Liverpool v Chelsea (Wembley) FA Cup Final

[RedReet]

At the risk of getting called an ignorant convict, can someone please explain exactly what motivates the anthem booing to me?

I get that Liverpool hasn't exactly been treated well by the govt and media over the last 40 or so years, and definitely sympathise with any anti-monarchy stance, but I'm struck by the fact that the booing appears to be a recent thing. Happy to be educated here.

I put a link in the Klopp thread to a Dave Maddock article on it.

Here's a similar one, ten years ago from David Prentice:

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/david-prentice-liverpool-fc-fans-3344117.amp

[Doc_Piptorious]

At the risk of getting called an ignorant convict, can someone please explain exactly what motivates the anthem booing to me?

I get that Liverpool hasn't exactly been treated well by the govt and media over the last 40 or so years, and definitely sympathise with any anti-monarchy stance, but I'm struck by the fact that the booing appears to be a recent thing. Happy to be educated here.

Whilst there are factors from the past that no doubt play a part, I would imagine that what happened before the recent game against Man City played a big part in fuelling the protesting of the anthem.

When the minutes silence last month for those killed at Hillisborough was jeered by City supporters and there was no outcry from moral crusaders such as the Daily Heil and Simon Jordon when that happened

Other things could play a part too imo but it does appear like the offended parties are picking and choosing when to be offended as it is not as though suppprters of other clubs have not booed the anthem in the past and is not as though the supporters of other clubs have not made very offensive chants in the past and right up to this day.

[banditos]

Thanks fellas. Puts a bit more perspective on it.

I've always been very wary of blind nationalism and feel a lot of sympathy for those who missed out in the nation-state lottery (Eg Basques and Kurds), so this makes plenty of sense to me now.

[Fosterbloke]

Because the city of Liverpool doesn't buy into the jingoistic Royalist establishment boot licking charade. They've been 'royally' ****ed over and let down by most major English institutions and this is their way of showing their displeasure.

Well that's my take anyway.

I don't like people pontificating to the plebs about how hard life is while sitting on a gold throne.

[Norbs]

The idea that Liverpool feels that it's its own nation isn't unique to them. Most people from large cities feel a bigger connection with their home than the nation on a whole.

The idea that the royal family is more loved by people from other areas in the UK is also wrong. It's more to do with class than geography

[baitman]

You could still love your country but have no love for the royal family.
The national anthem is all about kissing the ass of the royals.
Time for a remap.

[labourRed]

....

[shanks69]

[emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

https://twitter.com/FrankKhalidUK/status/1526888994201649156?t=iCBvUUboJs-4XUVAU6gGvQ&s=19

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[wiw]

Frank knows

[Buzzo]

Haha.

Imagine the laws are that a keeper makes an amazing save but he then has to sit back and watch as the ball spins into the net.

Desperate stuff from the Chavs.

[Paul12]

Makes sense...the shooter can kick it only once!!

[Buzzo]

If the keeper saves it onto the post it hits him again and goes in it’s a goal.

[Mark79]

Makes sense...the shooter can kick it only once!!

The shooter can only use his feet, so should that apply to the keeper too?

[spud_gun]

You could still love your country but have no love for the royal family.
The national anthem is all about kissing the ass of the royals.
Time for a remap.

and crushing rebellious Scotch

[Charly]

If the keeper saves it onto the post it hits him again and goes in it’s a goal.

No, it should be disallowed as it touched the keeper twice... and thats not allowed. [emoji16]