Jump to content

Recommended Posts

didn't we see a slightly less rabid version of 'defend our own whatever' over andy carroll  and joey barton ?

Yes and I agree with you but I don't remember us ever defending either of them over a 100+ page FA document which proved their guilt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't we see a slightly less rabid version of 'defend our own whatever' over andy carroll  and joey barton ?

Yes and I agree with you but I don't remember us ever defending either of them over a 100+ page FA document which proved their guilt.

some found ways to defend joey bartons continued employment after he was convicted.
Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't we see a slightly less rabid version of 'defend our own whatever' over andy carroll  and joey barton ?

Yes and I agree with you but I don't remember us ever defending either of them over a 100+ page FA document which proved their guilt.

some found ways to defend joey bartons continued employment after he was convicted.

Well I'm pretty sure I wanted his contract terminated after that but its a long time ago so I can't say. However, Nile Ranger is a good example I believe and I've been saying we need to get rid for awhile now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't we see a slightly less rabid version of 'defend our own whatever' over andy carroll  and joey barton ?

Yes and I agree with you but I don't remember us ever defending either of them over a 100+ page FA document which proved their guilt.

some found ways to defend joey bartons continued employment after he was convicted.

Well I'm pretty sure I wanted his contract terminated after that but its a long time ago so I can't say. However, Nile Ranger is a good example I believe and I've been saying we need to get rid for awhile now.

agreed.
Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't we see a slightly less rabid version of 'defend our own whatever' over andy carroll  and joey barton ?

 

You're confusing times you've struck poses over in the past with comparable incidents. One's about observing an entire community engaging in deceit and delusion in the face of overwhelming evidence, while gaily going around calling all manner of people liars and conmen, while the others were essentially about opinions over appropriate internal disciplinary action for events that had definitely taken place (in Barton's case at least). Personally, I reserve the right not to destroy someone for raising a fist, I frankly don't see it as that bad a thing in itself before looking at the wider situation, and resent the suggestion it's something to do with my personal interests. Incidentally, the same goes for Suarez, although I waive that right :aww:

 

Edit: Closest thing in our history was after we signed Lee Bowyer. A good load never got behind him, and even fewer were heartfelt, but still, that was a bit ugly...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbf ranger is a shit example, as he's not an integral part of the first team, so we'd readily ditch him as he's not worth the hassle. Barton always had the ability there to make a difference, The fact he barely used it the first couple of years is another matter. But I still dont remember a massive uproar at him getting punished. More a case of well it he's not going to be sacked, we might as well support him when he's playing for us, rather than any kind of concerted effort to prove any innocence when clearly guilty.

 

I could be talking bollocks as ever though. :dontknow:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbf ranger is a s*** example, as he's not an integral part of the first team, so we'd readily ditch him as he's not worth the hassle. Barton always had the ability there to make a difference, The fact he barely used it the first couple of years is another matter. But I still dont remember a massive uproar at him getting punished. More a case of well it he's not going to be sacked, we might as well support him when he's playing for us, rather than any kind of concerted effort to prove any innocence when clearly guilty.

 

I could be talking bollocks as ever though. :dontknow:

Had I even created you when barton was putting us through that ? ;D
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbf ranger is a s*** example, as he's not an integral part of the first team, so we'd readily ditch him as he's not worth the hassle. Barton always had the ability there to make a difference, The fact he barely used it the first couple of years is another matter. But I still dont remember a massive uproar at him getting punished. More a case of well it he's not going to be sacked, we might as well support him when he's playing for us, rather than any kind of concerted effort to prove any innocence when clearly guilty.

 

I could be talking bollocks as ever though. :dontknow:

Well there are (or there were) loads on here that were hailing Ranger as the second coming for ages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a look at the Suarez report.

 

If he referred to the player's race in the course of an argument, he's guilty. Those are the standards that operate here.

 

I just think he was operating with a Blatter-esque mentality, in which the victim would try to sort it out on the field, and wouldn't launch a complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil Thompson's a dick like. Not saying that Liverpool are out of the title race.

 

McAnally spot on with what he's saying now, and you can tell that he's pissed off with what Thompson is about.

 

Now Tony Cottee piping up saying if they beat Man City they are only 8 points behind and are right back in it.

 

Fuck's sake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil Thompson's a dick like. Not saying that Liverpool are out of the title race.

 

McAnally spot on with what he's saying now, and you can tell that he's pissed off with what Thompson is about.

 

Now Tony Cottee piping up saying if they beat Man City they are only 8 points behind and are right back in it.

 

Fuck's sake.

 

If we'd beat them the other night, would they be asking if we were in the title race? Exactly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

William Roache @Bill_Roache 4h  Reply  Retweet  Favorite · Open

@kennethdalglish Saddened by your role in the Suarez affair Ken. Consider yourself blackballed from the Bill Roache Golf Invitational 2012.

 

:mike: :mike: :mike:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing really new, but a nice little summary:

 

Luis Suárez race case: what report said about key figures

Kenny Dalglish, Dirk Kuyt, Damien Comolli and Luis Suárez’s legal representative Peter McCormick were all criticised in Football Association report.

 

Luis Suárez

Although the commission said he was “respectful” in his demeanour, they were damning about his evidence, branding it “inconsistent”, “unreliable” and – in his claim that he had attempted to behave in a “conciliatory” manner towards Evra – “simply incredible”. They also suggested he revised elements of his account in light of expert testimony on the usage of the term “negro” in Uruguay.

 

Patrice Evra

The commission found Evra to be “impressive”, “composed” and “clear” in his delivery of evidence and that he had a “balanced” attitude. Although he was criticised for having sparked the flare-up with his use of an offensive term, the Frenchman was ultimately vindicated.

 

Andre Marriner

The referee for the game was praised for his evidence, which was described as “plausible and credible”. He was also saluted for his on-field handling of a potentially explosive situation.

 

Dirk Kuyt

The Liverpool striker claimed that Evra had told Marriner he was being booked because he was black, an allegation rejected out of hand by the commission, who said the claim made “no sense”. The inconsistencies in his account of his conversation with Suárez after the game over what had been said weakened the Uruguayan’s case, according to the commission.

 

Kenny Dalglish

The commission labelled elements of what the Liverpool manager told Marriner in his room immediately after the final whistle “surprising”, as it contradicted various elements of Suárez’s own testimony. In his evidence, Phil Dowd, the fourth official at Anfield that day, said Dalglish had remarked “hasn’t he done this before?” in relation to Evra’s allegations, although this was not remarked upon in the report.

 

Damien Comolli

Another witness whose account of what Suárez had said to Evra “surprised” the commission. They drew attention to “discrepancies” in what Comolli reported to the referee about what Suárez had claimed to say to Evra in the immediate aftermath of the game and the striker’s evidence. They pointed out these discrepancies had “not been satisfactorily explained”.

 

Peter McCormick

Suárez’s legal representative was highly criticised. His suggestion that Evra made up his claim that Suárez said “I don’t speak with blacks” to gain revenge on the Uruguayan for failing to explain why he had fouled him earlier in the game was deemed “unrealistic”. He also said that Suárez’s claim that pinching Evra’s arm was an attempt to “defuse” the situation was due to “bad drafting” of the striker’s statement, a point that was also rejected out of hand by the commission.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/8987643/Luis-Suarez-race-case-what-report-said-about-key-figures.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill_Roache William Roache

LFC fans showing their class. Vile comments about Anne (Deirdre) to deflect attention from the behaviour of their club #SaySorrySuarez

 

:lol: :lol:

 

That can't be real. :lol: :lol:

 

 

That report. Pinched his arm to defuse the situation? :lol: W.T.F.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...