Atmosphere at Anfield (cut from R.Madrid post-match thread)

[Nicey]

I have to say it does seem that we are out sung week in week out at Anfield, it really takes a lot to get the normal match day fans going who give out about the players not being able to get up for lesser sides yet they cant be arsed to sing 2 verses on Walk on

[rudedog]

It's not the fan's 'fault' though, you're missing the point.

They can help, sure. But what happens then if a game is behind closed doors? The team cant perform?

This is an absolute gem though, cant blame the manager, wont even blame the players now - it's just the fans Priceless stuff mate.

Did Carragher use the word 'fault'? Show me a link if he did.

Who said its the fans fault Craig? the only quote I can find is one from yourself (from one of your tedious hyperboles).

Now i've heard it all - when the team plays ****, it's the fans fault

[Craig_H]

Old Toilet can be like a morgue at times but that doesn't stop ManYoo from dominating most of the weaker sides there.

Nail on the head and this kills fredo's (non) argument stone dead.

[Guest]

Nail on the head and this kills fredo's (non) argument stone dead.

No it doesn't! Chelsea have the same problems at home; dull atmosphere. It's just that Man.Utd have that little bit more quality upfront and also the consistency to go with it, plus their experience managing these types of games.

Of course the atmosphere plays a part, how can't it be!! If it can play a part in Europe, why can't it be when we play league matches with lower opposition. It's a fact that these type of matches don't excite the fans and makes it harder for the team to motivate themselves.

[Tee]

The crowd debate is a silly one because ultimately it is down to the players to perform regardless of what goes on around them.

I think the point being made is that the crowd can lift the team and certain players when we are struggling to break through against lesser teams - Man Utd have better players to unlock sides whereas our play is limited at times and if the crowd get going it can push more of the average players whose head can easily drop when there are groans for every bad touch or misplaced pass. Just my take on it.

[Guest]

The crowd debate is a silly one because ultimately it is down to the players to perform regardless of what goes on around them.

I think the point being made is that the crowd can lift the team and certain players when we are struggling to break through against lesser teams - Man Utd have better players to unlock sides whereas our play is limited at times and if the crowd get going it can push more of the average players whose head can easily drop when there are groans for every bad touch or misplaced pass. Just my take on it.

I can guarantee that if the atmosphere was like the one when we played Real all the time (and that shouldn't be hard for fans to get going as they are the ones who paid their tickets), then we would probably have had 4 wins out of 4 of those games we dropped points. There's no way we wouldn't have killed off those teams.

But as it stands, one problem breeds the other and it becomes a catch 22 situation. Both are at fault, players and fans. Fans can be proactive by providing the platform for the players. I haven't felt it when I've watched us play Stoke, Wigan, West Ham etc ... It was dull as **** and made our play more edgy as the match went on. Carra wouldn't have made this public (at least twice he said it) if it was a non issue.

[red g]

I can guarantee that if the atmosphere was like the one when we played Real all the time (and that shouldn't be hard for fans to get going as they are the ones who paid their tickets), then we would probably have had 4 wins out of 4 of those games we dropped points. There's no way we wouldn't have killed off those teams.

But as it stands, one problem breeds the other and it becomes a catch 22 situation. Both are at fault, players and fans. Fans can be proactive by providing the platform for the players. I haven't felt it when I've watched us play Stoke, Wigan, West Ham etc ... It was dull as **** and made our play more edgy as the match went on. Carra wouldn't have made this public (at least twice he said it) if it was a non issue.

what he said

[Scratch]

Anyone even debating the fact that the roar of the crowd doesn't spur a team on, and intimidate opponents, is fighting a losing battle...why is the crowd often referred to as the twelth man? Why does a team playing at home supposedly have the advantage? Because the crowd lifts them...but if the crowd is flat and lifeless, and the groans can be heard, of course it will affect the players...

Watching games this season, we've started strongly, with thecrowd right up...but then, as the crowd noise dies, the game tempo drops...the opposition comes back into it...

No, it's not the "crowd's fault" as some numbnut keeps saying, cos the players should be up for every game...but the crowd is at fault, cos they are the 12th man, the home advantage, the driving force that spurs the team on...when they fall flat, it is reflected...and when the team falls flat, so does the crowd...one affects the other, and vice versa.

[zimbo]

Go onto the pitch FFS or better, try to be more vociferous and instill some belief in those players. They are humans, equally so than most of the 'drunken' retards filling up a football stadium, even if they're paid loads amount of money to do their job.

I'm not convinced that your argument is strengthened by echoing an outdated, Thatcherite view of football supporters. Particularly when it's one that has been consistently used against us by those wishing to deflect the blame for Hillsborough on to our own fans.

[Guest]

Syd will always argue that it's entirely down to the players. His 'behind closed doors' argument is laughable really, as if professional football can be played without some form of advantage for the home team.

Let's ask UEFA / FIFA to put up new rules; let all football matches be played with a 50/50 representation of supporters for both teams, even during home games. Maybe that will spur some supporters, knowing they don't have that safety net in terms of numbers.

Our away support is magnificent week in week out, because they are the hard core ones. I've seen **** teams playing at home being defensive, still we managed to beat them. Maybe there's an urgency in our play away from home, knowing that our supporters are right behind us, explains why we've got a better away record.

It's an indisputable element but we know that Syd wants us to play like Barca and wipe off the floor each time we play. That's maybe why he wants Mourihno in charge?

[Guest]

I'm not convinced that your argument is strengthened by echoing an outdated, Thatcherite view of football supporters. Particularly when it's one that has been consistently used against us by those wishing to deflect the blame for Hillsborough on to our own fans.

Didn't view it this way, it was more 'tongue in cheek' that any other thing. I thought about removing that bit thinking maybe it would rile some sensitive souls.

Some say that Thatcher was good for England and some say the complete opposite ... but let's not indulge into that as it's a football forum.

[Guest]

Re: Zimbo

I was over the top with that bit in hindsight. It's a completely false assumption and I regret to have said it.

[zimbo]

Didn't view it this way, it was more 'tongue in cheek' that any other thing. I thought about removing that bit thinking maybe it would rile some sensitive souls. :

I don't think it's a question of being sensitive. It just seems unnecessarily provocative, particularly given the baggage that comes with such a statement (flippant or not) and the fact that it is still used by the ill-informed as a rod to beat us with.

Some say that Thatcher was good for England and some say the complete opposite ... but let's not indulge into that as it's a football forum.

They may say that. But they'd be more wrong than a hat made of ****.

[zimbo]

Re: Zimbo

I was over the top with that bit in hindsight. It's a completely false assumption and I regret to have said it.

No sweat. Now let's get back to the important business. Craig just called you a bogey. What do you say to that?

[Guest]

I don't think it's a question of being sensitive. It just seems unnecessarily provocative, particularly given the baggage that comes with such a statement (flippant or not) and the fact that it is still used by the ill-informed as a rod to beat us with.

I agree, that was out of order.

I won't edit the post because it's already been said and my bad. Just didn't realize the context of it when I wrote that bit. That was stupid.