I admire Liverpool's attacking football, but, no, I have had too many brick-bats and bottles thrown at me by Scousers to want them to win. Scum - enough said. Arsenal would be first choice, but they have blown it. That just leaves City. So City it is then. Although, when it's all done and dusted, any team apart from the Scum.
Norwich, Cardiff as well, shame Sunderland couldn't do themselves a favour last night. The PL title for me is always anyone but the scum and hopefully not man u. The relegation battles are always more interesting to me.
Very interesting run-in. Liverpool have it in their own hands now, if they win all their games it's theirs and they'd be my choice solely for Gerrard who has shown exceptional loyalty when they were also-rans for so long, he deserves it just for that. However, I have a sneaking feeling that after they beat Man City they'll slip up against Chelsea, that's exactly the sort of big game Chelsea are past masters of winning, they did it at Man City before Christmas and I just have a sneaking feeling they'll do it again at Anfield which will let Man City in to win it. I hope I'm wrong but heart says Liverpool (My mum's team) but head says Man City...
I've always disliked Arsenal and their useless fans. Have always found Citeh fans obnoxious twats. Chelsea? Never!! That leaves Liverpool, who I would want to win it even if I didn't dislike the others. My dearly departed Dad and I used to love watching that great Liverpool teams of the 70s and 80s in Europe. He was a Spurs man at heart, but we both appreciated the football Liverpool played. Also, they have a number of British players which I always like to see and lastly, I'd love Gerrard to lift the Premier League trophy after all his loyal service to the club.
Liverpool for me but i never ever would wanted to feel it during -70's and -80's when they keep going. Now tbey play great football and have many intresting players and young rising manager. Hope they win it.
Liverpool, they have a QPR player in their team................. Sterling And they play pretty football And they are a bit more home grown....and they have Suarez, for all his faults he seems to enjoy playing football for footballs sake
I was at Anfield the night we drew 2-2 in the second leg of the Milk Cup semi final. Liverpool were awesome in those days and from high up in the directors box, you could see them physically change gear. Fantastic stuff and they have got that back this season.
I was at that game too mate. I was 7 and undoubtedly a QPR fan, but was sitting with Liverpool fans and was wearing a Liverpool track suit (long story). I bemused those around me by cheering the QPR goals. Must have been a perplexing sight.
I'd like to see Liverpool win it, then Suarez falls to the ground clasping his ACL in agony, thereby missing the Workd Cup...
So have City apparently, which kind of makes a mockery of that very football-esque saying. Its one of those meaningless phrases that has crept into the game in recent years. Like "we scored too early" or, well, there are many more, I just can't think of them right now! Think about it. By that rationale every team in the league "has it in their own hands" at the start of the season. And if you have it in your own hands, why don't you just go and win every game? You can't because you could simply come up against a better team some day and get beat, despite trying your heart out. Truth is they don't have it in their own hands, nor does City. Far too many variables. If there were none, there'd be no point in playing the matches. Every team picks up and drops points through the season. Whoever finishes with the most will be Champions! (No offence to you Sooper, its just a phrase that has gotten on my nerves over the last couple of seasons )
Liverpool for me probably wrong but I don't remember their fans being as arrogant as the others when they were winning things
Err, I don't like the cliche but it is accurate. If either Liverpool or City win all their remaining games they will be champions. Its the fact that they have to play each other that is confusing you. Have a lie down.
Glad to see I'm not the only one still bitter after all these years!!!!!!!! Not really bothered who wins it......
I think it's true for both because they still have to play each other, mate. That match on 13 April may well be the game that decides the title. well, certainly decides whether Liverpool will win it. A City win will put them ahead with 2 games in hand, and so it'd be hard to see them losing it from there, seeing as their run in then goes Sunderland, WBA, Palace, Everton, Villa and West Ham.
I'd like to see Liverpool win it too, have always had a soft spot for them, which just grew bigger while Hyypiä was in his prime. (and they let us win 3 - 2 in the final 15mins in our first season back in PL, which started our survival story that year )
Lads I know why they say it, I'm saying its a nonsense little catchphrase that's overused and doesn't have much real meaning when you think about it. For starters, if one team has it in their own hands, by implication, nobody else simultaneously can. Or can they? If they can then would you say that before a ball was kicked this season, Liverpool, United, City, Chelsea, Arsenal etc all had it in their own hands to win the title? Or maybe that's being disingenuous. Maybe it just boils down to the amount of games in question which determine whether or not a team has it in their own hands. How far out do we go? Arsenal were top a month or two ago with around 15 to play. Did you say then Arsenal "had it in their own hands"? Of course you didn't because whilst technically and analytically some nerd sat behind a Computer having never watched a game of football in their lives and having just been presented with the league table, might be correct in saying that, if they knew the first thing about the game they'd realise it was balderdash. You're now saying Liverpool and City both "have it in their own hands" with six games to play? Na, I call bullsh*t on that too. Too far to go and too many tough teams to play including the fact I mentioned above that they might play their best but still get beat by a team that plays better. Liverpool could play their hearts out but draw 2-2 with City. How the hell then was in their own hands? The only occasion I might, just might, be tempted to use that generally hollow and quite irritating footballism is when, after having imbibed a considerable amount of alcohol and not having the cognizance to think of anything better, I observe there's only two games left and the lead team has a two point advantage and a superior goal difference over their opponents. Failing that, I'd probably say its a game of two halves, innit
