GAA Tipster
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

+11
black&white
redhandman
Loyal2TheRoyal
JimWexford
Grenvile
bald eagle
mullins
clash-of-da-ash
Real Kerry Fan
SamiPremier08
Jayo Cluxton
15 posters

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  clash-of-da-ash Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:02 am

When Ferguson spent unprecedented amounts at United in the late 80's on Pallister, Phelan and Webb, he was taking a big risk as the money was not coming from a rich owner. It paid off over the next year or two and the rest is history as they say.
clash-of-da-ash
clash-of-da-ash
GAA Hero
GAA Hero

East Galway
Number of posts : 1932

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Jayo Cluxton Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:14 am

black&white wrote:
It's only been since the advent of the Premiership era that money has become the be-all end-all of football. The resentment towards City and Chelsea is largely due to a growing dissillusion with the way the game is going (much like you have said you feel yourself), where a rich man can come in and buy success. Until the 1990s success had to be earned, teams could only spend big if they had built up a significant fan base, and needed to establish themselves in order to attract the best players.

Come of it B&W - United bought into and benefitted from this new found wealth more than any other club in Britain - and probably the world. United are an international brand - Munich was a disaster - but it brought something to Utd - globally - that probably no other club had/has.

But United had no success (League title) for 26 years - all the 70s and all the 80s! So where did they earn their success from at that point? They mostly bought it. Look at many of the record transfer fees at the time - United. Even when they were winning damn all they could buy big - so where is the earning success???? Its not about fan bases at all - cos the fans don't matter any more. Most of Utds fan base live millions of miles away from Manchester. Have a look at the Utd fan base of the 70s before the prawns arrive - they make Millwall look like altar boys.

The majority of resentment of City and Chelsea that I can see is from United fans. They had so long in the transfer markets doing what they liked, tapping up etc that they are now sick that despite their global brand Roman and the Arabs went elsewhere - and now they have a mutinous support because a disastrous takeover has saddled the club with debt. Sorry - but you reap what you sow.
Jayo Cluxton
Jayo Cluxton
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Number of posts : 13273

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Jayo Cluxton Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:23 am

By the way for those moaning at Tevez have a read back at how the catalyst for all the success Eric Cantona was 'prised' from Leeds. United fans have short memories.
Jayo Cluxton
Jayo Cluxton
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Number of posts : 13273

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  bald eagle Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:31 am

Jayo Cluxton wrote:By the way for those moaning at Tevez have a read back at how the catalyst for all the success Eric Cantona was 'prised' from Leeds. United fans have short memories.

Cantona was no more "prised" from Leeds than Leeds stole him from Sheffield Wednesday! There wasn't much prising in it Jayo and deep down you know it!

bald eagle
GAA Hero
GAA Hero

Doire
Number of posts : 2746

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Jayo Cluxton Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:50 am

bald eagle wrote:Cantona was no more "prised" from Leeds than Leeds stole him from Sheffield Wednesday! There wasn't much prising in it Jayo and deep down you know it!

He had a week's trial at SW and they offered him a further week but he signed for Leeds. Whats the problem there?
Jayo Cluxton
Jayo Cluxton
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Number of posts : 13273

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  bald eagle Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:01 pm

Take a look at my post again Jayo, Leeds didn't steal him for Sheff Wed and United didn't pirse him from Leeds, that's what i was saying!

bald eagle
GAA Hero
GAA Hero

Doire
Number of posts : 2746

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  bocerty Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:50 pm

bald eagle wrote:Take a look at my post again Jayo, Leeds didn't steal him for Sheff Wed and United didn't pirse him from Leeds, that's what i was saying!

the whole Cantona to Utd transfer came about after a phone call from Howard Wilkinson enquiring about Gordon Strachan was it not - Ferguson cheekily asked about Cantona and the rest is history.

I dont think there was any prising involved.
bocerty
bocerty
Moderator
Moderator

Tyrone
Number of posts : 5899
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Jayo Cluxton Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:58 pm

bocerty wrote:I dont think there was any prising involved.

Similar to Tevez so - the point I am making .....
Jayo Cluxton
Jayo Cluxton
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Number of posts : 13273

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  bocerty Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:18 pm

Jayo Cluxton wrote:
bocerty wrote:I dont think there was any prising involved.

Similar to Tevez so - the point I am making .....

ah now JC - two completely different scenarios - Cantona went to United because he figured he might actually win something and because the quality of players there was much better than at Leeds (no disrespect intended).

Tevez was blinded by the moola - he tried to play hard ball with United to get more wages and United played him at his own game - in came the Arabs with their blank cheque and he was drooling at the mouth. At least Ronaldo was driven by a boyhood dream of playing for Real and not money - he was making loads anyway so it wasnt as big an issue

The likes of Tevez are all too common now - they put money before football and success.

What makes me laugh is they all say they have a short career and need to make the most of it - most of them have careers spanning 15 years average - most are earning in excess of £2million per year which equate to £30m (jeez i should have been an accountant too) - how the f**k would you spend that amount of money if you were anyway sensible at all.
bocerty
bocerty
Moderator
Moderator

Tyrone
Number of posts : 5899
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  black&white Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:35 pm

Jayo Cluxton wrote:
black&white wrote:
It's only been since the advent of the Premiership era that money has become the be-all end-all of football. The resentment towards City and Chelsea is largely due to a growing dissillusion with the way the game is going (much like you have said you feel yourself), where a rich man can come in and buy success. Until the 1990s success had to be earned, teams could only spend big if they had built up a significant fan base, and needed to establish themselves in order to attract the best players.

Come of it B&W - United bought into and benefitted from this new found wealth more than any other club in Britain - and probably the world. United are an international brand - Munich was a disaster - but it brought something to Utd - globally - that probably no other club had/has.

But United had no success (League title) for 26 years - all the 70s and all the 80s! So where did they earn their success from at that point? They mostly bought it. Look at many of the record transfer fees at the time - United. Even when they were winning damn all they could buy big - so where is the earning success???? Its not about fan bases at all - cos the fans don't matter any more. Most of Utds fan base live millions of miles away from Manchester. Have a look at the Utd fan base of the 70s before the prawns arrive - they make Millwall look like altar boys.

The majority of resentment of City and Chelsea that I can see is from United fans. They had so long in the transfer markets doing what they liked, tapping up etc that they are now sick that despite their global brand Roman and the Arabs went elsewhere - and now they have a mutinous support because a disastrous takeover has saddled the club with debt. Sorry - but you reap what you sow.

No doubt that United were the team to benefit most from the Premiership era thus far, but at the start of the 90s United were no better poised to benefit than many others. Liverpool entered the decade as the top dogs, and if they had any sort of decent management at the club they could have expanded just as much as United did.

United had wealth before the Premiership era, but as I previously stated, it was due to a large fan base - the traditional way to build up a football club. Munich played a part in this, but it was more to do with the brand of football that United have played since the days of Busby. George Best is probably responsible for a whole generation of United fans almost singlehandedly. Even in the darkest days of the 70s and 80s, United played exciting attacking football, and this was why fans were attracted to the club.
If your theory about a tragedy being the root of United's global appeal, then should Liverpool not now be the most popular club in the world following Hillsborough? Or maybe the fact that they've mostly been playing unattractive negative football negated their appeal.

United's wealth has always spawned from their popularity, which is based on footballing reasons. It doesn't mean that other clubs aren't entitled to spend money, it just means that, for me anyway, success for United will be grounded in football, not economics.

Champions League final in 2008 sums it up, United were led up to the podium by Bobby Charlton, Chelsea by Peter Kenyon
black&white
black&white
GAA All Star
GAA All Star

Sligo
Number of posts : 1081
Age : 38

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  mossbags Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:00 pm

Jonsmith wrote: They made some of the World's biggest players in Beckham and Ronaldo and Keane. Fergie didn't just take out the cheque book and buy a team of players in one season.

Keane was already a great player before Utd broke a British transfer record to sign him under the noses of Blackburn. If anything his game deteriorated after he left the City Ground. His mind certainly did.
mossbags
mossbags
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Galway
Number of posts : 3405
Age : 44

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Jayo Cluxton Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:20 pm

The simple facts here are that if some billionaire backer approached Utd he would be welcomed with open arms - so to diss other clubs for doing same is nonsense.

If I was a United fan I would be asking myself how in the name of God the biggest brand name in the world allowed itself get in the position of being taken over by Americans who have no history in the club, no affinity to it or soccer and have since - predictably - saddled the club with massive debt. Serious corporate governance issues here.
Jayo Cluxton
Jayo Cluxton
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Number of posts : 13273

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  black&white Wed Feb 24, 2010 5:33 pm

I've no doubt that a billionaire backer would be welcomed into OT with open arms. I'd welcome it if it meant getting the Glazers out, and it would probably result in ticket prices stabilising instead of the constant price hikes we're currently seeing.
But that's because I'm not a neutral in that case, and I know it would improve United's chances of success and stability. However if the club then went and bought 10 expensive players in the space of a few months, anything subsequently won would, for me personally, not be held in the same regard as the trophies of the 90s or 00s, when the teams were built up in a "fairer" manner.

The difference that you cannot seem to grasp is that all of United's spending has always been self-funded, the club has made sufficient profits to cover transfer expenditure. Even now, the club is quite profitable. Strip out the interest on the Glazer's debt (none of which was incurred to fund transfers/operations) and the club is making significant annual profits. The transfer spending is sustainable (or would be if the Glazer interest wasn't there) because the club's operations generate the revenue to fund it.
Chelsea and City are not being run as football clubs, or even as businesses. They are being constantly subsidised by their benefactors, and it amounts to distortion of competition that they can continue to operate in such a manner. Without their backers, City and Chelsea could not afford to operate at the levels they do, and would go the way of Cork City, Portsmouth or Leeds fairly rapidly. And let's face it, their backers aren't even fans. The clubs just happened to be for sale at a good price.

The 10-point penalty for going into administration is in place to prevent teams from gaining an advantage by spending more than they earn, having a rich owner amounts to nothing more than a way of defeating this rule.

Personally I'd love to see a League of Ireland style salary cap brought into soccer. It wouldn't work in one country alone, but would become pretty effective if Uefa brought it into place as a prerequisite for entry into Champions/Europa leagues. It would force all clubs to play with what they can afford, and would level the playing field between the big boys and the rest. Teams who play attractive football would be rewarded, as they would attract the most fans and thus greater revenues.
black&white
black&white
GAA All Star
GAA All Star

Sligo
Number of posts : 1081
Age : 38

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  clash-of-da-ash Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:48 pm

I can see the Glazers doing to Man Utd what they did to Tampa Bay. They won the Super Bowl in 2002 and then proceeded to reduce the wage bill and are now one of the worst teams in the NFL trading draft picks and only signing rookies who will accept low pay by NFL standards.
clash-of-da-ash
clash-of-da-ash
GAA Hero
GAA Hero

East Galway
Number of posts : 1932

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  black&white Wed Feb 24, 2010 9:49 pm

clash-of-da-ash wrote:I can see the Glazers doing to Man Utd what they did to Tampa Bay. They won the Super Bowl in 2002 and then proceeded to reduce the wage bill and are now one of the worst teams in the NFL trading draft picks and only signing rookies who will accept low pay by NFL standards.

Wouldn't be surprised at all.

All down to Martin Edwards getting greedy when he floated the club as a plc. The majority of the funding raised by floatation went to the Edwards family, who diluted their holding significantly at that time. Once the club became a plc it was always vulnerable to a takeover such as the one that happened.
black&white
black&white
GAA All Star
GAA All Star

Sligo
Number of posts : 1081
Age : 38

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Jayo Cluxton Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:01 pm

black&white wrote:The difference that you cannot seem to grasp is that all of United's spending has always been self-funded, the club has made sufficient profits to cover transfer expenditure. Even now, the club is quite profitable. Strip out the interest on the Glazer's debt (none of which was incurred to fund transfers/operations) and the club is making significant annual profits. The transfer spending is sustainable (or would be if the Glazer interest wasn't there) because the club's operations generate the revenue to fund it.

Chelsea and City are not being run as football clubs, or even as businesses. They are being constantly subsidised by their benefactors, and it amounts to distortion of competition that they can continue to operate in such a manner. Without their backers, City and Chelsea could not afford to operate at the levels they do

Honestly B&W the nature of your argument is astounding especially considering what you do for a living - and you think there is something I can't grasp???? Are you trying to say that United ARE run as a football club?? Seriously?

You seem to hanker for a game played in grounds (not stadia!) sandwiched into cobble-locked streets, where men with cloth caps and cigarettes hanging from their mouths lift their sons over the turnstiles to cheer Nat Lofthouse or Stanley Matthews - and maybe I do too. But the fact is that football sold its soul many many years ago. Sold it to corporate inc, the TV companies, the stock markets and anyone else they could squeeze a few bob out of. The fans were discounted - unless they had the money to go along on the ride.

The club would be quite profitable - only for the Glazers debt??? Well Ireland would be profitable too only for a substantial budget deficit. The Glazers own the club. The big problem for United is that they are just about servicing the interest on the debt (incidentally their debt is greater than all 36 teams in Germany's top two divisions). Their accounts last year were good but they won't be selling a player for €94 million every season. Chelsea and City will continue to meet all their debts - on time.
Jayo Cluxton
Jayo Cluxton
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Number of posts : 13273

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  black&white Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:30 pm

Again, your missing the point of what I'm saying, maybe I'm not articulating it very well.

Whe I refer to being run as a football club, I mean that the club if the owners were to leave (taking their debt with them), the club could be run in pretty much the same manner as it is now. Expenditures on transfers, wages, operating costs, etc. are matched by the incomes from merchandise, television and ticket sales. It's being managed and run as a going concern.
You cannot say that about Chelsea or City, that's what I'm trying to get at. As an accountant, I don't believe that their models are sustainable, whilst United has a viable business underlying the club.

United's debt was saddled on the club by the Glazers, it is not the result of overtrading by the club. Year on year, an operating profit is shown. Even last year, there is a loss when you strip out the Ronaldo transfer, but a profit when you also strip out the interest on the Glazer's debt. The debt was not generated by football operations, it's the Glazers' personal debt, which they have managed to saddle onto the club.
The comparison with Ireland is completely inaccurate, as Ireland is running at a significant deficit in current spending, something that United are not.

As for Chelsea and City continuing to meet their debts on time, their debts are to their owners. It's like Chelsea claiming to be debt-free by converting all of their debt to shares owned by Abramovich, it's doesn't reflect the operating realities of the club. The club is being run in a manner that would result in 90 of the 92 league clubs going out of business.

I previously mentioned the rule regarding going into administration, the purpose of the rule was to try to force clubs to be run as going concerns. Chelsea and City aren't run as going concerns. They're not breaking any rules, but they are certainly going against the spirit of the rules, and gaining a significant unfair advantage as a result. My whole point is that I prefer, and will continue to prefer, to see success for teams who don't have this advantage over the others.
black&white
black&white
GAA All Star
GAA All Star

Sligo
Number of posts : 1081
Age : 38

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Jayo Cluxton Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:00 pm

Ok B&W - I reckon this would make a great argument over a few beers.

I absolutely know what you are getting at but do you think the Glazers will walk away and take the debt with them. I mentioned corporate governance earlier and tbh United have only themselves to blame for getting into this position. Clubs / owners / players are greedy. United hold no moral ground - there is no moral ground in football. From a position of pre-eminence in world football it is not beyond the question that United could at least end up like Leeds. And if City or Chelsea end up as someone's toy more luck to them. Fans of today only want success - and they don't give a sh1t how they get it.

I mentioned earlier how my only love (aside from our international teams) - the only thing I could identify with is Dublin GAA. The GAA belongs to the people. And while I enjoy and admire certain teams and players I fail to see how, for instance, a North Londoner can feel an affinity with a team that regularly has not one single Englishman (or Briton - never mind Londoner in it)! To me its all about identity and while I watch from afar and enjoy good games I have to say I would bust my ass laughing if the whole thing went down the pan.
Jayo Cluxton
Jayo Cluxton
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Number of posts : 13273

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  mullins Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:07 pm

Can't stand the premiership any more find it hard to even watch a game..Since Sky took it over its just gone immoral....When sky pulls the plug - football will go back to where it started..Good to see afc wimbeldon doing well again owned by the fans.. I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Icon_biggrin
mullins
mullins
GAA Hero
GAA Hero

Dublin
Number of posts : 2954

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Boxtyeater Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:28 pm

Jayo Cluxton wrote: I would bust my ass laughing if the whole thing went down the pan.

So would I indeed...Soccerball is an invention of the Brits. They invented every team game in the world that's played internationally. When some other nation proved superior to them at the game of the era they just invented another.

I wonder would they have any interest in a project I'm working on?? It's indoor hurling in disused premises ie. factories, warehouses, cattle marts. My Ukranian associate, Junior the Crane, feels it could take off big time in his native country if a little more "savagery" as he termed it, could be introduced... I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Affraid
Boxtyeater
Boxtyeater
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Leitrim
Number of posts : 6922

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  black&white Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:48 pm

The Glazer's debts will most likely go when they go, either through being paid off by a new owner, or by the buyer forcing the Glazer's to take them with them (and paying a higher price for the club). Would be very surprised if they found a buyer willing to come in and retain the current levels of debt.

I've family ties to United going back to my gandparents, so I've a bit more connection to the club than most this side of the Irish Sea, but the club is still nowhere near the Yeat's County when it comes to allegiences/passion!

I doubt that United will ever end up like Leeds, as the business models are extremely different. Leeds were spending more money than they were earning, consistently for a number of years. Revenues from gates, merchandise and TV weren't coming close to matching the spending on wages, etc., and that was the root of the collapse.

United have a solid business to fall back on, even if it's currently undermined by the debts.
To put it in context, United's debt is like somebody with a mortgage (no negative equity, yet at least!), the payments might make funds a little tight at times, but they're getting by.
Leeds were borrowing against next weeks pay, just to make the minimum payments on the credit card. Once you start having to borrow to fund current expenditures then you're really fooked!

Anyway, I'd better leave this for now - I've another 4 or 5 hours work ahead of me yet, and I'm sure you're nearly ready for the bed!
black&white
black&white
GAA All Star
GAA All Star

Sligo
Number of posts : 1081
Age : 38

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Jayo Cluxton Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:00 am

Good man B - fair enough analogies too. As a credit card holder of 15 years I have never paid a penny/cent interest - I know they love people like me! I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Icon_razz

Back to work with ya and I hope the cold snap has eased!
Jayo Cluxton
Jayo Cluxton
GAA Elite
GAA Elite

Number of posts : 13273

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  patrique Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:35 am

Jonsmith wrote:As long as City don't get fourth I don't. They represent all that's wrong with the Premier League. And It would be a shame to show Europe that people like Craig Bellamy are let near a soccer pitch.


What exactly would that be?

They haven't pulled out of the FA Cup or something crass and lacking in class like that have they?
patrique
patrique
GAA Hero
GAA Hero

Antrim
Number of posts : 2424
Age : 70

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  patrique Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:37 am

Aned City or liverpool should be 4th. Tottenham have a good record against City but City are not losing many. Home games against Tottenham and Villa might swing it.

I still reckon Arsenal will finish above United, mind you Portsmouth might do that if Rooney gets injured, but I am not sure about Chelsea.

Still I got Arsenal at 16/1 after Chelsea and United beat them. Last year United won the league without doing too much against the alleged big 4.
patrique
patrique
GAA Hero
GAA Hero

Antrim
Number of posts : 2424
Age : 70

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Grenvile Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:46 am

patrique wrote:
They haven't pulled out of the FA Cup or something crass and lacking in class like that have they?

Yes they pulled out of the FA Cup lastnight.. The same way they pulled out of the League Cup and the title race. Looks like that banner is staying up for another year anyways pat.

Grenvile
GAA Hero
GAA Hero

Laois
Number of posts : 2239

Back to top Go down

I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ... - Page 2 Empty Re: I bet Liverpool will not be in Top 4 ...

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum