RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are. A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres. I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts. The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference. RaulRaj, 35 Singapore

The Bradford Bugler wrote:
Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

The Bradford Bugler wrote:
Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

The Bradford Bugler wrote:
Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

The Bradford Bugler wrote:
Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

The Bradford Bugler wrote:

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future. "A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

The Bradford Bugler wrote:

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future. "A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

The Bradford Bugler wrote:

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future. "A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

The Bradford Bugler wrote:

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future. "A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

The Bantams side won the Fort Lowell shoot-out in Arizona, rattling in 21 goals in their four games

The Bantams side won the Fort Lowell shoot-out in Arizona, rattling in 21 goals in their four games

The Bantams side won the Fort Lowell shoot-out in Arizona, rattling in 21 goals in their four games

The Bantams side won the Fort Lowell shoot-out in Arizona, rattling in 21 goals in their four games

Stan Jessop wrote:
My dream of a "Young Squad of Stuart McCall's", developed from the Youth Development programme, has been shattered yet again. I recall a young player going from City to Man.Utd.(Thomson--I think?). He was equally showing great 'Starlet' promise. He did not get into their first team. He went to a lower league club, and suffered a broken leg etc. If the Youth Development programme and all the other 'Associations with other European Clubs etc.Is to make Bradford City a 'FEEDER CLUB'. Then these young 'Starlets' will continue to become dis-illusioned and BCFC, will remain in the Second Division.

Stan Jessop wrote:
My dream of a "Young Squad of Stuart McCall's", developed from the Youth Development programme, has been shattered yet again. I recall a young player going from City to Man.Utd.(Thomson--I think?). He was equally showing great 'Starlet' promise. He did not get into their first team. He went to a lower league club, and suffered a broken leg etc. If the Youth Development programme and all the other 'Associations with other European Clubs etc.Is to make Bradford City a 'FEEDER CLUB'. Then these young 'Starlets' will continue to become dis-illusioned and BCFC, will remain in the Second Division.

Stan Jessop wrote:
My dream of a "Young Squad of Stuart McCall's", developed from the Youth Development programme, has been shattered yet again. I recall a young player going from City to Man.Utd.(Thomson--I think?). He was equally showing great 'Starlet' promise. He did not get into their first team. He went to a lower league club, and suffered a broken leg etc. If the Youth Development programme and all the other 'Associations with other European Clubs etc.Is to make Bradford City a 'FEEDER CLUB'. Then these young 'Starlets' will continue to become dis-illusioned and BCFC, will remain in the Second Division.

Stan Jessop wrote:
My dream of a "Young Squad of Stuart McCall's", developed from the Youth Development programme, has been shattered yet again. I recall a young player going from City to Man.Utd.(Thomson--I think?). He was equally showing great 'Starlet' promise. He did not get into their first team. He went to a lower league club, and suffered a broken leg etc. If the Youth Development programme and all the other 'Associations with other European Clubs etc.Is to make Bradford City a 'FEEDER CLUB'. Then these young 'Starlets' will continue to become dis-illusioned and BCFC, will remain in the Second Division.

The Bradford Bugler wrote:

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future. "A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

The Bradford Bugler wrote:

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future. "A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

The Bradford Bugler wrote:

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future. "A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

The Bradford Bugler wrote:

JM wrote:

The Bradford Bugler wrote: Very eloquent RaulRaj and you have my sympathies. However, I don't understand what your post has to do with Bradford City losing a promising youngster to Liverpool. City might be celebrating the success of their youth set up, but what's the point if all the talent is going to get snapped up before they've even tasted first team football at Valley Parade? It's now official - we are a feeder club for Liverpool and anyone else who wants to come and plunder the youth we are producing.

for goodness sake, he's a 14 year old kid. no disrespect but there are no guarantees he will make it at Liverpool, or that he ever would at City. It does not make us a feeder club or, by your logic, some of the youngsters we snap up from premiership clubs (eg Medley)makes them feeder clubs of ours. At the end of the day our youth set up has just helped us earn a decent amount of money for a player who may never make it. That has to be good news for us. good luck to the kid and I hope he makes it, but I don't see why we have any compliants.

Sorry, I thought that City are strapped for cash and the whole point of setting up a youth academy, call iit what you want, was to produce home grown players without the need to keep signing two bit loan players all the time in the future. "A decent amount of money". I don't see any mention of an actual figure!

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are.

A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres.

I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts.

The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference.

RaulRaj, 35
Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are.

A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres.

I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts.

The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference.

RaulRaj, 35
Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are.

A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres.

I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts.

The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference.

RaulRaj, 35
Singapore

RaulRaj wrote:
I shall not begin with my emotional affiliations with LFC throughout my lifetime. We all are.

A financial boycott of products just for the time being may not be the best solution but can be a small measure of a start. In the long run it would still hurt LFC with Hick/Gillett only out for financial gains. I can also forsee them offloading any player whom they deem fit to reap profits. That can include Gerrard and Torres.

I would like to propose that, as Hicks seemingly is only a businessman and never a fan of anyone, and that he probably didn't know that in the EPL the football is round, and that his primary interests are elsewhere, he'd only realise the gravity of the situation here at LFC if the worst happens right in the heart of his interests. That refers to Texas Rangers and the Dallas Stars. This boycott should extend all the way across the atlantic to minimise the effect on LFC itself as a club. I do not know much about these two teams, but a simple search does provide some clues, and their rivals are pivotal in bringing the message across as they would love to undermine their bitter rivals in any way possible. I can declare to be anti-Texas Rangers and anti-Dallas Stars, and any rival team is a friendly figure. Whatever happens on the ground at Liverpool doesn't affect him much while sitting in the Sates as much as it does affect me as far as here in Singapore, and although the media is far stretching, we need to bring his undoings straight into his backyard; his homeland. He deserves to be HIT where it hurts.

The banks have been hesitant with the loans as they need assurances with their assets, but they also do know that LFC is not a small club. They know there would be ready buyers should the club make losses. (touchwood) And if Hicks is to use his assets back home as collateral, then these assets must be placed under a doubtful shadow. For that to happen, there must be negative sentiments in place for all his other assets and ventures. Its a totally different Ball-Game, and its a long shot, but collectively and in a short period, the voices of the fans of LiverpoolFC would be heard, and that would make the difference.

RaulRaj, 35
Singapore

Ali Baba wrote:
If the youth set up can generate the club some money that is definitely a good thing. Look at Everton, altohugh they are a feeder club to City, selling Rooney to Man U has set them up and they have built and progressed from there. Hindsight is a brilliant thing and we would have been better off if we got a fee for players like Forest, Ekoku, Brown, Sanasy, Emanuel, I can go on.

We have got a bit of money from Liverpool for a player that may never make it, then again he may be the next Wayne Rooney, and if that is the case, if you read there are incentive bonuses in City's favour and will be a nice cash influx to the club for a 14yr old kid.

He is a local lad and if he doesn't make he may come back, and if he spends a few years training with Liverpool with their facilities, is that really a bad thing.

A bit of good luck here for City and come on lads, lets be positive. We have had youth players that have had a lot of promise and see what have happened to them and the level they are playing at now, Gareth Grant, Danny Forrest, Kevin Sanasy, need I go on?

So great news I say if we have got some money with incentive bonuses for a kid and what a great opportunity for the lad. Let him develop at Anfield and if he doesn't make it, he MAY come back to Valley Parade a more complete player.

Ali Baba wrote:
If the youth set up can generate the club some money that is definitely a good thing. Look at Everton, altohugh they are a feeder club to City, selling Rooney to Man U has set them up and they have built and progressed from there. Hindsight is a brilliant thing and we would have been better off if we got a fee for players like Forest, Ekoku, Brown, Sanasy, Emanuel, I can go on.

We have got a bit of money from Liverpool for a player that may never make it, then again he may be the next Wayne Rooney, and if that is the case, if you read there are incentive bonuses in City's favour and will be a nice cash influx to the club for a 14yr old kid.

He is a local lad and if he doesn't make he may come back, and if he spends a few years training with Liverpool with their facilities, is that really a bad thing.

A bit of good luck here for City and come on lads, lets be positive. We have had youth players that have had a lot of promise and see what have happened to them and the level they are playing at now, Gareth Grant, Danny Forrest, Kevin Sanasy, need I go on?

So great news I say if we have got some money with incentive bonuses for a kid and what a great opportunity for the lad. Let him develop at Anfield and if he doesn't make it, he MAY come back to Valley Parade a more complete player.

Ali Baba wrote:
If the youth set up can generate the club some money that is definitely a good thing. Look at Everton, altohugh they are a feeder club to City, selling Rooney to Man U has set them up and they have built and progressed from there. Hindsight is a brilliant thing and we would have been better off if we got a fee for players like Forest, Ekoku, Brown, Sanasy, Emanuel, I can go on.

We have got a bit of money from Liverpool for a player that may never make it, then again he may be the next Wayne Rooney, and if that is the case, if you read there are incentive bonuses in City's favour and will be a nice cash influx to the club for a 14yr old kid.

He is a local lad and if he doesn't make he may come back, and if he spends a few years training with Liverpool with their facilities, is that really a bad thing.

A bit of good luck here for City and come on lads, lets be positive. We have had youth players that have had a lot of promise and see what have happened to them and the level they are playing at now, Gareth Grant, Danny Forrest, Kevin Sanasy, need I go on?

So great news I say if we have got some money with incentive bonuses for a kid and what a great opportunity for the lad. Let him develop at Anfield and if he doesn't make it, he MAY come back to Valley Parade a more complete player.

Ali Baba wrote:
If the youth set up can generate the club some money that is definitely a good thing. Look at Everton, altohugh they are a feeder club to City, selling Rooney to Man U has set them up and they have built and progressed from there. Hindsight is a brilliant thing and we would have been better off if we got a fee for players like Forest, Ekoku, Brown, Sanasy, Emanuel, I can go on.

We have got a bit of money from Liverpool for a player that may never make it, then again he may be the next Wayne Rooney, and if that is the case, if you read there are incentive bonuses in City's favour and will be a nice cash influx to the club for a 14yr old kid.

He is a local lad and if he doesn't make he may come back, and if he spends a few years training with Liverpool with their facilities, is that really a bad thing.

A bit of good luck here for City and come on lads, lets be positive. We have had youth players that have had a lot of promise and see what have happened to them and the level they are playing at now, Gareth Grant, Danny Forrest, Kevin Sanasy, need I go on?

So great news I say if we have got some money with incentive bonuses for a kid and what a great opportunity for the lad. Let him develop at Anfield and if he doesn't make it, he MAY come back to Valley Parade a more complete player.

Mr Who wrote:
The rumour doing the rounds for the last week or so has it that City are making half a million squid on this one. I wonder how it will be spent.

Mr Who wrote:
The rumour doing the rounds for the last week or so has it that City are making half a million squid on this one. I wonder how it will be spent.

Mr Who wrote:
The rumour doing the rounds for the last week or so has it that City are making half a million squid on this one. I wonder how it will be spent.

Mr Who wrote:
The rumour doing the rounds for the last week or so has it that City are making half a million squid on this one. I wonder how it will be spent.

Tommy wrote:
Francis was released by Notts. Forest. 'Ring Fenced' the new word in football, eh? Add this to 'back stick', 'in the mix', 'a big ask', 'a coming together' 'there or thereabouts' etc etc. We will need a complete new English Dictionary soon to add all of this lot!!

Tommy wrote:
Francis was released by Notts. Forest. 'Ring Fenced' the new word in football, eh? Add this to 'back stick', 'in the mix', 'a big ask', 'a coming together' 'there or thereabouts' etc etc. We will need a complete new English Dictionary soon to add all of this lot!!

Tommy wrote:
Francis was released by Notts. Forest. 'Ring Fenced' the new word in football, eh? Add this to 'back stick', 'in the mix', 'a big ask', 'a coming together' 'there or thereabouts' etc etc. We will need a complete new English Dictionary soon to add all of this lot!!

Tommy wrote:
Francis was released by Notts. Forest. 'Ring Fenced' the new word in football, eh? Add this to 'back stick', 'in the mix', 'a big ask', 'a coming together' 'there or thereabouts' etc etc. We will need a complete new English Dictionary soon to add all of this lot!!

albion wrote:

Mr Who wrote: The rumour doing the rounds for the last week or so has it that City are making half a million squid on this one. I wonder how it will be spent.

Hope everyone likes calamari then.

albion wrote:

Mr Who wrote: The rumour doing the rounds for the last week or so has it that City are making half a million squid on this one. I wonder how it will be spent.

Hope everyone likes calamari then.

albion wrote:

Mr Who wrote: The rumour doing the rounds for the last week or so has it that City are making half a million squid on this one. I wonder how it will be spent.

Hope everyone likes calamari then.

albion wrote:

Mr Who wrote: The rumour doing the rounds for the last week or so has it that City are making half a million squid on this one. I wonder how it will be spent.

Hope everyone likes calamari then.