Liverpool fans’ un-Scouse faith in FSG. And ‘poshos v plebs’ over postponements…

Ian Watson
Liverpool owner John W Henry FSG

The Mailbox debates the postponements in the wake of the Queen’s death, while the ownership models of Liverpool and Manchester United are compared…

Get your views in to theeditor@football365.com

 

Them and us
As a staunch UK republican (someone who wants rid of the monarchy, not some christofascist American), I’ve held my tongue a fair bit of late with old Liz popping her clogs. As much as I believe what I believe, I appreciate many wouldn’t want to hear it right now, and I must respect that. The Queen is dead, long live the king and all that.

However, the treatment of football fans, by the governing body and the government rubs me up the wrong way. I see the posho sports haven’t been cancelled, just the game of the people. And it got me wondering, why is that? Why is it ok for cricket to be played, but not football? I don’t purport to have the answers, but I have some theories.

1) They don’t like inconveniencing the poshos in any way. It’s bad enough that they’ve had to return from their holiday homes to show contrition and respect to ol’ Queenie, don’t want to take away their cricket too.

2) They don’t trust the grief addled football fans to comport themselves with dignity befitting such a sombre occasion. As if football fans can’t be trusted with anything emotional. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure you’d have to deal with some drunk idiots and maybe some less than desirable songs, but gallows humour is one of the best ways to deal with grief, especially on a national scale.

3) They see us as proles and plebs, who should be deferential to our betters. We should be inconvenienced, the people. Not them. Those who maybe had flights and travel booked are boned (sure, they get to be here for the national grief instead) – but tough tits. We are the people expected to line the roads, with our sombre hats and plastic Union Jacks, not them. And let’s face it, we’d all rather watch our favourite team over that, so to ensure that it doesn’t look like the royal family have declined in importance, they prevent the one thing that would show their position in this society.

4) They don’t have enough police to ensure we all are defferential at the palace and also at matches.

Whatever the reason, it just shows how those in power view those who confer power upon them, with utter contempt.
John (How much is gonna cost the nation to change everything from Queen to King, and at what point do we want to live in proper modern democracy and not some fairytale kingdom?) Matrix AFC

 

…I was sad when the Queen died and I wanted the matches to go ahead. Not everything is one or the other. Mind you, football is so far down the warren of “gestures” and “making a statement” that it wasn’t really a surprise when the games were postponed.
Matthew, Belfast

 


Four talking points from the Premier League’s mounting fixture congestion problems


 

…If it was the death of King William, who appears to back up his claims of being an actual football fan, with actual appearances at matches (rather than appearances for ceremonial purposes), surely he would want his beloved Villains to take to the field in his honour, rather than being the reason for their fixture postponement?

Horses and courses, I suppose.

Bestest,
Wik, Pretoria (speaking of equine, you just know King Charles will insist on polo proceeding following his passing), Pretoria

 

Prudence in football is sleight of hand
Marcel G, LFC may be a Liverpool fan for 35 years but that doesn’t protect him against unfounded optimism and , with respect, self delusion. His expectation that FSG are investing in the infrastructure so as to generate more income to be invested in the team is, to the letter, the case made by Arsenal supporters here from 2005 onwards as the Emirates was being built from income at the cost of a weakened team and high ticket prices. And while lecturing others on the noble virtue of prudence.

If didn’t; the prudent management and enhanced assets went directly into the increased market capitalisation of the company and was collected by the then shareholders when they sold out to the current owner. FSG are unashamedly venture capitalists/investment firm whose sole purpose is to make money for their owners. It is very untypical of Liverpudlians to have this sort of faith in such an organisation which I feel sure is misplaced: FSG will cash in when the sale-value of the assets and their income-generating potential is at their maximum. The new owners will have paid the same price for the asset as if it was funded by debt and will be seeking a return on the higher capital invested; the reward for prudence will be gone with FSG.

Because the Glazers are so obviously horrible, it may be easier for MU supporters but I’m at one with a correspondent here s few weeks ago when he said he was totally relaxed about MU spending £100m on somebody at an exorbitant salary if it might benefit the team. That’s something for the Glazers to worry about: this is a £3.5bn business from which they’ve already leeched millions, why should the team be a winger short so that the net capital value of MUFC is as high as possible whenever they decide to cash in!
JODO

 

Chelsea metaphor
So – I was annoyed about a few things about Johnny Nic‘s latest article, as is to be expected by a Chelsea fan probably. I just find the argument that Tuchel was somehow silly for liking his job a bit daft. Surely liking or even loving your job, even if you deep down know it won’t last, is a plus all around. The alternative sounds to be a fairly miserable experience.

Additionally, the term ‘prostitute’ is very pejorative, with deep roots in misogyny (here I go being all woke – must be the woman in me) and I think Johnny can well get his point across without using it. Most egregiously, it’s just a super poor metaphor – because in the power differential of a sex worker and buyer – the power is not really in the hands of the sex worker – i.e. Chelsea in this hamfisted metaphor – so the whole thing collapses in on itself.

Just my two cents.
AG, CFC

Chelsea boss Thomas Tuchel looks unhappy
VAR sabotage?
I don’t know if this has already been covered but just in case it hasn’t, I will give my take on it. We all know more technology being used to officiate football matches is a good thing but it also eventually reduces the need for the number of match officials required for each game. These officials are on professional salaries and the onset of technology will eventually mean a lot of them will be out of a job. Given the somewhat bizarre and lack of common-sense decisions that are being made by these officials, I can only conclude that the technology is deliberately being misused so it gets phased out or at the very least has question mark hanging over its use, so match officials will always be retained. I hear people saying ‘but the use of VAR requires more officials not less’. Yes, this iteration of VAR is semi-automated but the next version might be fully automated. To me, they are tarnishing the technology with the way it is being used to keep their involvement in the professional game relevant. Hopefully by getting this information out there, the use of VAR by these officials will be scrutinised further and hopefully they will be held accountable for some of the strange decisions being made.
Seamus, Sweden

 

Winners and losers
Put me right there in the losers section because I’m ashamed to admit I was furiously checking my socials to see how the hell I had missed the news football was back on. Then I actually read the thing, grunted at the clear anti-Arsenal bias running right through it, then went back to staring at the wall until Thursday night.
Matt (thanks for the chuckle) Wright, Gunner in Aus.