I would write a cutting reply. However, the limit at Anfield will have been negotiated with your club and be in-line with your allocation for us when we visit your your midden
Persistent standing means Man Utd's allocation has been cut by the Liverpool council on recommendation from "The Ground Safety Advisory Group", whoever they are. Its nothing to do with Liverpool Football Club, so you can't scream about bias or anything.
Based on the article here: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/live...due-to-persistent-standing-100252-29199140/3/ It seems like the Utd fans get allocated some seats that have an obstructed view of the action, and so fans in those seats stand in the gangways so they can see the match. So unless the 1,000 tickets that have been cut include those obstructed seats, it seems like this move isn't going to solve the problem... And no, Utd haven't made any changes to the Liverpool allocation for the match at OT http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereve...united-wont-hit-back-at-liverpool-ticket-snub
Liverpool have traditonally given us a lower allocation than most, this goes back to the 70's after we we're promoted from the old 2nd division. In their defence it was in response to our "bad" rep at the time, and advice from the Dibble.
Poor journalism from Manchester Evening News there. Liverpool FC had nothing to do with the decision, so I don't see how it could be tit for tat tbh. Punishing Liverpool FC and its fans for something the council did would be ridiculous to say the least. And yes, the view from the back of Lower Anny Rd is awful, I once heard it being described as trying to watch the game through your letterbox. Very true. We badly need a new stadium, Anfield sadly just isn't up to stratch anymore.
How is it poor journalism? The article clearly states: "Councillors in the Merseyside city are expected to cut from 3,015 to 1,965 the number of seats given to United supporters for the Premier League clash at Anfield." The MEN is obviously referring to Liverpool the city, not the club, and pointing out that Utd had good reason to reduce the Liverpool allowance given the vandalism that took place back in Jan.
United fans have been warned for "persistant standing" at OT so whats new. But the club back the bye-law breakers http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereve...tretford_end_fans_not_at_risk_say_united.html
Lol at that report! If there was a 75% risk of a "catastrophic accident" when people stand to celebrate a goal, there would have been ten fatalities already this season. Bloody consultants have no idea how to use statistics as usual...
My fault there, didn't read it properly, just scanned it quickly and saw it say that it emerged Liverpool were cutting Man Utds ticket allocation down.
Not agreeing with the forecast of doom in that article but local council's have the right voice their concerns.
Swarbs, I'm not disagreeing with you, or the rationale behind it or anything, but the trouble is that when something DOES happen, statistically you'll get all the fatalities at the same time. Instead of getting 10, spaced out over 5 weeks and 20 grounds, you'll get 20 at one match. The whole of the insurance industry is based on these long term stats, not the short term fluctuations.
Insurance is one of the biggest scams in human history. I wouldnt trust anything they say ever as its almost 100% bullshit fabricated for their own needs.
I wouldn't blame Liverpool for cutting Man Uniteds ticket allocation especially after what happened at Elland Road last night. Man United fans apparently showed their class by putting up a sick banner about two dead Leeds fans. Thats Man United fans showing their class or lack of it. Source http://www.yahoo.ie
And when liverpool fans chant about Munich it is different how?. There are a sick minority in both sides of pretty much every major rivalry, but to use them as a stick to beat any club with is ridiculous, hypocritical and show the lack of intelligence you possess.
