liverpool kept expanding and growing as it adapted to new ideas and new peoples. I believe that the history of Liverpool stands as a symbol that anyone who believes in the place, and the football club that is its heart, is a Scouser—in the same way that people from across Europe who stood by the Roman Empire were called Romans.