The Liverpool Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steve*
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 44K
  • Views Views 3M
Tezzz said:
I've just read this. If true it's good we get to keep him but....

**** UEFA. Ran by ******* retards. Taking our best defender this season away from us for the final. Well done you stupid retarded *****. Absolute cancer to the modern game.
Click to expand...
Why blame UEFA when it was Liverpool in agreement with the player who effectively suspended him in the first place pending an investigation, only for UEFA to impose the 30 day ban whilst an investigation took place. To quote an official Club statement :"Yesterday, Friday 22nd April 2016, a formal communication was received from UEFA stating that they are investigating a possible anti-doping rule violation by Mamadou Sakho. The player will respond to UEFA on the matter. The player is currently not subject to any playing suspension. However, the club, in consultation with the player, has decided that while this process is followed the player will not be available for selection for matches. There will be no further comment at this time.
If the club wasn't worried why prevent him from playing, they must have been concerned enough to effectively suspend the player from their games before UEFA gave out the 30 day ban. UEFA didn't need to suspend him as Liverpool already had, they were just making it official. It's amazing how quickly supporters forget what has happened if it doesn't fit into their rose tinted viewpoint.

Read more: Mamadou Sakho suspended by Liverpool after failing drugs test | Metro News
 
woolly said:
Why blame UEFA when it was Liverpool in agreement with the player who effectively suspended him in the first place pending an investigation, only for UEFA to impose the 30 day ban whilst an investigation took place. To quote an official Club statement :"Yesterday, Friday 22nd April 2016, a formal communication was received from UEFA stating that they are investigating a possible anti-doping rule violation by Mamadou Sakho. The player will respond to UEFA on the matter. The player is currently not subject to any playing suspension. However, the club, in consultation with the player, has decided that while this process is followed the player will not be available for selection for matches. There will be no further comment at this time.
If the club wasn't worried why prevent him from playing, they must have been concerned enough to effectively suspend the player from their games before UEFA gave out the 30 day ban. UEFA didn't need to suspend him as Liverpool already had, they were just making it official. It's amazing how quickly supporters forget what has happened if it doesn't fit into their rose tinted viewpoint.

Read more: Mamadou Sakho suspended by Liverpool after failing drugs test | Metro News
Click to expand...

"Yesterday, Friday 22nd April 2016, a formal communication was received from UEFA stating that they are investigating a possible anti-doping rule violation by Mamadou Sakho. The player will respond to UEFA on the matter. The player is currently not subject to any playing suspension. However, the club, in consultation with the player, has decided that while this process is followed the player will not be available for selection for matches. There will be no further comment at this time." - Liverpool FC official statement.

The club didn't suspend him. I'm assuming they didn't pick him in case he was found guilty by UEFA and that may have compromised any results he played in; potentially costing us a UEFA Europa League trophy if he's played and we'd won. Either way, I don't think it's being viewed through rose tinted glass... If anything, your interpretation of the events is strange since you think they suspended him.

 
woolly said:
Why blame UEFA when it was Liverpool in agreement with the player who effectively suspended him in the first place pending an investigation, only for UEFA to impose the 30 day ban whilst an investigation took place. To quote an official Club statement :"Yesterday, Friday 22nd April 2016, a formal communication was received from UEFA stating that they are investigating a possible anti-doping rule violation by Mamadou Sakho. The player will respond to UEFA on the matter. The player is currently not subject to any playing suspension. However, the club, in consultation with the player, has decided that while this process is followed the player will not be available for selection for matches. There will be no further comment at this time.
If the club wasn't worried why prevent him from playing, they must have been concerned enough to effectively suspend the player from their games before UEFA gave out the 30 day ban. UEFA didn't need to suspend him as Liverpool already had, they were just making it official. It's amazing how quickly supporters forget what has happened if it doesn't fit into their rose tinted viewpoint.

Read more: Mamadou Sakho suspended by Liverpool after failing drugs test | Metro News
Click to expand...

Read that twice and I'm struggling to understand your point so I'll let you explain.

But I'd drop the 'Metro' quote s a general rule. That's not a good source to try run with. Go with something credible.
 
Scouseinthehouse said:
Read that twice and I'm struggling to understand your point so I'll let you explain.

But I'd drop the 'Metro' quote s a general rule. That's not a good source to try run with. Go with something credible.
Click to expand...
Don't ask me how the Metro **** got stuck to the post, but the truth is even if UEFA hadn't given a suspension he wasn't going to play as the club and player decided to NOT play him pending the investigation. The fact that UEFA subsequently handed out a 30 day suspension is irrelevant to the case he was prevented initially from playing by the club not UEFA, whether it was a suspension (to be fair it was a poor choice of phase) or just a decision made by the club and player doesn't make it UEFA's fault. Fans just like to blame the authorities when things don't go their way. Would a link to the Official Liverpool Site be more creditable ;) Liverpool FC club statement - Liverpool FC
 
What would the French do? Start Mangala? Ideally it would have been Koscielny and Varane. Now after injuries, France are stuck with an erratic horror show called Mangala in defence. Surely it would make sense to call up Sakho?
 
damola3 said:
What would the French do? Start Mangala? Ideally it would have been Koscielny and Varane. Now after injuries, France are stuck with an erratic horror show called Mangala in defence. Surely it would make sense to call up Sakho?
Click to expand...

Logically one would think but Deschamps is adamant that ain't happening.

Although looking at the in form, top talent he's left out of the French squad what's going through his mind right now is anyones guess?
 
woolly said:
Don't ask me how the Metro **** got stuck to the post, but the truth is even if UEFA hadn't given a suspension he wasn't going to play as the club and player decided to NOT play him pending the investigation. The fact that UEFA subsequently handed out a 30 day suspension is irrelevant to the case he was prevented initially from playing by the club not UEFA, whether it was a suspension (to be fair it was a poor choice of phase) or just a decision made by the club and player doesn't make it UEFA's fault. Fans just like to blame the authorities when things don't go their way. Would a link to the Official Liverpool Site be more creditable ;) Liverpool FC club statement - Liverpool FC
Click to expand...

So if I'm reading you right, Liverpool FC should be the ones to blame and not UEFA? Is that correct?
 
Nope it was a decision made by the player and the club at the time based on the information available, remember there was no guarantee that the club would reach the cup final when the decision not to play him was made. It's just one of those things you cannot blame anyone for what happened, apart from Sakho maybe for taking the diet pills without checking the banned list.
 
Not sure exactly how this is UEFAs fault. It was on the banned list (thus he failed) they have since decided the aren't even sure it should be on the banned list. Technically they would still be within rights to leave him banned until they decide. But they haven't done so.
 
Mike. said:
Not sure exactly how this is UEFAs fault. It was on the banned list (thus he failed) they have since decided the aren't even sure it should be on the banned list. Technically they would still be within rights to leave him banned until they decide. But they haven't done so.
Click to expand...

So it's exactly Uefa's fault then? They've banned a player for using a banned substance which they aren't sure is on the banned list?
 
woolly said:
Don't ask me how the Metro **** got stuck to the post, but the truth is even if UEFA hadn't given a suspension he wasn't going to play as the club and player decided to NOT play him pending the investigation. The fact that UEFA subsequently handed out a 30 day suspension is irrelevant to the case he was prevented initially from playing by the club not UEFA, whether it was a suspension (to be fair it was a poor choice of phase) or just a decision made by the club and player doesn't make it UEFA's fault. Fans just like to blame the authorities when things don't go their way. Would a link to the Official Liverpool Site be more creditable ;) Liverpool FC club statement - Liverpool FC
Click to expand...

Everyone knew he was going to receive a 30 day ban.
 
Tezzz said:
So it's exactly Uefa's fault then? They've banned a player for using a banned substance which they aren't sure is on the banned list?
Click to expand...

No. They are investigating whether it should remain on the banned list. It currently still is on the banned list. He still failed a drug test. What you said is not what I wrote.
 
What people don't understand about drugs lists is that they are dynamic. Things can come on and off the banned list. It's why sportsmen and women in all competitions need to be aware of the changes. Which they are notified of.

UEFA could easily decide it should stay on the list and then his ban would be extended.
 
Last edited:
Mike. said:
No. They are investigating whether it should remain on the banned list. It currently still is on the banned list. He still failed a drug test. What you said is not what I wrote.
Click to expand...

My bad, I mis-read it.
 
Tezzz said:
My bad, I mis-read it.
Click to expand...

No problem. It's being badly reported in Liverpool circles. Its not that they don't know. It's because after evidence offered by his lawyer, they are deciding whether it should stay. It's good they are willing to listen. Some bodies would ignore it rather than admit they can learn something
 
Tezzz said:
Well done mate. What did you graduate in? Cheers I'll check that out!!

And to be honest Lovren wasn't just poor or having a slow start mate, he was absolutely shocking.
Click to expand...

Thanks! Sports Journalism - Graduated last summer and spent the past year at Blackpool FC.

He really, really was...
 
Tezzz said:
My dad said we should go to Wembley. I'm pretty meh on it at the moment. What game would pick if we went to a pre season one?
Click to expand...

Those tickets go on sale tomorrow if you're still thinking about it.

Wish they'd hurry up and decide one way or the other on the Mainz game they day after.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top