Topic: The Anfield Wrap

[Kenny's Jacket]

I read your post and thought “What on earth? Why wouldn’t he have watched the first half if he was hosting the post-match show”, so to then actually watch the show and find out that it was because of something out of his control, I would say that was a crap and unfair representation of what actually happened, particularly given you were following on from saying that he’s “not host material”. It gives an impression of something completely different to the reality, that he’s not good at hosting and he didn’t even watch the first half yesterday (bangs head against wall).

So weve established Mo didnt watch the first half, as I said. Thats literally the reality. Its not something you can debate, its fact.
I dont think hes host material, if you do great, I dont. 
Hes a decent contributor, hes has done well as a contributor on a few shows. The womens football one sticks in my mind, but on many other occasions hes very average.
Youve missed the part of my post where I said I liked him. 

[Kenny's Jacket]

Yep. He didn’t watch the first half because his Internet was down. You chose to bring it up without mentioning that. And I’m pulling you up on it. Nothing more to it.

Well done on recognising reality, took a while 

[Kenny's Jacket]

If recognising reality is pulling up a dickhead on a dickhead move, then fair enough.

Wooooo ok Tiger. 
Untwist your knickers.   

[Kenny's Jacket]

Don't subscribe to video, so haven't seen PMP, but the pink was OK yesterday, helped a lot by Neil appearing on it. It didn't hold back on how truly dreadful the performance was. However, Gibbons should leave it with looking for positives when there really aren't any at all.

I think it's a shame that Johnno isn't involved more, either on Pinks or the ratings a few times recently. As I've said previously, it's not helped TAW that he's disappeared around the same time Robbo left.

Also, where's John Milburn these days? Feels like it's ages since he's been on anything.

Its been a while since Johnno has done any footy stuff, I dont remember thinking he was great on it. Hes great on Agony though.
I think hed be good on stuff like 3 strikes and wildcards.
There is clearly a Robbo shaped hole though. 
If Gibbo is hosting the Pink then I think it needs Neil as a guest. As demonstrated Neil cant do both shows. 
I think Gutman should do more post match stuff.

The heyday was Robbo hosting Damien

[Big Bamber]

Its been a while since Johnno has done any footy stuff, I dont remember thinking he was great on it. Hes great on Agony though.
I think hed be good on stuff like 3 strikes and wildcards.
There is clearly a Robbo shaped hole though. 
If Gibbo is hosting the Pink then I think it needs Neil as a guest. As demonstrated Neil cant do both shows. 
I think Gutman should do more post match stuff.

The heyday was Robbo hosting Damien

There is a perfect storm of the Reds being crap, a contributor gap, narrow spectrum of views, and thorny issues that threaten the entire house of cards (e.g. the rigged nature of the league/financial doping, sportswashing and rival fans). Tough times at TAW Towers regrettably. 

[Kashinoda]

Probably because they don’t want to talk about the ownership. I don’t mind redmen tv, even though I don’t think neither of them represent all fans views.

It would be refreshing for them to talk about the elephant in the room.

They've spoken about the ownership plenty, including whole episodes on the subject during the World Cup.

That said what exactly are you looking for when discussing the ownership? There's only so much you can say (and it's been said to death, on TAW). Are they to have a dedicated weekly 'FSG out' podcast where they go full Everton?

If all you're looking for is FSG anger and eternal discussion about midfielders, Twitter or Reddit should be more than enough to satiate your needs.

[Zlen]

I recently picked up the audio sub and went through the podcast backlog to download stuff - there were at least half a dozen episodes tackling the question of ownership and inner turmoil in the club. That is the single most explored topic in the past few months.

[Big Bamber]

I recently picked up the audio sub and went through the podcast backlog to download stuff - there were at least half a dozen episodes tackling the question of ownership and inner turmoil in the club. That is the single most explored topic in the past few months.

I wonder how much of that reaches the non-subscribers? It's a separate point, but if topics do not feature on the free show, TAW live, and Talking Reds, there will be those that get a skewed view of "TAW". Can't be helped, but it is probably real.

[red_Mark1980]

These days the Pink (post match show) is a half cut Gibbo, the host, slurring his way through a shambles of a show.

Are you including the Brighton Pink in your view?

[Fitzy.]

The idea that TAW don't address the ownership issue is a fallacy mainly pedalled by Twitter-cranks. Obviously they do talk about the ownerships plenty without it being a boring obsession.

In truth, what these cranks are moaning about is that TAW doesn't do what they want...which is to moan and bitch about transfers, money and the ownership model. Tantrum-level engagement is the MO of so many online fans, to the extent that any kind of level-headed chat is interpreted as some kind of act of FSG-pasty propaganda. It's wild and, in truth, probably dominated by young lads who are broadly clueless and view football without the inherent cultural ties that a lot of traditional fans feel about their football club. This allows them to jump in two-feet about any element of the football club without an understanding that they're actually a damaging influence.

Their relationship with the club is primarily transactional which is at odds with the sensibilities espoused by the likes of TAW who are essentially engaging in a decade-long love letter to an institution that means more to them than whether Liverpool are owned by an oil state or not.

[TwitterJayy]

They've spoken about the ownership plenty, including whole episodes on the subject during the World Cup.

That said what exactly are you looking for when discussing the ownership? There's only so much you can say (and it's been said to death, on TAW). Are they to have a dedicated weekly 'FSG out' podcast where they go full Everton?

If all you're looking for is FSG anger and eternal discussion about midfielders, Twitter or Reddit should be more than enough to satiate your needs.

I want FSG out because we won’t compete with the rest in years to come especially when Klopp goes. But I wouldn’t mind from TAW, RMTV and any other big podcast that can represent the fans, is a fair balanced point for both sides.

They can easily acknowledge a lot of the good FSG done and also criticise them for what’s happening now. They can also acknowledge that others have very different opinions. Be nice for once for a very fair balanced view from one of these accounts.

It seems any anger that is acknowledged is towards Twitter fans, when a lot of match going fans are pissed off too. It would be great if that was made known.

[TwitterJayy]

The idea that TAW don't address the ownership issue is a fallacy mainly pedalled by Twitter-cranks. Obviously they do talk about the ownerships plenty without it being a boring obsession.

In truth, what these cranks are moaning about is that TAW doesn't do what they want...which is to moan and bitch about transfers, money and the ownership model. Tantrum-level engagement is the MO of so many online fans, to the extent that any kind of level-headed chat is interpreted as some kind of act of FSG-pasty propaganda. It's wild and, in truth, probably dominated by young lads who are broadly clueless and view football without the inherent cultural ties that a lot of traditional fans feel about their football club. This allows them to jump in two-feet about any element of the football club without an understanding that they're actually a damaging influence.

Their relationship with the club is primarily transactional which is at odds with the sensibilities espoused by the likes of TAW who are essentially engaging in a decade-long love letter to an institution that means more to them than whether Liverpool are owned by an oil state or not.

I’d love us to compete and not be owned by a state. But we are not competing, and it doesn’t feel like my club. Scary especially as it’s my local.

I’d love us to be a club where supporters came first and not customers. It’s a reason, why I’d welcome Qatari investment because the club is long gone. Might as well join the rest of soulless franchisees.

[red_Mark1980]

My club doesn't feel like my club, so the best thing is investment from a hideous country.

I don't think you'll hear that from contributors as it's not how they think.

I see that crap online, but it's not indicative of my match going experience.

[TwitterJayy]

My club doesn't feel like my club, so the best thing is investment from a hideous country.

I don't think you'll hear that from contributors as it's not how they think.

I see that crap online, but it's not indicative of my match going experience.

Each to there own mate.
My match going experience is pissed off that we don’t spend and what’s happening now, was going to happen at some point.

Btw hideous country? Because they follow there religious beliefs.
Not perfect by any means, but there following there beliefs.
People in this country, want others to follow our beliefs, so same applies to there country.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Are you including the Brighton Pink in your view?

'
No, the Brighton Pink was saved by Neil; Gibbo sounded sober. 

[red_Mark1980]

Each to there own mate.
My match going experience is pissed off that we don’t spend and what’s happening now, was going to happen at some point.

Btw hideous country? Because they follow there religious beliefs.
Not perfect by any means, but there following there beliefs.
People in this country, want others to follow our beliefs, so same applies to there country.

I'm not getting drawn into this. Have a great day

[Kenny's Jacket]

Each to there own mate.
My match going experience is pissed off that we don’t spend and what’s happening now, was going to happen at some point.

Btw hideous country? Because they follow there religious beliefs.
Not perfect by any means, but there following there beliefs.
People in this country, want others to follow our beliefs, so same applies to there country.

Acting like a twat makes you a twat, acting like a twat and justifying it with God makes you a deluded coward of a twat.

[TwitterJayy]

Acting like a twat makes you a twat, acting like a twat and justifying it with God makes you a deluded coward of a twat.

I take it you haven’t spoken to any Muslims on this issue then?

Acting like a twat, because I accept others beliefs even if I don’t follow them.
2023 we’re we avoid controversy because we want to sit on our high horse and tell everybody how great we are.

[cdav]

Think Neil's thoughts on the ownership from todays newsleter really chimes with my thoughts

https://mailchi.mp/theanfieldwrap/taw-daily-run-down-smfjjjc1sc-1368756

[Rush 82]

I'm beginning to suspect that the sportswash agenda is complete.

Ownership of a football club by a state is now regarded as normal by the vast majority of people - their reasoning is simple - 'if there was something wrong with it surely the governing bodies wouldn't allow it'

It's done - the version of football we've known for most of our lives is done.

We've reached the point where we're reduced to making the least worst choices moving forward. 

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Each to there own mate.


Btw hideous country? Because they follow there religious beliefs.
Not perfect by any means, but there following there beliefs.
People in this country, want others to follow our beliefs, so same applies to there country.

That's bollocks and you know it as for not perfect my any means,you're taking the piss right ?

[Fromola]

I'm beginning to suspect that the sportswash agenda is complete.

Ownership of a football club by a state is now regarded as normal by the vast majority of people - their reasoning is simple - 'if there was something wrong with it surely the governing bodies wouldn't allow it'

It's done - the version of football we've known for most of our lives is done.

We've reached the point where we're reduced to making the least worst choices moving forward.

Part of the problem is people are stick to the back teeth of FSG and their cheapskate nature in the transfer market and doing everything on the cheap while looking to rake it in off a sale rather than invest to keep us competitive. Also the absolute mess they're leaving the club in at the moment, the whole club has turned into a shambles very quickly and the buck stops at the top.

Therefore you'll get a lot of fans who'll accept anybody who promises to throw money at Klopp in the summer. The same thing happened in the build up to Hicks and Gillett - people just sick of Moores and Parry and not being able to compete. Rafa/Klopp can only carry it so far when up against clubs outspending us many times over every year.

Unfortunately that tips the balance with fans accepting anyone.

[Kenny's Jacket]

I take it you haven’t spoken to any Muslims on this issue then?

Acting like a twat, because I accept others beliefs even if I don’t follow them.
2023 we’re we avoid controversy because we want to sit on our high horse and tell everybody how great we are.

Ive spoken to loads on it actually . Im not obliged to accept or respect people's beliefs.

[courty61]

Think Neil's thoughts on the ownership from todays newsleter really chimes with my thoughts

https://mailchi.mp/theanfieldwrap/taw-daily-run-down-smfjjjc1sc-1368756

100%.

[Fitzy.]

Sports washing: the route one bad faith argument is to pretend it’s about religion and cultural differences.

[TwitterJayy]

Ive spoken to loads on it actually . Im not obliged to accept or respect people's beliefs.

That’s fair enough, i understand not everyone agrees. But I think it’s very controversial that for years in the UK, we have had lots of different people come and accepted as long as they follow our values.

Now we have people, slamming another part of the world. All because they follow there religious beliefs.

For the record too, I’m not against Qatari investment. I’d rather it be a private company from anywhere in the world compared to state. But in the footballing world, we are falling below. Surprised FSG hasn’t pushed FFP further to FIFA,UEFA and the FA.

[Kenny's Jacket]

That’s fair enough, i understand not everyone agrees. But I think it’s very controversial that for years in the UK, we have had lots of different people come and accepted as long as they follow our values.

Now we have people, slamming another part of the world. All because they follow there religious beliefs.

For the record too, I’m not against Qatari investment. I’d rather it be a private company from anywhere in the world compared to state. But in the footballing world, we are falling below. Surprised FSG hasn’t pushed FFP further to FIFA,UEFA and the FA.

its not just because they follow their religion, its because in doing so they espouse views that I and many find abhorrent.
Please let me know why its problematic to find some religious views abhorrent?

Can you give examples of what you mean by "we have had lots of different people come and accepted as long as they follow our values."?

Another question, which countries do you think are more welcoming to foreigners, those in the middle east or those in Europe?

[TwitterJayy]

its not just because they follow their religion, its because in doing so they espouse views that I and many find abhorrent.
Please let me know why its problematic to find some religious views abhorrent?

Can you give examples of what you mean by "we have had lots of different people come and accepted as long as they follow our values."?

Another question, which countries do you think are more welcoming to foreigners, those in the middle east or those in Europe?

What’s meant by different people was meant different cultures. Which is great considering how we’ve evolved over the years and people learning to accept other peoples beliefs and embrace there cultures. An example could be of Salah. Wonderful person who abides by his beliefs, while embracing other cultures (e.g. Christmas).

The Middle East can be very welcoming as well as Europe. I mean lots of people go to Dubai and enjoy it, there’s a reason it’s up there for a go to destination. While your there though your asked to be respectful to there culture and rules.

Yes they have some beliefs, which over in Europe we don’t accept. However they possibly think the same of over here in Europe.

You can rightly be against it, but you can’t just call somebody out because they think differently to you. I personally know somebody who’s a revert and received a lot of backlash for trying to explain there beliefs. Imagine it was the other way round?

[John C]

I'm no longer a subscriber to TAW podcasts so what have I missed please, why is this dominating the TAW thread?

[Kenny's Jacket]

What’s meant by different people was meant different cultures. Which is great considering how we’ve evolved over the years and people learning to accept other peoples beliefs and embrace there cultures. An example could be of Salah. Wonderful person who abides by his beliefs, while embracing other cultures (e.g. Christmas).

The Middle East can be very welcoming as well as Europe. I mean lots of people go to Dubai and enjoy it, there’s a reason it’s up there for a go to destination. While your there though your asked to be respectful to there culture and rules.

Yes they have some beliefs, which over in Europe we don’t accept. However they possibly think the same of over here in Europe.

You can rightly be against it, but you can’t just call somebody out because they think differently to you. I personally know somebody who’s a revert and received a lot of backlash for trying to explain there beliefs. Imagine it was the other way round?

but Salah hasnt been told we will be accepted on the condition he embraces our beliefs.   He did it anyway.  So its not an example of what you earlier claimed.  To add , his Christmas tree photograph's on twitter and Instagram draw criticism from fellow muslims.

Youve not answered if Europe or Middle East is more welcome. People go on holiday to a Dubai , a place that has buiilt a purpose built holiday destination, Wow.
Ask the Dubai leaders daughter what she thinks.

So in conclusion, you didnt answer any of my questions 

[Ghost Town]

They've spoken about the ownership plenty, including whole episodes on the subject during the World Cup.

That said what exactly are you looking for when discussing the ownership? There's only so much you can say (and it's been said to death, on TAW). Are they to have a dedicated weekly 'FSG out' podcast where they go full Everton?

If all you're looking for is FSG anger and eternal discussion about midfielders, Twitter or Reddit should be more than enough to satiate your needs.

The idea that TAW don't address the ownership issue is a fallacy mainly pedalled by Twitter-cranks. Obviously they do talk about the ownerships plenty without it being a boring obsession.

In truth, what these cranks are moaning about is that TAW doesn't do what they want...which is to moan and bitch about transfers, money and the ownership model. Tantrum-level engagement is the MO of so many online fans, to the extent that any kind of level-headed chat is interpreted as some kind of act of FSG-pasty propaganda. It's wild and, in truth, probably dominated by young lads who are broadly clueless and view football without the inherent cultural ties that a lot of traditional fans feel about their football club. This allows them to jump in two-feet about any element of the football club without an understanding that they're actually a damaging influence.

Their relationship with the club is primarily transactional which is at odds with the sensibilities espoused by the likes of TAW who are essentially engaging in a decade-long love letter to an institution that means more to them than whether Liverpool are owned by an oil state or not.

Yep

This is the state that Liverpool fandom has descended to: unless you are constantly slagging the club off about transfers and spending, and constantly moaning and whinging about the state of the team, and constantly raging about how terrible we are and how we wouldn't be terrible if the club would only listened to the true sages of football, i.e the fans, then you are classed as a 'Top Red', a highly humorous soubriquet, apparently, which "cleverly" means the opposite of what it purports. Such wit!

Of course all of the above are issues to one degree or another, but that doesn't mean they have to be whinged about constantly. But that's what a lot of fans now demand. The comments for each TAW video are full of such stuff, slagging TAW off because they aren't moaning enough.

[Fitzy.]

I'm no longer a subscriber to TAW podcasts so what have I missed please, why is this dominating the TAW thread?

You haven’t missed anything. As Ghost Town outlines, it’s more about what folk on TAW aren’t saying.

Basically, the team are doing poorly so the knives are out and daft lads on social media are enjoying a pile on when TAW post something.

[Big Bamber]

Or… given the Reds poor performances and results, supporters are turning a more critical eye to what is happening on and off the pitch. As humans, they like to see their own views reflected in fan media. Especially those outlets they pay for and market themselves as supporter created, driven, made, and focussed. When they don’t see their views regularly reflected, they use the many channels now available to them to let ‘media’ know. For better or worse. My two cents is that this can be useful if it staves off unsubscribing. But it’s not daft, it’s human nature. For better or worse.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

That’s fair enough, i understand not everyone agrees. But I think it’s very controversial that for years in the UK, we have had lots of different people come and accepted as long as they follow our values.

Now we have people, slamming another part of the world. All because they follow there religious beliefs.

For the record too, I’m not against Qatari investment. I’d rather it be a private company from anywhere in the world compared to state. But in the footballing world, we are falling below. Surprised FSG hasn’t pushed FFP further to FIFA,UEFA and the FA.

My god you aren't half talking some shit.

No matter how many times you type it out,It has fuck all to do with religion you ............

Fact is that you've outed yourself as having no morals,which is kinda ironic.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Sports washing: the route one bad faith argument is to pretend it’s about religion and cultural differences.

Jay was paying attention during the blood soaked WC,I bet he even agreed with those c*nts throwing the bigot slander towards our manager.

[Ghost Town]

Or… given the Reds poor performances and results, supporters are turning a more critical eye to what is happening on and off the pitch. As humans, they like to see their own views reflected in fan media. Especially those outlets they pay for and market themselves as supporter created, driven, made, and focussed. When they don’t see their views regularly reflected, they use the many channels now available to them to let ‘media’ know. For better or worse. My two cents is that this can be useful if it staves off unsubscribing. But it’s not daft, it’s human nature. For better or worse.

No I'm sorry but this won't wash. Everything these so-called supporters want to see is already there to see in TAW's output. Ownership, transfers, need for new players, critcal analayses of players, tactics, even of the manager, even calling the team and perfomances fucking shite.

But the whingers' problem is that TAW and others aren't banging on about it all the time. Because that's what they want, these joyless, gutless, impatient, witless cryarsers who seem to make up an increasing proportion of Liverpool fans these days. Because all they want to do is bang on and on and on about these same things over and over again, so they object and become outraged because TAW or other sources don't also bang on and on and on about the same things all the time.

There's more to life, and football support, than negativity and miserable wailing and railing. There's worth in fortitude and patience and taking adversity on the chin; of looking for positivity and nuggets of hope in even the bad times. There's a kind of grace in reacting to difficult times philosophically, taking the rough with the smooth without endless complaining.

I'm not saying TAW or anyone else embodies all this perfectly, but it's not only good, but beneficial, IMO, that they don't spend all their time reflecting the 'views' of the perpetual moaners and negatives. Thank God they have a bit more about them then that.

[Big Bamber]

No I'm sorry but this won't wash. Everything these so-called supporters want to see is already there to see in TAW's output. Ownership, transfers, need for new players, critcal analayses of players, tactics, even of the manager, even calling the team and perfomances fucking shite.

But the whingers' problem is that TAW and others aren't banging on about it all the time. Because that's what they want, these joyless, gutless, impatient, witless cryarsers who seem to make up an increasing proportion of Liverpool fans these days. Because all they want to do is bang on and on and on about these same things over and over again, so they object and become outraged because TAW or other sources don't also bang on and on and on about the same things all the time.

There's more to life, and football support, than negativity and miserable wailing and railing. There's worth in fortitude and patience and taking adversity on the chin; of looking for positivity and nuggets of hope in even the bad times. There's a kind of grace in reacting to difficult times philosophically, taking the rough with the smooth without endless complaining.

I'm not saying TAW or anyone else embodies all this perfectly, but it's not only good, but beneficial, IMO, that they don't spend all their time reflecting the 'views' of the perpetual moaners and negatives. Thank God they have a bit more about them then that.

I think we agree on the core point but I think you’ve let yourself down there. Deeming them “so-called supporters, whingers, witless” dismisses them.

If you want to discuss philosophy, ok. There is worth in debating, and having conviction in your argument. That is a philosophical reaction. That is “taking the rough”. There is a time for impatience, so “grace” isn’t a cover for cowardice or meek acceptance.

Coming back down to Earth, if you do the debate right, it makes the most compelling listening, repeatedly.

Also, not everything is there to see on TAW. I think they even take pride in that.

For example, I have debated on here with them about using every opportunity to call out financial doping, especially when rival supporters are on. They disagree with that approach. OK, we move on. But that is one example of where a viewpoint is not there. I’m sure other ‘real’ supporters have other examples.

Listing topics as dealt with is superficial. How have they been dealt with? Narrowly? Giving common views a fair shake? Even when you disagree.

[Fitzy.]

I think we agree on the core point but I think you’ve let yourself down there. Deeming them “so-called supporters, whingers, witless” dismisses them.

If you want to discuss philosophy, ok. There is worth in debating, and having conviction in your argument. That is a philosophical reaction. That is “taking the rough”. There is a time for impatience, so “grace” isn’t a cover for cowardice or meek acceptance.

Coming back down to Earth, if you do the debate right, it makes the most compelling listening, repeatedly.

Also, not everything is there to see on TAW. I think they even take pride in that.

For example, I have debated on here with them about using every opportunity to call out financial doping, especially when rival supporters are on. They disagree with that approach. OK, we move on. But that is one example of where a viewpoint is not there. I’m sure other ‘real’ supporters have other examples.

Listing topics as dealt with is superficial. How have they been dealt with? Narrowly? Giving common views a fair shake? Even when you disagree.

The point is that TAW have regularly addressed some fundamental issues around transfer policy, ownership, team tactics and squad management. As results have worsened, these discussions have become more critical and more regular. That said, you don't have to be on-board with the line taken by a particular contributor - obviously.

However, the tone and nature of a lot of what TAW are being attacked for is - I am going to repeat it - daft. It's daft because it's not steeped in intelligent argument and rigor. It's paint-by-numbers braindead commentary. E.g. "Why don't FSG put their hands in their pockets and break the bank for a midfielder?" A casual glance at the ownership model in relation to the club's sustainability would suggest that this will simply not happen. So are TAW to spend endless shows asking these daft questions, or are they to engage in a debate that sits within the parameters of what its likely?

This isn't TAW defending FSG, it's just them acknowledging the realities of how the club is run. However, as recently as yesterday, John Gibbons was arguing that FSG have done a credible job but the model might now be outdated. But he didn't express it in a manner that made him look thick.

We can reduce this to folk having different opinions but that doesn't do justice to the way TAW contributors are being criticised online.

[Big Bamber]

The point is that TAW have regularly addressed some fundamental issues around transfer policy, ownership, team tactics and squad management. As results have worsened, these discussions have become more critical and more regular. That said, you don't have to be on-board with the line taken by a particular contributor - obviously.

However, the tone and nature of a lot of what TAW are being attacked for is - I am going to repeat it - daft. It's daft because it's not steeped in intelligent argument and rigor. It's paint-by-numbers braindead commentary. E.g. "Why don't FSG put their hands in their pockets and break the bank for a midfielder?" A casual glance at the ownership model in relation to the club's sustainability would suggest that this will simply not happen. So are TAW to spend endless shows asking these daft questions, or are they to engage in a debate that sits within the parameters of what its likely?

This isn't TAW defending FSG, it's just them acknowledging the realities of how the club is run. However, as recently as yesterday, John Gibbons was arguing that FSG have done a credible job but the model might now be outdated. But he didn't express it in a manner that made him look thick.

We can reduce this to folk having different opinions but that doesn't do justice to the way TAW contributors are being criticised online.

The tone that people use may be daft (or plain unacceptable) but their point (e.g. critical of FSG, tactics, selections, TAW) and motivation (e.g. feeling unreflected) can be perfectly rational. For example, I could sympathise with subscribers who think replying to the question "Why don't FSG put their hands in their pockets and break the bank for a midfielder?" with "This will simply not happen, as any casual analysis will show" is not satisfactory. Or, I could sympathise with the view that acknowledging the realities of how the club is run, arguing that FSG have done a credible job, and that the model might now be outdated should be a great starting point for debate right now, not the end of it. I might not agree with all of that, but I don't think it is a daft position or would necessarily lead to poor content for shows. Anyway, I don't want to stray into defending online assholes, so I'll leave it there. Up the Reds.     

[Fitzy.]

The tone that people use may be daft (or plain unacceptable) but their point (e.g. critical of FSG, tactics, selections, TAW) and motivation (e.g. feeling unreflected) can be perfectly rational. For example, I could sympathise with subscribers who think replying to the question "Why don't FSG put their hands in their pockets and break the bank for a midfielder?" with "This will simply not happen, as any casual analysis will show" is not satisfactory. Or, I could sympathise with the view that acknowledging the realities of how the club is run, arguing that FSG have done a credible job, and that the model might now be outdated should be a great starting point for debate right now, not the end of it. I might not agree with all of that, but I don't think it is a daft position or would necessarily lead to poor content for shows. Anyway, I don't want to stray into defending online assholes, so I'll leave it there. Up the Reds.     

I'm not arguing that you can't disagree with TAW. I am taking the position that the extent of much of the the criticism isn't reflective of the considered way you have drawn out and explained your point. In fact, you have elaborated on the point I am making - which is that many critics aren't interested in debate and discussion. They want endless hot take misery that scratches the surface of the issues that may or may not exist at the club. I genuinely believe that one of the things that annoys them about TAW is that they choose to demonstrate that easy fixes aren't achievable because this is complex and may require patience and difficult decision making.