Topic: The Anfield Wrap

[Alisson Wonderland]

It was around this time last year I began to put forward the argument of getting shut or/reducing the numbers of AFQs. Then when we spoke to people casually it was astonishing how many people really had it as a huge positive for them, something they really looked forward to, often for important reasons. This came to an end around March in Ireland when it was striking the numbers who genuinely love it and cherish it. I was very much put back in my box. The challenge is to keep it fresh and we are having a go at that as much as we can.

I'm very much in the keep AFQ as it is camp.  It's one of my favourite shows and I like that it sometimes has people on who don't do the main football shows, like Timo and Rachel and Joe Connolly (although he's not been on for a while).  Always good to have some of the regulars on there as well (Gibbo, Paul, Rob etc) to make it a decent mix.

[Dench57]

Could listen to Neil Docking on Ban This Filth all day

[CONFIAMOS]

I thought he made it as clear as possible that this is not about the local sellers and they will not be affected. I'm not sure where use of Liverpool in relation to education comes into this?
Bits were a little cringy, mainly how he was trying like mad not to upset anyone or say the wrong thing
I'd be concerned if local traders were being put out of business by this, but they're not.
I'd be concerned if they were trying to trademark the word Liverpool for general use, which they are clearly not and if they were the reputational damage would potentially outstrip any benefits.
I'd be a bit concerned if we were trying to trademark things that other clubs hadn't, but they're not and only trying to do what other clubs have done.
I've said it before, but it's no coincidence that we're doing this at the time we are looking to renegotiate a kit deal, when suppliers will quite rightly be asking us what we are doing about large scale counterfeiting.

Item 41 - on the application is education and it refers to football academies general organisation of football related events and services. So basically restricting the freedom and ability of association of many current and future organisations.

New sponsor or no new sponsor it's about growing the value of the business and all things considered it's morally wrong to do it commoditising education, amongst other things.

No matter what billy bullshitter says!

[Zlen]

It was around this time last year I began to put forward the argument of getting shut or/reducing the numbers of AFQs. Then when we spoke to people casually it was astonishing how many people really had it as a huge positive for them, something they really looked forward to, often for important reasons. This came to an end around March in Ireland when it was striking the numbers who genuinely love it and cherish it. I was very much put back in my box. The challenge is to keep it fresh and we are having a go at that as much as we can.

Oh don’t get me wrong, AFQ is mostly good and often glorious - but Ban this filth is always great. Perhaps if Ban this filth was shorter? One or two things to ban instead of three - quick, snappy and out every few weeks. But definitely keep AFQ strong, both versions.

[CraigDS]

Item 41 - on the application is education and it refers to football academies general organisation of football related events and services. So basically restricting the freedom and ability of association of many current and future organisations.

It wouldn’t (and couldn’t as it’s untrademarkable) stop anyone using the Liverpool name in relation to the city, only in the relation to the club.

[tmsneil]

Item 41 - on the application is education and it refers to football academies general organisation of football related events and services. So basically restricting the freedom and ability of association of many current and future organisations.

New sponsor or no new sponsor it's about growing the value of the business and all things considered it's morally wrong to do it commoditising education, amongst other things.

No matter what billy bullshitter says!

Been told the following if this helps:

It is worth noting that no Trademark application has been submitted for item 41. The specific trademark has been narrowed down to three classes.

Classes and terms

Class 9

Software; downloadable software; mobile apps; podcasts; downloadable podcasts; mobile apps; software applications; software for the provision, development and editing of podcasts; all of the aforesaid goods relating to the sport of football. .

Class 25

Clothing, footwear, headgear; tracksuits; socks; jogging trousers; scarves; hats and caps; underwear; shorts; trainers; jerseys; shirts; uniforms; boots; singlets; all of the aforesaid goods being sporting goods used for playing the sport of football, or being memorabilia in connection with a football club.

Class 28

Games, toys and playthings; video game apparatus; sporting articles; decorations for Christmas trees; all of the aforesaid relating to the sport of football; footballs; reduced size footballs; tables for table football; miniature replica football kits; football or soccer goals; shin pads for football; nets for football goals; football ball bags.

[CONFIAMOS]

It wouldn’t (and couldn’t as it’s untrademarkable) stop anyone using the Liverpool name in relation to the city, only in the relation to the club.

In relation to FOOTBALL.


If it's true that they have kicked that one into touch then good - clearly they have seen the huge issue.

[Fitzy.]

Oh don’t get me wrong, AFQ is mostly good and often glorious - but Ban this filth is always great. Perhaps if Ban this filth was shorter? One or two things to ban instead of three - quick, snappy and out every few weeks. But definitely keep AFQ strong, both versions.

I think a stumbling block with this is booking the right people. I’m guessing they do it when the bookings are sorted rather than the other way round. Possibly.

[LallanaInPyjamas]

It was around this time last year I began to put forward the argument of getting shut or/reducing the numbers of AFQs. Then when we spoke to people casually it was astonishing how many people really had it as a huge positive for them, something they really looked forward to, often for important reasons. This came to an end around March in Ireland when it was striking the numbers who genuinely love it and cherish it. I was very much put back in my box. The challenge is to keep it fresh and we are having a go at that as much as we can.

Have to say when I used to have to drive more, AFQ was a real highlight. I often batch them up now and listen to them in bulk during internationals and they're usually still great. I think they can be very uplifting if you're feeling a bit down or lonely so that might come into the surprising feedback you've received.

Ban This Filth could be done a little more frequently but it's definitely best left as an irregular show. The format would become tiresome for listeners and guests alike I would imagine.

[Stussy]

I think the Michael Owen interview was really good. Josh did a good job. Was robust, fair questions putting the issues directly to him and he stood up for himself and gave his perspective.

[Alan_X]

The Peter Moore interview...

Found it very cringeworthy - this 74/75 season dvd - what the fuck?

Don't think the interview challenged the issue well enough - but then I suppose he won't have wanted to upset the applecart so to speak? What about the local sellers? What about the use of Liverpool with reference to education? Moore has just thrown about his usual bullshit and the awkward use of 'mate'. He's very good at it but it's just waffle that doesn't get to the crux.

I’m going to reopen the trademark thread tomorrow and will pick it up then.

[Alan_X]

In relation to FOOTBALL.


If it's true that they have kicked that one into touch then good - clearly they have seen the huge issue.

It never was an issue. Sadly, SOS jumped the gun and put out a statement full of in accuracies and misrepresentation.

The Liverpool Echo were never threatened by this. City of Liverpool FC were never threatened, the City Council were never threatened, schools, academies and colleges were never threatened. And even if the club did want to use it to attack local traders, as he pointed out, there were only 5 or so skews out of 500 independent traders product lines that would be affected.

He explained exactly why the club is doing it.

Large scale counterfeiters in China and the Far East produce millions of pounds of fake ‘official’ merchandise with ‘Liverpool’ on it. There was loads of it on sale in Kiev and Madrid. In Kiev they couldn’t do anything but could in Madrid where it had Tottenham/Liverpool on it because ‘Tottenham’ is trade marked.

[red_Mark1980]

It wasn't just SOS though. I love the stuff from HSOAB but they and Transaplino were on it from day one.

Rather than taking a second and asking the club they  (what we can a be guilty of at times)  jumped straight onto social media.

[Iska]

It was around this time last year I began to put forward the argument of getting shut or/reducing the numbers of AFQs. Then when we spoke to people casually it was astonishing how many people really had it as a huge positive for them, something they really looked forward to, often for important reasons. This came to an end around March in Ireland when it was striking the numbers who genuinely love it and cherish it. I was very much put back in my box. The challenge is to keep it fresh and we are having a go at that as much as we can.

That was pretty brave to think about moving in that direction because it must have been obvious how much it is loved.  As you say, the challenge must be keeping it fresh.  That said, changing the dynamic carries a risk too - can only speak for myself obviously, but around a quarter of them don’t hit the mark for me anymore.  Nothing you can fix I’m afraid, it’s just about the right room and you can’t go tailoring that for the likes of me - I have my favourites but others will disagree.  But when you get the right room and go deep, it’s fucking magic.

That said, AFQ Football’s just never really worked for me, no matter who’s on it.  I couldn’t even tell you why - maybe it’s never quite been clear to me what it is, is it serious or comedy or what.

[Fitzy.]

AFQ Football is the epitome of a Curate’s Egg. Certainly offering decent content but sidelined with occasional banality about inconsequential stuff that’s been asked before or is just a bit dull. TAW at its best - and why it’s emerged and sustained - focuses on interesting football issues without brevity, cliche or froth. It affords time for contributors to give their opinions in an open forum that isn’t inhibited by the trappings that mainstream broadcasters are confronted with. While AFQ football isn’t restricted by these obstacles, it goes at a pace that means its not doing anything particularly well a lot of the time.

In truth, it doesn’t sit well as part of the TAW offering because it doesn’t have a proper idea of what it’s supposed to be but somehow, at times, regards itself as an earnest football show. Don’t get me wrong, earnest is good and means this stuff is taken seriously. But shows like Wildcards offers something AFQ Footy really lacks. 

By comparison, Friday’s AFQ is a totally different beast. It works. Must be kept! 

Also...TAW IS BOSS.

[Alan_X]

It was around this time last year I began to put forward the argument of getting shut or/reducing the numbers of AFQs. Then when we spoke to people casually it was astonishing how many people really had it as a huge positive for them, something they really looked forward to, often for important reasons. This came to an end around March in Ireland when it was striking the numbers who genuinely love it and cherish it. I was very much put back in my box. The challenge is to keep it fresh and we are having a go at that as much as we can.

This evening’s AFQ was great. The cat and Adam’s ‘Fame without the trappings of fame’ among the highlights. Emilia Bonner is a really good host.

[Iska]

I think the Michael Owen interview was really good. Josh did a good job. Was robust, fair questions putting the issues directly to him and he stood up for himself and gave his perspective.

Yes it was excellent.  I’m really quite liking him now after this round of interviews - he does remind me of Kevin Keegan a lot, totally single-minded and rational, but personable with it.  He’s certainly not the oddball people say round here and he never has been - he’s just not a cool guy like Fowler.  Doesn’t make him bad.  It was also interesting to hear him let slip that he’d been mapping out the mental approach to take with young players.  I didn’t realise his job stretched that far, I thought he was just doing corporate things.

[Raaphael]

Kev Walsh keep saying that the defence don`t pass to Adrian anymore. Is that correct though? My feeling was that they passed the ball a lot to him at least in the first half against Burnley.

Also, my impression of him is that he seems generally decent with his feet with short passes. And  that it`s more in the distribution with long passes where he is not on Alisson`s level.He`s not Simon Mignolet.  Am I wrong?

[Stussy]

I like AFQ. Keep it, its fun. Just keep it refreshed with the mix of contributors and its a great listen

[Fromola]

I think the Michael Owen interview was really good. Josh did a good job. Was robust, fair questions putting the issues directly to him and he stood up for himself and gave his perspective.

It was like he was interviewing Alan Partridge. He's a strange one Owen.

He's trying to turn around how he's perceived with Liverpool fans but that went when he signed for United. I understood his point of it was either that or Hull but the trade off was any goodwill from Liverpool fans.

[NotTooXabi12]

More sweary, shouty nonsense from kev Walsh

[tmsneil]

Have to say when I used to have to drive more, AFQ was a real highlight. I often batch them up now and listen to them in bulk during internationals and they're usually still great. I think they can be very uplifting if you're feeling a bit down or lonely so that might come into the surprising feedback you've received.

Ban This Filth could be done a little more frequently but it's definitely best left as an irregular show. The format would become tiresome for listeners and guests alike I would imagine.

The bold is a very insightful point; it very much did which was the main reason for rethinking.

[Alf]

Listened to my first show for 3 months on the trademark debate and though Gibbo did a good job with it.

[Fromola]

Yes it was excellent.  I’m really quite liking him now after this round of interviews - he does remind me of Kevin Keegan a lot, totally single-minded and rational, but personable with it.  He’s certainly not the oddball people say round here and he never has been - he’s just not a cool guy like Fowler.  Doesn’t make him bad.  It was also interesting to hear him let slip that he’d been mapping out the mental approach to take with young players.  I didn’t realise his job stretched that far, I thought he was just doing corporate things.

The whole round of interviews has been about buttering up Liverpool fans, so it's likely to have that effect. He knows fans of his other clubs either hate him (Newcastle) or barely acknowledge him (United, Real Madrid, Stoke) and that won't change. Liverpool was the only success of his club career and he was a genuinely great Liverpool player. Up there in the top 5 Liverpool players of the first 10-15 years or so of the Premier League. If Liverpool fans hate him as well then it hurts his legacy a lot.

While he comes over well, there's a fair degree of spin involved and rewriting things a bit.

[gazzalfc]

The Peter Moore interview was everything I expected from the guy that tried to make the Dreamcast and EA sports a thing.

Just talk all the buzzwords and bring up all the names of independents he's bought t-shirts from (including the ones he tweeted about yesterday) and all the people involved.

It's nice that Gibbo got the access and like how they presented both sides of the fence. But when all is said and done it clarified absolutely nothing.

[Raaphael]

I have a good impression of Peter Moore. It`s very easy to slag off people. What did you want him to do?

[gazzalfc]

I have a good impression of Peter Moore. It`s very easy to slag off people. What did you want him to do?

I have the utmost respect for what he's doing for the club off the field in terms of how we are being run. He's bringing in top tier sponsorship

But when talking about the trademark issue it's really simple. Revoke and apologise. Trademarking 'Liverpool' even in a footballing sense is comical and any attempt to enforce it in the UK is only going to lead to bad PR

[Raaphael]

Not sure it`s so black and white. It`s obviously to protect the name against foreign operations taking advantage of the name. It`s not aimed at the locals. Seems like a lack of communication to me.

[bradders1011]

Re: AFQ.

There are a few contributors who often just answer "Oh I don't know" or disregard the questions they don't like. Fewer of those please.

Re: Peter Moore.

He's clearly doing excellently at his job, but you could hear the "trained" ways of speaking coming through as he sought to put minds at ease. As the discussion with SOS beforehand highlighted, we can probably trust FSG, but what comes afterwards? When Moore was dismissing concerns as "but who in their right mind would want to use this nefariously?!" the two words that sprang immediately to mind were "Steve Dale."

[gazzalfc]

Not sure it`s so black and white. It`s obviously to protect the name against foreign operations taking advantage of the name. It`s not aimed at the locals. Seems like a lack of communication to me.

The trademark (as applied for) only covers for enforcement in the UK. This wont stop blag kits or merch being made and sold in Asia, Africa and South America.

The point is that you cannot pick and choose who you enforce a trademark on. Once you have that, anything with Liverpool on (in a football sense) will be breaking trademark and can then be enforced (even if it was a cease and desist)

The worst thing about that interview is that it was more about him apologising for getting caught applying for it rather than consulting those affected 1st

[thekitkatshuffler]

Not sure it`s so black and white. It`s obviously to protect the name against foreign operations taking advantage of the name. It`s not aimed at the locals. Seems like a lack of communication to me.

The club have already taken action against small independents.  To say it's just about huge organised forgery operations is plain wrong and even if it was accurate now, who's to say it would be under whoever the next owners are?

If they're willing to take action over a piece of matchday commentary, then they don't have any boundaries.

It's a wrong-headed move and I hope it fails.

[Alan_X]

I have the utmost respect for what he's doing for the club off the field in terms of how we are being run. He's bringing in top tier sponsorship

But when talking about the trademark issue it's really simple. Revoke and apologise. Trademarking 'Liverpool' even in a footballing sense is comical and any attempt to enforce it in the UK is only going to lead to bad PR

No offence but the only reason there’s bad PR is because some people are trying to turn the issue into something it’s not. All the reasons that SOS have put forward not to do it are, to be frank, absolute bollocks. It’s a straightforward trading decision taken in order to stop large scale counterfeiting from the Far East.

If you don’t understand that then sorry. Why should the club allow millions of pounds in revenue to be lost to Chinese and far eastern counterfeiters because of a non-existent threat to local traders?

I almost pissed myself laughing when the SOS lad said that FSG saw all the Spurs fans in Madrid wearing club gear and decided that trademarking ‘Liverpool’ would somehow make all the travelling fans suddenly decide to wear replica tops. It’s ridiculous.

‘If the club trademark ‘Liverpool’ the Echo will have to change its name...’. Will it fuck. Same goes for all the small clubs around Liverpool and the City itself.

And what the fuck was that banner about? ‘It’s not a protest...’ they said, and then a massive banner goes up at the front of the Kop. What exactly is the ‘greed’ that SOS are going on about? All the revenue and profits that are staying in the club to buy £70 million players, pay their wages, recruit the best manager and back of house team?

SOS and others are still putting out stuff that is untrue. I exchanged a couple of tweets with Lucy who was in the programme and while I’m sure she’s well meaning, a load of things she was tweeting were just wrong.

I keep hearing that a UK trademark can’t stop overseas counterfeiting. 

Wrong on two counts. First, it allows imports to the UK to be impounded. Second, I order to apply for worldwide trademarks under the Madrid system of the WIPO, the first step is to register the trademark in the home country. 

Then there’s the nonsense about “they already have ‘Liverpool FC’ so why do they need ‘Liverpool’...” which just shows the naivety of anyone asking the question. If all a counterfeiter has to do to make his fake merchandise safe from trademark enforcement is use the word ‘Liverpool’ without the ‘FC’ on the end he will be laughing all the way to the bank. 

There’s a vocal minority who seem desperate for FSG to fuck up and show themselves to be evil yanks sucking the life out of the club, supported by out-of-towners and day trippers who buy Thomas Cook packages and spend fortunes in the club shop. 

Cunning Americans who have built probably the best Liverpool team I have ever seen, spent world record fees for players, got the best manager in the world, taken us to three European finals in four years, won our sixth European cup, started the season with five wins out of five, on a record winning streak... all just so that they can crush a few local traders.... the bastards!... it’s fucking obvious that’s what is driving these hedge fund yanks...

As for the ‘FSG might be alright but what happens if they sell to a bunch of c*nts?...’ well first off we’ll all have bigger fish to fry, and second, any  c*ntish new owner could probably shut down HSOAB and Transalpino using existing trademarks.

I didn’t bother opening the other thread.

[thekitkatshuffler]

Did the TAW lads throw into the running costs pot to get their pinned thread?

[Alan_X]

Did the TAW lads throw into the running costs pot to get their pinned thread?

No idea and I’m not sure who pinned it or why as there’s no real need to pin it because it’s a popular thread.

We don’t take advertising. We rely on personal donations. If any of them want to support RAWK we’d be happy to take donations.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Great post there Alan

[Alan_X]

It’s all a bit sad. I read through the ‘Liverpool have trademarked the Liverbird’ thread from nine years ago and the same arguments came out. Nine years on the city still uses the Liverbird as do hundreds of other organisations. The stalls around the ground are still there and the local retailers like HSOAB and Transalpino are still in business.

Picking up on the actual impact, I had a look at Transalpino’s website and on 6 pages there wasn’t one that would be affected by this. The Kirkdale Boxing Club logo might be an issue because they’ve used the club’s Liverbird design on a version of the old LFC badge for some reason and Ajax and the David Bowie estate might have a word. If this was designed to stop the sale of Transalpino gear it’s utterly pointless.

HSOAB have a few items that could be affected but North Face and Adidas would also be  interested.

Love Follow Conquer - similar situation. A couple of lines that might be an issue.

The whole point about this stuff is that it’s not trying to look like official club product. Even if the club were trying to put them out of business it wouldn’t increase sales of club merchandise. ‘Oh no, I can’t buy Transalpino, I’d better shoot off and pick up a replica top from the club shop...’  it’s ridiculous.

[red_Mark1980]

On Owen.

Its amazing how much it's not his fault. Any "normal" person wouldn't think like that.

I'm not blaming Brendan or Rafa. Well good. You're the one who signed for that shambles. You're the one who let your contract run down so we got Nunez and a packet of skips.

You're the one who spoke how great it was to sign for Mr. Ferguson.

I wanted to come back. Well happy days lad. Shouldn't we be thankful.

Enjoy retirement

[Jookie]

On Owen.

Its amazing how much it's not his fault. Any "normal" person wouldn't think like that.

From my experience most people will try and justify the decisions they make to themselves and others. Particularly if those decisions are unpopular and/or prove unsuccessful.

Michael Owen left us when his contract was running down. Others players have done that in the past. No idea why he didn't sign a new contract and if that was his and/or the club's fault. It didn't matter. The money we got for him helped fund, in part, the Alonso and Garcia purchases.

We won the Champion's League and that formed the foundation for a 3-4 year period of really good football and the most competitive team we'd had in while. A few years later we had Fernando Torres playing up front, whilst Michael Owen was struggling with injuries and a shadow of the player he once was.

He joined Manchester United. Yes it hurt a bit at the time. But it didn't really mean that much. He went there as a peripheral player. Someone who was no way near the player he was. At the time it was a decision I didn't agree with.

As a match going fan Michael Owen gave me some of the best moments following the Reds. The FA Cup Final in 2001 is the prime example. Other won't agree but I'm at the stage, and have been for years,where I've forgiven him for United. I've forgiven him for any blame he has associated with his exit. The good he did far outweighs the bad.

In the TAW interview I thought Owen came across as someone who sounded like they very much still loved the club and someone who regretted his decisions. I didn't think he was trying to blame anyone for how things turned out. In fact I think he was at pains to point out that he attached no blame to anyone. It was interesting to hear him discuss his career decisions and so passionately defend his case. I don't agree with everything he did. I still don't after the interview. But if it's true that upon leaving Newcastle he had a choice of Hull (and moving away from his family), United or retiring then I'm not really sure if he had that much of a choice. Not as much as I, and probably others, thought at the time.

[Fromola]

On Owen.

Its amazing how much it's not his fault. Any "normal" person wouldn't think like that.

I'm not blaming Brendan or Rafa. Well good. You're the one who signed for that shambles. You're the one who let your contract run down so we got Nunez and a packet of skips.

You're the one who spoke how great it was to sign for Mr. Ferguson.

I wanted to come back. Well happy days lad. Shouldn't we be thankful.

Enjoy retirement

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Fool me thrice . . 

Rafa was never going to take the bait a third time with Owen. He may still have fucked him over again when United came in but he could never trust a player who fucked him over twice, no matter how much Carra or Gerrard might have wanted him back.

[red_Mark1980]

To me it sounded like he was trying too hard.

On the trademark pod I thought the SOS did themselves no favours.

The talk of Apple and the Beatles was mad. The link between the tat on sale outsode the ground and Barcelona was frankly ridiculous.

The guy opened up talking about greed. Despite the owners not.taking money out of the club.

Moore came across as a slick CEO very much on a positive PR spin. Which is exactly what you'd expect. But ultimately his points are valid.

I know I'll get pelters for daring to question SOS