Qatari company seek to Sponsor LFC and rename Anfield (?)

The thing is as long as the name itself isn't affected the vast majority of fans will grumble for a few weeks then forget about it, I'm not keen but if it happens then we'll move on to something else pretty soon.

Is nothing Sacred? 

The heart and soul of football is slowly being eaten away by commercial interests. I don't buy the 'it's the modern way' line..that way just alienates the fans even more.


They can Ooredoo one and f*** off........

Give over lad..

American owners are a shower of sh*te.. These included

I'm not sure what their nationality has to do with anything. Or are you simply trying to press buttons for the sake of invoking a response?

And what does "give over" mean? Might be useful for me to know in the event of future discussions.

I don't care how many owners fall into that category but I do want the owners of this club to back up what they actually say and stop talking sh*te just to try and keep fans on side.

Poor logical assertion, fans have never been on their side.

Curiously what have they not backed up though? Has Anfield already been renamed or are we engaging in our usual over reaction to something that "could" happen but actually hasn't yet?  (Like the selling of Agger last window)

I'm not sure what their nationality has to do with anything. Or are you simply trying to press buttons for the sake of invoking a response?

And what does "give over" mean? Might be useful for me to know in the event of future discussions.

Not in the way that you need to defend a nation, I'm not having a go at that.
But American owners are all here for one reason and it's to try and take a slice of the pie, they have zero interest in the sport and have seen money flood into the game and want their part of that..
The last lot ran us into debt, these are cementing us as a mid table club.. Lerner at Villa is no better.. The Glazers at Utd have just buried them in debt whilst taking money from the club from time to time, they have a successful club so it's easier to mask the problems long term they could be causing.

I wish football hadn't sold its soul, I wish the American business men hadn't tried to try and take money ( badly) from something they don't understand.

Say what you want about the Shieks at City or the Russians at Chelsea they can bank roll it without the need to just try to take money from the club.
Had they not seen an opportunity to try and make money they wouldn't be here and they are doing nothing to make us competitive.

So no im not looking for a rise I'm just giving my opinion on the American businessmen who are try to make money off football and running clubs down.
We are now a mid table side, having two sets of American owners has done that for us.

Poor logical assertion, fans have never been on their side.

Curiously what have they not backed up though? Has Anfield already been renamed or are we engaging in our usual over reaction to something that "could" happen but actually hasn't yet?  (Like the selling of Agger last window)

A lot of the stunts they pull are an attempt to get the fan base on side.. Just because it's not worked doesn't mean they aren't attempting it.

What have they backed up? There are plenty of examples of things that haven't happened, ie Agger, if the rumours were true that is, we will never know if city were interested or if it was media speculation, as a lot of transfers are.
But what have they done? Are we competetive? Are we playing in a new stadium? Or a refurbed one yet? They may not have promised a specific date but it's been 3 years now and that hasn't even got started..
Maybe the stuff Torres hinted at when he left about them were true.
Have they made many mistakes? By learning the game? As of yet they still know nothing about it.

I'm not expecting you to change your mind on them but ive firmly made mine up.. We won't be competetive under them as owners.

There may well be nothing in this story, but even it being out and on the table for discussion shows where the sport is now.. And these types of leech owners have put the sport where it is..

Not in the way that you need to defend a nation, I'm not having a go at that.
But American owners are all here for one reason and it's to try and take a slice of the pie, they have zero interest in the sport and have seen money flood into the game and want their part of that..
The last lot ran us into debt, these are cementing us as a mid table club.. Lerner at Villa is no better.. The Glazers at Utd have just buried them in debt whilst taking money from the club from time to time, they have a successful club so it's easier to mask the problems long term they could be causing.

I wish football hadn't sold its soul, I wish the American business men hadn't tried to try and take money ( badly) from something they don't understand.

Say what you want about the Shieks at City or the Russians at Chelsea they can bank roll it without the need to just try to take money from the club.
Had they not seen an opportunity to try and make money they wouldn't be here and they are doing nothing to make us competitive.

So no im not looking for a rise I'm just giving my opinion on the American businessmen who are try to make money off football and running clubs down.
We are now a mid table side, having two sets of American owners has done that for us.

American Owners in the MLS are doing pretty well. Having turned that league into a reasonably well known and reasonably well skilled (compared to other leagues it's size) league. So in that sense, your logic is skewed and it seems you are arguing more out of emotion than out of objectivity. You do have points about their lack of knowledge of the game and I do believe that FSG saw an opportunity (challenge?) to get involved in the biggest "Soccer" league in the world and have a go at being successful. I will at least give them credit for trying to do things without infusing huge amounts of debt into the club ala the Glazers, but I still contend that if FSG were doing what the Glazers have done with United that most on here would overlook the debt indescretions.

So yes, while some of the American owners in the EPL fit your indictment, American owners of "soccer" franchises in general do not as a whole. Also, the talk of the Sheiks and Russians is comical. They don't know anything more about football than the EPL's American owners, they just have enough money to cover up their ignorance (or to display it for all to see depending on your perspective).

Everyone talks about the sport losing it's soul but part of the reason it has is due to the out of control spending endorsed by those same Russian and Sheik owners.

As for making us competitive, sure they could probably do that really quickly by spending boat loads of money on transfers and such but once again, with FFP and debt coming into the picture I'm not sure it's as cut and dry as you make it out to be.

I doubt anyone out there would be willing to buy this club and then pour 200 million dollars into it for transfers and a new stadium. And even if they could, would it be legal with FFP?

I would have no problem with FSG leaving if someone better were to come along. But there's also a chance that you get someone worse than FSG because WE don't have any control over who buys the club.

Still be Anfield to every like-minded supporter out there no matter how they rename it!

So yes, while some of the American owners in the EPL fit your indictment, American owners of "soccer" franchises in general do not as a whole. Also, the talk of the Sheiks and Russians is comical. They don't know anything more about football than the EPL's American owners, they just have enough money to cover up their ignorance (or to display it for all to see depending on your perspective).
 

Wrong, just look at the set-up they have behind the scenes at City & Chelsea they have some of the very best men in the business & as for lack of Knowledge of the game from Arab or Russian owners one thing you have to give them credit for is their Knowledge of making a team competetive.

They know the more you strip a team bare & expect youth to pick up the baton the further more you are likely to be in a relegation scrap  (Villa) or become a mediocre club (LFC) both american owned.

American Owners in the MLS are doing pretty well. Having turned that league into a reasonably well known and reasonably well skilled (compared to other leagues it's size) league. So in that sense, your logic is skewed and it seems you are arguing more out of emotion than out of objectivity. You do have points about their lack of knowledge of the game and I do believe that FSG saw an opportunity (challenge?) to get involved in the biggest "Soccer" league in the world and have a go at being successful. I will at least give them credit for trying to do things without infusing huge amounts of debt into the club ala the Glazers, but I still contend that if FSG were doing what the Glazers have done with United that most on here would overlook the debt indescretions.

So yes, while some of the American owners in the EPL fit your indictment, American owners of "soccer" franchises in general do not as a whole. Also, the talk of the Sheiks and Russians is comical. They don't know anything more about football than the EPL's American owners, they just have enough money to cover up their ignorance (or to display it for all to see depending on your perspective).

Everyone talks about the sport losing it's soul but part of the reason it has is due to the out of control spending endorsed by those same Russian and Sheik owners.

As for making us competitive, sure they could probably do that really quickly by spending boat loads of money on transfers and such but once again, with FFP and debt coming into the picture I'm not sure it's as cut and dry as you make it out to be.

I doubt anyone out there would be willing to buy this club and then pour 200 million dollars into it for transfers and a new stadium. And even if they could, would it be legal with FFP?

I would have no problem with FSG leaving if someone better were to come along. But there's also a chance that you get someone worse than FSG because WE don't have any control over who buys the club.

You can't compare the MLS to European football..
FFP is a sham that won't work there will always be ways around it.

I honestly can't be bothered to debate it. You have your view which you're entitled to, I can have mine, I don't like them, rate them, think we will ever be competetive under them.. Their ways and decisions have set us back and we are firmly a mid table side who won't compete under their vision.

They brought us for a bargain, they are stabilising us to sell on at some point at a profit, that's all they are interested in .. Profit..
Their intentions of making us competetive and getting CL football again has proved bigger than they imagined and they won't invest to do so when that will cost them long term when they plan on selling.
If people think selling at a profit isn't their long term vision then they must be on a different planet..
You're right we don't have any say in who they sell to and they won't care.. Whoever pays the most.

While we, the fans have to watch this once great club sink into mediocrity at their hands.

If you want to enjoy that ride go ahead.. I support this club in every way I can and that won't change but I won't pretend and live in hope that these are the right people to move us forward.

They are just business men, we are no less weetabix to FSG than we were to Tom Hicks

If it means we have more funds for transfers etc i am all for it but dont want us to become a man city or chelsea! We need money to compete for major titles its simple as that!

Wrong, just look at the set-up they have behind the scenes at City & Chelsea they have some of the very best men in the business & as for lack of Knowledge of the game from Arab or Russian owners one thing you have to give them credit for is their Knowledge of making a team competetive.

They know the more you strip a team bare & expect youth to pick up the baton the further more you are likely to be in a relegation scrap  (Villa) or become a mediocre club (LFC) both american owned.

And for all of the great setup and people behind the scenes at City and Chelsea what have they won this year?

Oh that's right....nothing.

If Roman knew football he wouldn't change managers everytime he sneezed...and it doesn't matter who he puts in charge because he's the mad hatter that has the final say in everything that goes on.

It's funny, you guys think I'm defending FSG, I'm not, they haven't shown to be anything special and I couldn't care less if they moved on. The only point I'm trying to make is that we could have a lot worse owners than we do so be careful what you wish for. That's all I'm going to say on it because I feel like we are muddying up this thread and I apologize to the thread starter for my part in that. You guys are entitled to your opinion, just don't be so quick to think you know mine.

And for all of the great setup and people behind the scenes at City and Chelsea what have they won this year?

Oh that's right....nothing.

If Roman knew football he wouldn't change managers everytime he sneezed...and it doesn't matter who he puts in charge because he's the mad hatter that has the final say in everything that goes on.

It's funny, you guys think I'm defending FSG, I'm not, they haven't shown to be anything special and I couldn't care less if they moved on. The only point I'm trying to make is that we could have a lot worse owners than we do so be careful what you wish for. That's all I'm going to say on it because I feel like we are muddying up this thread and I apologize to the thread starter for my part in that. You guys are entitled to your opinion, just don't be so quick to think you know mine.

How many managers have we had under FSG in 3 years?

And for all of the great setup and people behind the scenes at City and Chelsea what have they won this year?

Oh that's right....nothing.

If Roman knew football he wouldn't change managers everytime he sneezed...and it doesn't matter who he puts in charge because he's the mad hatter that has the final say in everything that goes on.

Is the season over yet? Chelsea could still win the Europa Cup & City could still win the FA Cup.

Abromovich changes managers has been nothing short of success for him as they have almost won every major Trophy since his takeover, i dont agree with his method but there is madness to it.

Not really a lot of point for a forum then is there, that can be said for about any post on here

I'm not saying it shouldn't be discussed, I'm just saying I'm not going to get on my soap box about it either way. I can see the pros and cons but when all's said and done, the decision will not be made by us.

Let them rename Fenway Park first and see how that goes down.

What next?  Change the colour of our kit?  Add a sponsors name into our nickname or club name?  How about changing the Liverpool badge so that the Liverbird is using a phone manufactured by this Qatari telecom company?  Why don't we melt down all the trophies we've won in the last 120 years and get the scrap value towards the transfer budget?

You have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.  Some things shouldn't be sold off.  If they aren't going to build a new stadium then they don't need the money to rebrand the ground.

Ahead of a season when they are about to coin in an extra £35M from improved TV deals I can't even believe we are having this discussion.

If there were any meat on this bone it would be one hell of a paradox - the value Americans put on history and tradition while our owners are apparently prepared to put a price on any aspect of LFC's pedigree.
Money, louder and words spring to mind.

the value Americans put on history and tradition

Americans as a whole value $$$$$$

History and tradition are valued only when convenient and cheap.

Most American sports venues are sponsored in this day and age. There are very few (including Fenway) that retain their historical name.

I wouldn't rename the stadium to be honest. Especially when we're staying at Anfield. New stadium I could understand.

But if they want to slap Ooredoo all over the advertising boards in the ground, on our shirts and rename the stands bar the Kop then I'm fine with that as long as we get a lot of £££.

But if they want to slap Ooredoo all over the advertising boards in the ground, on our shirts and rename the stands bar the Kop then I'm fine with that as long as we get a lot of £££.

That exactly what I've been thinking this is all about. Not renaming, just becoming our new sponsor. The notions of renaming Anfield are nonsense.

I dont like the idea of the stadium being renamed.... Anfield is Anfield .
     But sentimental value wont buy world class players so as long as the money is invested the right way i could maybe cope .

Let them rename Fenway Park first and see how that goes down.

What next?  Change the colour of our kit?  Add a sponsors name into our nickname or club name?  How about changing the Liverpool badge so that the Liverbird is using a phone manufactured by this Qatari telecom company?  Why don't we melt down all the trophies we've won in the last 120 years and get the scrap value towards the transfer budget?

You have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.  Some things shouldn't be sold off.  If they aren't going to build a new stadium then they don't need the money to rebrand the ground.

Ahead of a season when they are about to coin in an extra £35M from improved TV deals I can't even believe we are having this discussion.

Pretty much sums it up for me.

I don't see this happening even if FSG want it too as I don't see us as fans as accepting it.

Be nice to knee-jerk and get frothy at the mouth after there is something a bit more to go off of.

It's article is written at a supporter website that is quoting a newspaper who was quoting a director of a foreign company , but nothing confirmed by anyone.


This part of the article:

"“We want to sponsor the club in full. We want to sponsor the Stadium (possibly rename it) as well as the club’s kits. Our goal is to reach the Asian markets where the Premier League has an enormous fan base.”

See the parenthesis under (possibly rename it) if that was a direct quote then it would not be like that, it would be part of the quote, so that is a supposition made by either the TIA writer or the Al Jazeera writer not a quote by the company official.

So we are officially beginning operation knee-jerk 04-2013 based of an idea of a reporter that heard 2nd hand that a company had been looking (perhaps) at LFC to sponsor.