People end up forced into extreme positions that they might not otherwise take because of the vitriol and the endless drone of posts criticising the owners. You can't have a middle ground, because it doesn't work on the internet.
I think FSG are decent owners. I don't think they're great owners, and I think much they have done could have been improved upon. Trying to charge £77 for tickets was a mistake and the protest was an excellent move to push back on that. But then, FSG responded and changed their plans in that regard (though they are often accused of not listening to the fans). It shouldn't have happened in the first place but it's an issue that has been, for a time anyway, resolved.
To those who dislike them they are parasites whose sole focus is corporate gain and financial greed, who are happy to trample on the club and sell its traditions and atmosphere at any price and at whatever cost to the club. When you are of this view, an objective discussion becomes pointless. You can't make rational points about them bringing financial stability to a club that was nearly bankrupt, about growing commercial revenues to make the club's long term growth sustainable, about FINALLY increasing Anfield's capacity after decades of inaction (because apparently it wasn't enough), about bringing in the best manager the club has had in decades and footing the bill for the players he has sought, about steadying our ship to get us back into the CL etc etc etc. You can't draw comparisons to other owners - the likes of Mike Ashley who treat fans with conempt, foreign owners representing states, organisations or interests with murky human rights records or questionable sources of income, owners who mortgage the futures of clubs with years of financial mismanagement.
I support fan protests and the work done by supporters groups but I think many of the criticisms they have over the ownership are more with the way modern football has developed than anything FSG are doing per se. I think often this ire would be better directed at the Premier League, or sponsors, or Sky etc etc. I still respect what they're aiming for, I can just see it from the perspective of the ownership too, a viewpoint which seems so alien to some that they won't countenance it.
All this difficult nuanced debate is lost, because people who hate our owners have such entrenched positions about it that any discussion with any nuance becomes impossible. So, as with politics, the people who are happy enough with FSG broadly get pushed into a staunch defence and we have the same boring f*cking discussions OVER and OVER again with the same characters. It's tedious and it ruins thread after thread here.
Very well said.
Having stepped back from the acrimonious discussion, I am starting to realise what the origin of the view as represented by people like Al, Graham, and stevensr123 is.
It stems from the growing realisation that the local fan (for Top Six clubs in general, not LFC specifically) is becoming less relevant to the success (and value) of football clubs (emptyhad and blue plastics are hapless and abject examples).
Football has been sanitised and repackaged into a global 'product' that sells eyeballs to TV advertiser, sporting good manufacturers and clothing retailers. In this context, local fans exist simply to provide 'colour', a backdrop for the stage if you will, important but not absolutely essential (as bitter a pill as that may be to swallow)..
It is this reality that the local fan is railing against, the loss of relevance, the feeling that their passion has been stolen from them.
I don't know what the answer is, I only know that the advent of easy communication and technology that allows you to 'be there' via a screen has changed football (and other sports) forever. I also know that locals fighting non-locals is the incorrect path.
The only thing that I can hold onto is that all of us want the same thing - a strong, vibrant club that enjoys success in the top flight.
Something that genuinely baffles me is how a section of the local fans can
a. begrudge the non -locals a mere 15% allocation, and
b. fail to recognise that without the non-local that LFC would not be remotely close to competing for the footballing talent that is the lifeblood of success.
The reality is that we have to find some kind of balance and that vitriolic responses to each other are counter productive.
