Fans protesting against away ticket prices

George I will spell it out for you once again,the history book has many many instances of L.F.C. buying players for record club and national record transfer fees.I do not ever recall the club saying they will have to put the price of admission to Anfield because they bought a player for a record fee.Also if you check you will see some of those players were only teenagers when they signed for us.

Excellent - the difference is the record fees back then werent exactly like we see now - same with the wages and pretty much everything.

You cant compare backwards

Excellent - the difference is the record fees back then werent exactly like we see now - same with the wages and pretty much everything.

You cant compare backwards

How do you know that  and why can't I compare back.My life has been toyally immersed in Liverpool Football Club and I feel that I am in a position compare L.F.C. from the 1940s to the present day.Do not have the audacity to tell me that I cannot compare.

How do you know that  and why can't I compare back.My life has been toyally immersed in Liverpool Football Club and I feel that I am in a position compare L.F.C. from the 1940s to the present day.Do not have the audacity to tell me that I cannot compare.

Billy - everything in football has got more expensive , back then you didnt have Arab or Russian Billionares forcing the transfer fees and wages up - even policing games has increased massivly in price.

To match those costs the clubs need to generate money.

Billy - everything in football has got more expensive , back then you didnt have Arab or Russian Billionares forcing the transfer fees and wages up - even policing games has increased massivly in price.

To match those costs the clubs need to generate money.

Do you  think that when Tommy Trinder made the Fulham captain the countries first 100 quid a week footballer the clubs put the cost of going to the match up.In the day when a working man was earning about 10 quid a week  a 100 quid seemed out of this world.You ar right we did not have Arab or Russian billionaires back then ,we had men who bought shares in the club because of their love of the club.That is the big difference between the likes of Fenway and those loyal Liverpool shareholders, to Fenway it is only a business. 

To most owners it's either a business or a play thing.

Football is now a business - it's one of the biggest businesses in the world now.

Clubs need businessmen in their clubs to enhance their finances and get as much income as they can to allow more money to be spent on the team at the wishes of the fans

To most owners it's either a business or a play thing.

Football is now a business - it's one of the biggest businesses in the world now.

Clubs need businessmen in their clubs to enhance their finances and get as much income as they can to allow more money to be spent on the team at the wishes of the fans

Do you  think that T.V,Williams,H.Cartwright,H.K.Latham.R.L.Martindale,John Smith,Sid Reakes, C.J.Hill, E.A. Sawyer,H.E. Roberts were not businessmen.They were all businessmen who invested in Liverpool Football Club shares.And whats more they all had a love of the club.They were the men who Bill Shankly said were only there to sign the cheques,imagine Brendan Rodgers telling John Henry he is only there to sign the cheques,his feet would not touch the ground.By the way those Directors were instrumental in the appointment of a Mr William Shankly as manager of L.F.C. in December 1959.A little bit of my memories for you George.

It's all fond memories Billy and I wish modern football was that pure instead of being about money.

but that did include a pie and a pint Billy

You could certainly get a pie in those days walton but no pints I'm afraid. Supporters used to get their ale prior to going into the ground,hence the need to have an Echo with them.

How do you know that  and why can't I compare back.My life has been toyally immersed in Liverpool Football Club and I feel that I am in a position compare L.F.C. from the 1940s to the present day.Do not have the audacity to tell me that I cannot compare.

You keep on sharing your memories Billy ,as i for one love listening to tales of days gone by ,shared many a night in the pub with me old friend who shared stories with me that were a privilage to listen too.

 Thanks Andy,I appreciate your post and thoughts,cheers REDS for ever and ever.

You could certainly get a pie in those days walton but no pints I'm afraid. Supporters used to get their ale prior to going into the ground,hence the need to have an Echo with them.

Echo? Only if it was an evening KO.

Echo? Only if it was an evening KO.

I think you will find they used to have an early edition of the Echo in those days,in fact we had the Echo,the Daily Post and the Evening Express. I can't quite remember if the Evening Express had Liverpool in it's title but I am sure it did.

I think you will find they used to have an early edition of the Echo in those days,in fact we had the Echo,the Daily Post and the Evening Express. I can't quite remember if the Evening Express had Liverpool in it's title but I am sure it did.

Said before mate can remember the Footie Echo being sold in the ground late 80s and outside the ground right up to the mid 90s, especially on a saturday.

Said before mate can remember the Footie Echo being sold in the ground late 80s and outside the ground right up to the mid 90s, especially on a saturday.

Huyton I have a feeling the early edition of the Echo used to come out about 12 0r 1 o clock even many years before the 80s for as long as i remember.However this should not detract from the fact that the cost of going to the match is exhorbitant for the working man.

Amy Lawrence ‏@amylawrence71
Interesting leaflet about ticket prices is due to appear at a couple of PL grounds tomorrow. Courtesy of @JayMcKenna87

http://t.co/Ssj86wBv

Image from twitter.
For Arsenal game.

Never does a bad article this lad:

Tickets: We’re paying the price for tribalism

by Gareth Roberts // 7 February 2013 // @robbohuyton


FOOTBALL, as Jimmy Greaves said on more than one occasion, is a funny old game.
 
It still is. But now it’s not just the game that is ‘funny’ – it’s the ever increasing circus that continually performs around it, even when no actual football is being played.
 
Once upon a time, being a football supporter was easy. You paid at the turnstile, watched the match and then headed for the pub or returned home.
 
You’d talk through the game with friends and family, watch Match of the Day and that was that. On Sunday and Monday newspaper reports would sate the appetite for further analysis and discussion and by Monday night it was pretty much all over until the next game.
 
The game then was affordable, enjoyable and, perhaps crucially, not over analysed. It felt like an escape – it was fun. That’s not to say there was any less passion for it. Fans were still 100 per cent engrossed in their club and the sport. Crowds were noisy, arguably more so than now.
 
Football was taken just as seriously, but time and effort was channelled much differently. Attending top-level games didn’t require the sacrifices, financially and time-wise, that it does today. For most it was case of turn up, pay and watch – no membership schemes, booking fees, telephone queuing systems or registering online.
 
Without the internet, rolling sports news and the proliferation of televised games, football felt special and was treated as such. Conversations centred around the players and the game itself, not finance, not owners, not regulation and not an ever-changing football ‘issue’.
 
Now, the world that revolves around football seems to have lost sight of what is important.
 
No longer is the focus solely on players and managers. Now there is constant moralising and courting of controversy. Conflict is sought and stirred with loaded questioning and agenda-ridden reporting. Dumbed-down doses of tribal bait are constantly laid, even by the mainstream media these days. Even the BBC Sport website was recently tweeting to ask ‘What is the biggest club in England?’
 
Who cares?
 
Message-boards, blogs, websites, Twitter and Facebook buzz non-stop with everything ranging from sensible discussion and tactical analysis to bile, bigotry and hatred.
 
Separating the wheat from the chaff can often be an arduous and soul-sapping task, one that adds to the cumulative effect of modern-football fatigue. A world where any sensible discussion about the game is constantly drowned out by the current five minutes of shame is a world that quickly becomes intensely frustrating.
 
Take some of the real issues among match-going football supporters, like ticket pricing. Whatever agendas exist, this is a topic that should be top of them. Yet, too often, it’s a mere whisper as all around shout about that week’s manufactured outrage.
 
The gradual pricing out of a generation of fans from top-level football has eaten away at the game year on year since the Premier League was formed in 1992. The BBC’s Price of Football survey puts it to the forefront of the news agenda once a year, while The Guardian’s David Conn has also penned a series of excellent articles on the subject.
 
Those sources aside it’s barely registered in the grand scheme of things; the discussion has been from far from sustained. Mass media analysis of the great ticket rip off has very much been the exception rather than the rule with the Premier League’s PR arm trotting out facts and figures about how full grounds are in an effort to dampen any interest in the topic.
 
That of course spectacularly misses the point. Bums on seats doesn’t equate to quality of supporter. And when clubs are so keen to sell the atmosphere at games, it is deeply flawed logic that dictates a pricing policy which is increasingly meaning the very people who create that atmosphere – the loyal, long term, passionate supporters – are walking away from the game they love because they can no longer afford it.
 
But there is growing evidence that football supporters can influence the agenda. The start of 2013 has brought with it some strong suggestions that the tipping point has arrived when it comes to paying extortionate prices to watch the game.
 
The news that Manchester City sent back almost a third of their ticket allocation at Arsenal after fans baulked at the £62 price tag for their match at The Emirates made national news.
 
It was quickly followed by news that Liverpool and Manchester United supporters – two of the biggest and most organised fanbases in the country due to ownership issues past and present – would put rivalries aside to work with the Football Supporters’ Federation and Supporters Direct to campaign for a maximum away ticket price in the Premier League of £20-25.
 
Already huge disparities exist, not just between grounds but based on who the away team is. Liverpool fans, for example, also faced a £62 bill for an away end ticket for The Emirates as, like City, it was deemed to be a ‘Category A’ game.
 
Conversely, Stoke City fans will pay £32.50 for an away end Premier League ticket at The Emirates as it deemed to be a ‘Category B’ game.
 
As staggering as it is, this breaks no rules. The only rule clubs in the top flight must comply with is that away fans are charged the same as home fans.
 
Protesting against what is essentially a tax on the travelling fans of so-called bigger clubs is nothing new. In 2007 a group of Manchester United fans organised a boycott of food, drink and programmes when visiting Craven Cottage. There United supporters were charged £45 for their match with Fulham in the same season that Manchester City fans had paid £25.
 
Football Supporters Federation chairman Malcolm Clarke has estimated that the new Premier League TV deal – worth upwards of £4billion – means that top flight clubs could cut ALL tickets by £32 and suffer no loss in income due to the increase in the share of the TV pot.
 
He said: “There are many ways of measuring what is the best league. But if you look at the Bundesliga, where fans can attend matches for 15 Euros, stand up, have a pint if they wish, and even get a ticket for the metrolink, it seems the Premier League is short changing its own supporters.
 
“This business of categorising matches is blatantly unfair. Just because Manchester City have a lot of money doesn’t mean their supporters have, and the same is true of the other teams who get charged the highest prices every time they play.
 
“And if they are starting to say enough is enough, and that in turn affects the atmosphere within the stadiums, will it retain its worldwide popularity? I am not so sure it will.
 
“This is a real test for the Premier League. They seem to think football is immune from the economic situation elsewhere. But it isn’t. And how it responds – especially next year – will shape the game for years to come.”
 
As refreshing as this chink in the armour of the capitalist machine was, what was also telling – and depressing – was how the message was again blurred by the football circus.
 
So Arsene Wenger, reportedly the fourth highest paid manager in the world on £7.5m a year, had this to say as the debate on ticket prices raged: “They [the fans] have a choice.
 
“They can choose to go to Manchester United. They can choose to go to Manchester City. They can choose to go to Barcelona. You can choose to go to the theatre or not. Of course it’s fair.”
 
That a millionaire Premier League manager is out of touch with supporters is perhaps no surprise. More worrying were the comments made to the media by Paul Matz, of the Arsenal Independent Supporters’ Association.
 
He said: “It’s not the first time that City have not sold their full allocation, and previously City were not a category A club, so ticket prices were only half the cost.
 
“City have got where they are by importing a sugar daddy, rather than through their own efforts, mirroring what happened at Chelsea a few years ago, so it’s bound to take a while before the level of their fan base catches up.”
 
Yes, damn those City fans and their incomes that don’t match the bank balance of one of the richest men in the world… It shouldn’t need spelling out – it’s the clubs that are rich, not the fans.
 
Sadly, Paul Matz wasn’t alone in allowing club loyalty to cloud what is an issue for ALL football fans.
 
Yet the deep irony is that if fans like him could take the blinkers off, tear down the club-coloured walls and work together for the common good, something could be achieved.
 
Nobody – not the clubs, not the TV companies, not anyone else connected with selling the ‘product’ of football in England – wants empty seats or campaigning supporters distracting from the action on the pitch.
 
But the appetite for protest, for boycotts, or even sensible discussion among fans is tempered by tribalism and one-upmanship.
 
In Germany, the same situation united fans. They protested together. Here? Here, we actually have fans that defend the ever-increasing prices; that defend the gentrification of the game and that deliver such gems as “You can’t afford it? Tough.”
 
So finally the media are listening. Finally the clubs are worried. And what do fans do? Wrap themselves up in tit-for-tat nonsense that benefits nobody.
 
It really is a funny old game.

http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2013/02/tickets-were-paying-the-price-for-tribalism/