RAWK goes into Meltdown 2010/2011
- Thread starter samabachan
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
- Status
I know that! How many European away games did they have?
Not sure about that. Liverpool fans and a lot of pundits rate their 88 team as one of the best ever in terms of quality of football. With Barnes, Beardsley and Aldridge at their absolute best.
They played some good football under Dalglish as a manager. Back when they were actually a good team. They also had some exciting players in the 90s under Evans.
Think the shift in approach towards a pragmatic game has come since Houllier took charge which was further promoted by Benitez. Its been 11 years of dire garbage.
Yep, Their 87/88 team was incredibly attacking. They virtually played with 5 strikers. It pains me to say it but my opinion the best footballing team I've seen play in this country at that includes these recent wenger arsenal teams.
The earlier Liverpool teams I don't think much of at all.
I was unaware of that. When I said never, I meant in my football watching life-time, which is obviously not quite as long as yours. Since I've been old enough to understand what was going on, they've been dull, and yeh, that's probably just over a decade.
It was pretty amazing football when you consider that in 88 there was no under soiled heating, flown in pitches, DNA altered grass etc and that football was played on mud baths and goats paddocks for half the season.
It might shock you to know then arsenal werent exactly known for flashy football pre wenger.
Well there were at least 3 at Newcastle...
That's the most exciting and attack minded Liverpool side I have seen as well. They were very good to watch.
Not sure why you thought they played with 5 strikers. They were a well balanced side who relied on Beardsley and Barnes for the flair with Aldridge as the main poacher. Houghton on the right and Whelan/Mcmahon in the centre of the park. Rush came back from Juve the season after but I don't remember Dalglish playing Beardsley, Aldridge, Rush and Barnes at once that often.
I'm well aware of that
1-0 to the Arsenal is sort of sung ironically after 20 minutes these days.They were dull as dishwater under Shankly although admired for their "industry". Paisley added finesse without abandoning the pragmatism but I must say I admired the side of Kennedy, McDermott and Souness in mf. 78-ish?
I'm well aware of that
how old are you?
From what I remember they played a bastardised version of the archaic MW system. Barnes was their outside left ant it wad the season the had Ronnie Rosenthal on loan. I can't remember who their outside right was but he was equally spectacular. He and barnes stayed quite advanced and provided the ammo for Rosenthal, Beardsley an Aldridge.
They had Rosenthal the season after when Arsenal won the league and also had Rush and Aldridge together for one season before Alridge left. That's what I think you are remembering as I recall a few games when they played all of them together. Not often mind you.
The 87/88 side was mainly Alridge/Beardsley upfront with Barnes having more or less a free role and then Houghton on the right(he ousted Craig Johnson) with Whelan and McMahon the midfield pairing. They were better than everyone else because Barnes and Beardsley were the two best flair players in the country at the time by a mile. Only really Waddle was close and he was not in their class IMO.
Edit: According to wiki Rosenthal was loaned to the dippers in 1990 and scored 7 goals in 8 games paired with Rush ahead of Beardsley the season they won back the title. I thought he played alongside Alridge and Rush as well for abit but it does not seem like he did. Alridge was flogged to Sociedad in 89.
Maybe we can sell them Almunia?
You're right olesbg. Those seasons are all a bit blurry now. What a tremendous team it was though. Thank feck those days are long gone.
They must be delighted with this new attacking style Dalglish has brought.
What a feast of football we were treated to last night. After that rubbish served up by Arsenal/Barca, it was a breath of fresh air.
What a feast of football we were treated to last night. After that rubbish served up by Arsenal/Barca, it was a breath of fresh air.
You obviously didn't see Shankly's title winning sides of the 60's then. We scored 90 plus goals in season 63-64. That's hardly dull. From the late 60's onwards, English football in general took on a more defensive slant. Leeds United were crowned champions in 1969 having scored just 66 goals. 5 years later they repeated their success, & again, scoring a mere 66 goals in the process. This trend continued throughout most of the 70's until Paisley's Liverpool side won the league in 1979 with 85 goals. This seemed to shake English football out of it's defensive, pragmatic, doldrums. & since then, attacking football has pretty much been the order of the day in England.
I remember that game very well. Easter Saturday 1988. United were also down to 10 men when they came back from 3-1 down.
All two of em?
nice comparison. Forget United, Spurs, Chelsea, City and Derby etc all of whom played great attacking football. Although Leeds made sure they didn't let many in they could score all right. If you're looking for a more cautious side than Liverpool I'd say the bummers would be more apt. The stats, as usual, don't tell the tale. I remember Keegan whingeing because Jack Charlton's Boro went to A field and didn't read the script. They came away with a 0-0 draw and Keegan's bleating filled the papers. Three days later (IIRC) you lot came to OT and shut up shop for a 0-0 draw that was beyond boring. I remember Shankly's first and subsequent title sides well - more to the point; do you?All two of em?
I remember them too and you're quite right. Derby were very good in those days I seem to remember
All two of em?
The stats tell more of the full story than your blurred, biased, anecdotal 'opinion'. You don't need to be a footballing genius to see that any team that scores over 90 goals in a season is anything but dull. My first match at Anfield was back in February 1964. I watched a 'dreary' 6-1 victory over Sheffield United.
I used Leeds United as a point of reference, because it was about this time that football took on a harder, cynical, edge. It was also a time when Shanks set about trying to build a new side, as he had shown too much faith in those that had served him so well in not only getting out of the old 2nd division, but in also winning 2 league titles (The same number as Busby's all conquering Manchester United if I'm not mistaken). He bought a few expensive strikers in the years after after winning the league in 66: Tony Hateley, Alun Evans, & Jack Whitham. But none proved up to the job of replacing the likes Roger Hunt & Ian St John. As a consequence, we struggled to score the way we did during the mid 60's.
Shanks went on to building a new title winning side by scouring the lower leagues for fresh, new talent. He brought in players that had the physical & mental strength to cope with the new challenges that football was faced with. The other free-scoring teams you mentioned failed to adapt to the new way. Even United, with a world class attacking trio of Charlton, Law, & Best, slipped quickly into obscurity. Whereas Shankly's Liverpool met the challenge full on. So if you're going to view Derby County in a positive light during this particular era. Then surely you have to do the same with Liverpool. After all, our 1973 title winning side scored more goals than Cloughie's champions of the previous year. Or are you going to put on those blinkers again ?
As for your comments re Keegan/Boro/0-0 draw at OT. You do realise that occurred in the 1976/77 season ?. Nearly 3 years after Shankly resigned
ok Mr Statto, your first game was a 6-1 win. Even mid-table sides manage that now and then. It hardly proves Liverpool as a great entertaining and attacking force although they were obviously a force.....and just a reminder here, they played four extra games (42 as opposed to 38) back then so 9/10 goals above the modern teams is a given for champs.
Goals:
63/64 Utd 90 L 92*
64/65 Utd 89* L67
65/66 Utd 84 L79*
66/67 Utd 84* L 64
67/68 Utd 89 L71
68/69 Utd 57 L63
*champs
Overall, a respectable tally but not exactly outstanding compared to United and probably Everton at the time. Their goals were usually a product of wearing down the opposition as opposed to the brilliance of United, Everton or Spurs, or even City and Chelsea's individual stars.
'64 was Liverpool's "impact" season and they never even nearly reached that total again. In '69 United finished on 42 pts, way behind Liverpool in 2nd on 61pts but a mere 63 goals against United's 57. I still maintain that the stats, even though they support my argument don't even begin to give a full picture. Liverpool weren't as negative as a lot of other teams in that era but they sure didn't dress to thrill.
When you're bandying plurals around it's a bit of a let-down to find you actually meant just 2. I didn't try to give the same impression of multiple titles (although he won 5 all up) for Busby although we actually won a European Cup as well in that period.
I hadn't realised Keegan's rant was as "late" as '77 but whatever, same meat, different gravy.
One thing I will grant you is that Shankly left the team in a healthy state as opposed to Busby's comparative lack of regard for the future. Tbf, "dull as dishwater" wasn't necessarily their regular product but when they needed to be, and it wasn't infrequent, they sure could be. There was always an admiration for Liverpool's efficiency but rarely would anyone say they excited the nation during Shankly's reign.
Oh, and United's "slide into obscurity" was largely without the world class trio of Law, Best and Charlton.
Funny coming on this forum really, with all the heated animosity between the two clubs but I disliked you lot more then, than I do now, although I did think the 78 team were a bit good. Doubt if they'd've stopped us winning the treble in 99 like we stopped you in 77 though.
Goals:
63/64 Utd 90 L 92*
64/65 Utd 89* L67
65/66 Utd 84 L79*
66/67 Utd 84* L 64
67/68 Utd 89 L71
68/69 Utd 57 L63
*champs
Overall, a respectable tally but not exactly outstanding compared to United and probably Everton at the time. Their goals were usually a product of wearing down the opposition as opposed to the brilliance of United, Everton or Spurs, or even City and Chelsea's individual stars.
'64 was Liverpool's "impact" season and they never even nearly reached that total again. In '69 United finished on 42 pts, way behind Liverpool in 2nd on 61pts but a mere 63 goals against United's 57. I still maintain that the stats, even though they support my argument don't even begin to give a full picture. Liverpool weren't as negative as a lot of other teams in that era but they sure didn't dress to thrill.
When you're bandying plurals around it's a bit of a let-down to find you actually meant just 2. I didn't try to give the same impression of multiple titles (although he won 5 all up) for Busby although we actually won a European Cup as well in that period.
I hadn't realised Keegan's rant was as "late"
as '77 but whatever, same meat, different gravy.One thing I will grant you is that Shankly left the team in a healthy state as opposed to Busby's comparative lack of regard for the future. Tbf, "dull as dishwater" wasn't necessarily their regular product but when they needed to be, and it wasn't infrequent, they sure could be. There was always an admiration for Liverpool's efficiency but rarely would anyone say they excited the nation during Shankly's reign.
Oh, and United's "slide into obscurity" was largely without the world class trio of Law, Best and Charlton.
Funny coming on this forum really, with all the heated animosity between the two clubs but I disliked you lot more then, than I do now, although I did think the 78 team were a bit good. Doubt if they'd've stopped us winning the treble in 99 like we stopped you in 77 though.
Tell us your thoughts about the back pass rule, red man
So goals scored mean something now do they? The league as a whole was one hell of a lot more competitive back then also. Money really has changed the game completely.
eh?
just putting the extra "goals for" in perspective but thanks for the lesson, whatever it was.
Apart from Liverpool during that era, there was no dominant team. The fact that multiple other teams actually won the league now and then shows that the strength and depth of the league as a whole was far wider than it is today.
What I'm saying is that you are trying to compare apples with oranges, so your arguments don't wash.
we are talking 60s - Liverpool were not "dominant"
I don't understand your point - and think you have totally missed it.
Tell us your thoughts about the back pass rule, red man
That's such an illogical conclusion to draw, Erica that I am in no way surprised it is you who has drawn it.
That's such an illogical conclusion to draw, Erica that I am in no way surprised it is you who has drawn it.
It's not even a conclusion you spanner
Eh? Us and Liverpool had two titles each in the 60's, with the others spread evenly between six teams. We had a European Cup too for good measure. Dominant?
It's not even a conclusion you spanner
'Spanner'?
Nice one, goofy.
And I bet she is drawing some lame, illogical conclusion between the abolition of the back pass and Liverpool's failure to win any league title since.
That's such an illogical conclusion to draw, Erica that I am in no way surprised it is you who has drawn it.
It's not even a conclusion you spanner
Amazing how you put the two of them together, Sam
I am a bit clever like that, E.
Tell me there was more to your question though, Erica. Were you really asking someone out of interest what they thought of a law abolished 20 years ago? Dullard.
Never mind the backpass, lets list things that have happened since Liverpool last won the league:
DVD
Internet
death of Video/Cassetes
Death Of Diana
9/11
Political correctness and health and safety have ruined the country,
Labour have come to power, turned us into a police state, and been kicked out again
I like this game
DVD
Internet
death of Video/Cassetes
Death Of Diana
9/11
Political correctness and health and safety have ruined the country,
Labour have come to power, turned us into a police state, and been kicked out again
I like this game
- Status