I meant the built atmosphere. It was quiet most of the times, but had its own identity imo. Better playing inside a beautiful library, rather than in a soulless, ugly, random construction which generates zero atmosphere anyway.
1 Like
Off topic, but I laughed at the coverage of the cup final on saturday presenting wembley as this majestic cathedral of sports, and then as the image panned out there was nothing but industrial wasteland surrounding it. It looked like one of the Chinese Olympic venues
3 Likes
I can imagine. I didn’t get a chance to see Wembley which was a shame
I got to see Griffin Park before Brentford’s promotion, what a neat little place stuck right in a residential neighborhood. So glad I got to take my kid to it before they moved.
6 Likes
Not meant mockingly, but why? That seems like an odd venue to go to for an non-local
But yeah, that sort of thing makes a big difference and is part of the reason why these older stadiums have such soul. Even in the US you see it and it is part of the reason why the Cubs and Red Sox have such connection with their stadium in a way lots of these newer stadiums that were just plopped down wherever there was room to build one cannot replicate. I think the new(ish) football stadium in Nashville is the best example of a new build replicating the inner city feel of these older stadiums that make them part of the comunity.
I think I’m right in saying that it was the only football ground in the country to have a pub on every corner? Something like that. Not saying that was Semmy’s motivation but it would be a good one.
4 Likes
I went (though being in London) it made more sense and they were playing Bournemouth I think.
It was charming but yeah not really suitable for a step up, not been to the new one but maybe one day.
Swansea seemed to carry enough atmosphere from the Vetch to the Liberty.
As for Wembley it’s always been like that it’s town isn’t that far away but most of the industrial wasteland you suggest is TFL lines and venues for various things. I think most of that area feels like railway line.
3 Likes
TBH, I was piggypacking on wife’s work trip with my son, had an afternoon mid-week to ourselves while she was in meetings. So I took my son (4 at the time) to the Museum of Nat History in the morning and then to the afternoon game at Brentford as it was a short tube ride away. There was a London derby match that day that I wanted to avoid any aggressive lads on the tube (I think it was Palace Vs Arsenal or Spurs) so we went the other way as Nolan was still fairly timid around the tube. Brentford was amazing. I showed up at the grounds without tickets and explained why I was there (couldn’t buy tix online, no UK address) and their promotions manager came out and gave us 4th row seating in the family section. took Nolan and I into the dressing room to meet some of the Bees, gave him some promo materials and a free hot dog/soda at the half. It was Leeds visiting so a fairly good match. Great experience. was at Anfield 3 days later.
11 Likes
I remember you recounting it on TIA 
1 Like
Nothing is impossible.
1 Like
Can’t be worse than the WI FI currently, I understand it on match day a bit but it was crap even on the tour and there were only about 10 of us on it.
1 Like
I have a query. looking round recently and one thing I see banded round from City fans in particular is the claim that we were bank rolled by the Moores family. This apparently justifies their financial doping 
Just wondering how much, if any of it is true. I know John Moores was an Everton supporter and big shareholder. I just dont know how much we benefited from Littlewoods etc.
I suspect we’ve covered it before so apologies for missing that.
During our heyday in the 70s-80s we were definitely one of the richer teams, bankrolled by Littlewoods. But it’s all relative. These were local family businesses who could finance perhaps £10m of investment every so often.
It’s totally incomparable.
6 Likes
Ta very much, next step will be understanding the relative scale of that and how it compares in todays money. I was just enjoying the ride at that time.
I do remember that we were scrambling round seeking external investment for the stadium that never happened etc.
1 Like
The period they have all been harking on is from a slightly earlier period. We had been relegated in 54 and in the first few seasons showed no signs of being able to come back up. We appointed Shanks in 59 who bank rolled by a new a director overhauled the entire squad leading to us to getting promoted in 62 and then Shanks winning his first title in just the second year back in the first division. Their claim is that is essentially what City did, and so we’re hypocrites for going on about their spending.
The difference is that our spending at that time while a lot of the second division was commensurate with the size of the club. We were at the time still the third or fourth most successful side in history with titles and cup finals to our name within the past decade. The relegation was the aberration and the spending was a return to normal.
The story comes from what is essentially a hit piece in the MEN that was published right before the last league game that tells the story with facts, but messages them ridiculously. It refers to Liverpool then as having had an “underwhelming history” and suggesting the spending was akin to a side like Huddersfield all of a sudden spending British transfer record fees to invent a position for themselves at the top table.
The irony of this relative to your question is it was actually the exit of John Moores that opened the door for this. He was one of the largest shareholders, but that ownership was well distributed among the board. He left to take ownership of Everton and one of his Littlewoods people took his shares and his place on the Liverpool board. It was he, a guy called Eric Sawyer, he convinced the board to bankroll Shanks rejuvenation of the squad.
9 Likes
It also ignores the point that it’s not the externally funded spending as such. The point is that Manchester City has fabricated and obfuscated the source of their funding / the extent of their spending in order to circumvent regulations that exist NOW, not in the 1950s and '60s.
5 Likes
Pep is full of shit,yes we spent money during the 70’s and 80’s but nowhere near to what they are now in comparison to other clubs back then.
Take 1979 for example,City broke the transfer record paying £1.4mill for Daley while we spent £450k on Sheedy and Kennedy.
It’s just bollox to justify what they are doing in the transfer market,which is now supposed to be restricted to FFP,which wasn’t in place back then.
10 Likes
I’m not sure if it was on here or Twitter. But when Pep said recently something recently along the lines of “stop going on about our spending. Liverpool spent record fees in the 70s” a graph was displayed showing that we were (I think) 4th largest spenders for the decade.
The media of course let him get away with his remarks unchallenged. The bald hypocritical cokeheaded git. 
11 Likes
He’s not good enough to qualify for git status.
We’re a select bunch.
4 Likes
You can’t escape completely though.
I’ll give you that and perhaps old but he sure is a cynical fucker when it comes to coaching his sides to ‘professionally’ foul.
3 Likes