How Arsenal and Liverpool's success could so easily have belonged to Tottenham and Everton

Can you plese tell us what illegal substances you have been taking so we can help you when you check into the psychiatric acute ward

"Arsenal and Liverpool both have an impressive cache of trophies, but they should count themselves lucky. It could just as easily have been Spurs and Everton in their places." No they couldn't because they haven't won as many games as either club. If they did, then they would be in the same position as Arsenal and Liverpool. Tottenham have had their successes in the past, so if we're going to blame an event in 1919 for their current problems .....please just do your talking on the pitch. The same with Everton, they've had chances but more often than not have blown them. When Tottenham and Everton become great football teams, they'll have something to sing about, but for the time being....lets give them a bit of medicine spoon treatment. There there Tottenham and Everton.....happy now?

Here we go, cue all the "it's all Liverpool’s fault comments" from the bitterest fans in the world. I would just like to make a few points, 1) Is the fact that Everton’s great team broke up down to the ban, or the fact that the board/manager etc did not do enough to keep them. I only ask because they seem to be the only team that this happened to during this period. 2) Probably the best footballing team Liverpool has produced was during this period so why would Everton have been guaranteed success and 3) Everton were offered the prestigious Kings Dock site for their stadium, which is conveniently forgotten, but could not come up with the funds. In two words GROW UP!

The basis of Everton's argument is that the team that won the league in 1985 would have definitely won the European Cup the year after and then entered a period of European domination. However with Gary Lineker still present (despite the article suggesting an exodus) that team won precisely nothing the season after. So how they can think they would have been the best team in Europe I don't know. All English teams who would have qualified were affected by the ban yet Everton seem to think only they were.

While there was obvious repercussions from the Heysel incident on our immediate and following future success, I don't feel that your argument can be purely based on that fact. I feel that after the whole debacle, we could of returned a lot sooner to the level we are moving towards now. A big part of our continued unsuccessful status was to do with a man who surely can no longer return to Merseyside, Peter Johnson, with Sir David Marsh also being entirely innefective during the clubs decline beforehand. While I agree that The Heysel tradgedy was a catalyst, I don't think that the blame can be laid solely on the shoulders of that incident. Would of been much better off without it mind............

The fact that Tottenham have has since 1919 to turn the trend around says it all really. Crap team, crap management and crap fans.

Clearly a bitter and twisted Gooner who probably knows nothing of her clubs History, Sue grow up! you know at the end of the day at least we are fundamentally British it made me laugh the other day whent the French president and our pm visited the emirates with the french flag flying at a french ground with a french manager and a french team,Arsenal have been seaching for the own identity for over a 100 years at least we know where our roots are!

[quote]1) Is the fact that Everton’s great team broke up down to the ban, or the fact that the board/manager etc did not do enough to keep them. 2) Probably the best footballing team Liverpool has produced was during this period so why would Everton have been guaranteed success 3) Everton were offered the prestigious Kings Dock site for their stadium, which is conveniently forgotten, but could not come up with the funds.[quote] 1) Everton had one of the Greatest team in Britain, if not Europe at that time, therefore many of their players were sought after and with European football offered by their suitors, there was little we could do to of stopped them going. They were ambitious, which is what made them so good. 2) If that was Liverpools best footballing period, yet we were better, where could we be now? 3) Had we of made the progress we could of made, the money for the Kings Dock would not of been an issue. In fact, we would probably of had Stanley Park at the time we first enquired. Does that answer your questions Ian?

Everyone always talks about Henry Norris' role in getting Arsenal promoted in 1919, but forget that it all came about due to match fixing between Manchester United and Liverpool to ensure that United avoided relegation at the expense of Chelsea. Both these clubs voted for Arsenal's promotion in return for Norris putting their case for avoiding sanctions caused by the match fixing.

PAUL a, sO THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE GOT TO FALL BACK ON: 'AT LEAST WE'RE FUNDEMENTALLY ENGLISH'? THAT JUST ABOUT SUMS IT ALL UP I RECKON!! BY THE WAY, ARE RAMOS, POYET, BERBATOV, KEANE, ZAKORA, MALBRANQUE, HUTTON AND CHUMPWANDA ENGLISH? SPURS ARE A SMALL CLUB - THEIR SUPPORTERS HAVE SMALL MINDS, AND YOU WILL FOREVER BE IN ARSENAL'S SHADOW!!

In your opinion Everton had the best team in Europe, I'm sure not many others will share that opinion, unless they are of course Evertonians. Yes they were a good side, but the best in Europe!!. If, as you say Everton were the better team during that period why doesn't it show in their trophy haul, and I assume we are talking about 1985-1990?. I don't think the funding has anything to do with success during the period concerned as this has only been an issue since the SKY Premier League was formed and we have both been equally unsuccessful in that particular time. I actually thought you're first comment posted was quite honest, but maybe I have touch a nerve and released your true feelings.

Exactly how much are LFC paing for the chunk of Stanley Park that they plan to redevelop for a new stadium???

Rizla papers... think you need to get back on the blunts mate... firstly he said British... as in British owned, as in Robbo, King, Woodgate, Dawson, Keane, Jenas, Lennon, Bent, Hutton, Bale... Let's name yours... erm ok, we got hoyte... oh yeah, walcott... erm? what's his name?? Garry? erm... someone beginning with R... Randal or something... I don't know of any more! Anyway, that was a shit argument, even from a Spurs perspective, who cares where they're from these days, none of us give a sh1t about the England team anymore anyway!!! the point i you got Wenger and we have only just got Ramos... if we got Ramos when you got Wenger, and Wenger had just turned up the argument would be the other way round... if, but, maybe, when... blah blah blah you're better than us, I can deal with it... cos you're scum, I can be thankful every day, that although you play some pretty football you still aint won a trophy for coming on 5 years... we have and we beat you 5-1 on route to do it... we've still won more in Europe (the promised land apparently) than you have and we've hardly played in it for the last 20 years... we gave you enough time to catch us up, yopu couldn't do it!

The fact that Tottenham have has since 1919 to turn the trend around says it all really. Crap team, crap management and crap fans.

Both Spurs and Everton were ahead of their rivals when the Euro ban came in so who knows what might have happened. Anyway, decimated means a reduction of 1 in 10 or 10% so you are saying that the loss of one player ruins a team, well maybe you're right when it comes to Lineker leaving Everton.

does anyone know where i can buy some muff diving equipment??

The first season after the war, Spurs won promotion. Our failure to consolidate our position and move on has as much to do with the failure of sucessive Boards and the determination of other clubs to float to the top. The bitterness that existed was because of the activities of the Arsenal chairman securing the votes that got them elected rather than promoted- how would the Arsenal feel if they do not get Champions league because FIFA decided to give non Champions League places to other nations league champions through bribery and corruption?! The fact is that it was not until 1931 that Arsenal got enough points that would have seen them promoted and it is very questionable if they would have attracted crowds - then revenue - then the right Manager ( Chapman) and then the players without the leg up. However, opportunity presented them with a lot and others should try and emulate their achievements.

It is actually an opinion quite widely held that Everton had a team that could of been the best in Europe at that time. The team that completed the seasons from 87 to 90 was depleted, yet still challenged at the top. What I am saying is, had we of kept hold of most of the key players that won the ECWC, chances are we would've improved further and probably won the cups that we got into the final for, or finished better than runner up or 3rd in the league. I am not bitter, not at all. I just wonder what it would've been like. Liverpool has two of the biggest football teams in British football within it, it could've been the two biggest in the world. I am not saying we would've took your place, just, in my opinion, would probably of been there with you at the same time had it not of been for an unfortunate series of events, the first of which being the Heysel tradgedy.

Thanks for the history lesson but it is all rather silly. Spurs dominated English football for a time in the early 60s and should have got to the European Cup final except for poor decisions by a referee. They won a few cups then faded. They have continued to do this time and time again. The future will only belong to them when they can play to the maximum week-in, week-out. After the Newcastle result I would say Ramos has got a couple of years before that will happen. All of this has nothing to do with the past but has everyting to do with what happens here on in.