http://m.guardian.co.uk/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2013/may/06/anfield-liverpool-david-conn
It's a ****ty piece imo, where there may well be a lot of facts in the article there is a lot of finger pointing at the club going on from the writer. To suggest the club engineered a decline is going a bit far. Yes they bought the houses with the intention of eventually demolishing so that they could expand or at least having that option. I think the intention is clear. Why is it considered secret? Why else would they have bought the houses? I'm not saying the club have acted properly over this situation just that this article is looking at it from one perspective.
Here's another club point of view and again this will be too much bias from the club. http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/live...pansion-plans-still-on-track-100252-32917317/ “This is about improving the area as a whole rather than Liverpool as a club improving its capacity. By everybody working together - and everybody winning - it makes for a much better solution than anything that has been looked at in the past. “We are absolutely on course.” Ian Ayre
Read the article myself and have to say that I was shocked at the behaviour of Liverpool Football Club.
So should they have bought the houses, let people live in them for some unknown period of time to make money from rent and then just kick them out when the bulldozers come?
Not read the article but it would make sense to let the area decline first, more likely to get help to renovate the area from the local council then
I don't think you can blame LFC for "the area" declining based on them shutting down 1-2 streets. One of the opponents in the article is a bitter businessman who though he'd make loads of money buying a hotel where the new ground was supposed to be and it didn't happen. On the other hand, when these houses are a fraction of a player's weekly wage I don't think they should lowball the owners. LFC should be able to make respectable offers, though not "compensate" the locals for the fact that a few people have died in the area due to vandalism and violence over the last decade or so.
really surprised by the shock over this article - anyone who's been paying attention should know about this. the club were ruthless in many ways, and didn't respect their responsibility to the community. they didn't cause the decline, but certainly didn't help it, and now they are trying to improve upon that. end of story.
Not from me pal. They are a wealthy football club with mega rich owners. They could afford to pay the residents off, rather than using 3rd person parties to try and buy these houses at a knockdown price. It just seems like a slap in the face for the people in the surrounding area.
Conn clearly believes every resident who stayed did so out of some sense of community WWII spirit rather than securing the best price possible, which is something only nasty capitalist football businesses based in Liverpool do. Like a typical sports media luvvie, it's about getting a melodramatic headline, otherwise he'd be writing it in the FT.
It's prity short sighted to blame Liverpool FC for the decline of the Anfield area, the surrounding neighbourhoods are no different.
Do I need to point out where I live? Wasn't blaming the club either, just attempting to put a different spin on it
I meant in that exact vicinity it wasn't a pop at your wool status I think buying up property & then leaving it boarded up obviously has a negative effect on the area, when it's done wholesale. If you're going to buy up entire streets do it by the correct channels via planning approval backed with a compulsory purchase order. I think doing it piece meal so that the remaining properties become more likely to be vacated, is a bit 'back door'. Those streets are now grim in the extreme.
Sorry mate but the club has engineered exactly that and has been doing for years. It has benefited them to do absolutely nothing for the area because it has driven prices down and people away. I've been telling you lot this for a long time I'm afraid lads. It is one of the things that sickens me about my own club. They must be one of the worst "community" clubs in the country.
I remember you posting about this on other threads. I don't know a lot on the subject, I just felt that the article was just another journo looking to have a go. I know there has been wrong doing by the club but the writer even tries to pin a murder on us.
