Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:05 pm  

I think it's now clear for all to see, Hart is clearly the best keeper in the prem and the scary thing is, he will only get better, and this is a very long sentence, I'm sorry.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:12 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

Why didn't Liverpool start with Stevie Me and Bellamy? Rob, do you still think Reina is clearly the best keeper in the world?

He's not had his best season, it happens, but I was never saying those things on his form this season, was I? Even then, he has played well for the past few months, but he has made a couple of errors that we're not really used to seeing. You know I used to say that Torres was the best forward in the world after Villa, it's now debatable if Torres is even a forward.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:42 pm  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012 ... CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012 ... CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:45 pm  

flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z That's highly typical of the Mirror to be honest. Maybe the Mirror should start a campaign to stop the PL being shown in Latin American countries, as all the commentators call players 'negro' on there. I doubt they care that much though.

flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z That's highly typical of the Mirror to be honest. Maybe the Mirror should start a campaign to stop the PL being shown in Latin American countries, as all the commentators call players 'negro' on there. I doubt they care that much though.

[Wigan6/Leeds1 Andy]

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:32 am  

flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z These last three paras from the Guardian piece sum up perfectly why I'm still scratching my head at Liverpool's stance..... Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting". Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said." Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again.

flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z These last three paras from the Guardian piece sum up perfectly why I'm still scratching my head at Liverpool's stance..... Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting". Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said." Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:58 am  

Wigan28/Leeds18 Andy wrote: flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z These last three paras from the Guardian piece sum up perfectly why I'm still scratching my head at Liverpool's stance..... Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting". Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said." Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again. indeed, suarez, comolli, kuyt, dalglish and the club as a whole are painted in a bad, conspiratorial light, yet no apology to evra, or acknowledgement of any wrong doing, just more surly ill advised statements from the club, i wouldn't be surprised if there is more to come

Wigan28/Leeds18 Andy wrote: flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z These last three paras from the Guardian piece sum up perfectly why I'm still scratching my head at Liverpool's stance..... Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting". Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said." Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again. indeed, suarez, comolli, kuyt, dalglish and the club as a whole are painted in a bad, conspiratorial light, yet no apology to evra, or acknowledgement of any wrong doing, just more surly ill advised statements from the club, i wouldn't be surprised if there is more to come

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:23 am  

Roddy B wrote:

lefty goldblatt wrote:

True, a man of Toure's build could have stayed on his feet, but, if you're shoved in the area, you go down.

I need Arthur Clarke to explain why Skrtl wasn't shown a red (and not even a yellow). Last man fouled = red card, unless the rules have been changed today.

He was going down before the contact it seemed. It seems to be the way of the modern game: contact in area; hit the ground; penalty. I was always of the belief that it had to be 'sufficient contact', but the definition of that obviously means anything. You could stand on a player's undone lace and it would be deemed sufficient contact.

I don't think Skrtel was shown a red because he didn't seem to be getting to the ball, of what I seen, Reina was comfortably getting to the ball and he wasn't going towards goal. It could have got a yellow, but I guess the ref felt that the penalty was enough punishment. I'm never sure on the red card rule anymore, especially around penalties.

There were plenty of players going down in the second half after the slightest of touches, in some cases falling over without being touched. Don't know what it looked like on the the telly, but from close to ground level the pitch was like a skating rink. Modern pitches are light years ahead of the mub baths on which I used to watch winter football, but they can have a problem with surface water.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:31 am  

flipper wrote: Wigan28/Leeds18 Andy wrote: flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z These last three paras from the Guardian piece sum up perfectly why I'm still scratching my head at Liverpool's stance..... Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting". Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said." Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again. indeed, suarez, comolli, kuyt, dalglish and the club as a whole are painted in a bad, conspiratorial light, yet no apology to evra, or acknowledgement of any wrong doing, just more surly ill advised statements from the club, i wouldn't be surprised if there is more to come Is Garry Cook still out of work? If not Liverpool could perhaps recruit him to improve their PR department. Did anyone hear and understand Mark Lawrenson's comments, on 5 Live just before kick off, on Dalglish's drinking habits? Something along the lines of "he never used to drink as a player, now he's the last to be dragged out of the resturant". I couldnt work out whether he was insinuating he had a problem, or just saying in a cack handed way that he was uptight as a player, became more relaxed when he retired, reverted to type when he became a manager. Either way I dont think he was doing his mate any favours.

flipper wrote: Wigan28/Leeds18 Andy wrote: flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z These last three paras from the Guardian piece sum up perfectly why I'm still scratching my head at Liverpool's stance..... Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting". Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said." Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again. indeed, suarez, comolli, kuyt, dalglish and the club as a whole are painted in a bad, conspiratorial light, yet no apology to evra, or acknowledgement of any wrong doing, just more surly ill advised statements from the club, i wouldn't be surprised if there is more to come Is Garry Cook still out of work? If not Liverpool could perhaps recruit him to improve their PR department. Did anyone hear and understand Mark Lawrenson's comments, on 5 Live just before kick off, on Dalglish's drinking habits? Something along the lines of "he never used to drink as a player, now he's the last to be dragged out of the resturant". I couldnt work out whether he was insinuating he had a problem, or just saying in a cack handed way that he was uptight as a player, became more relaxed when he retired, reverted to type when he became a manager. Either way I dont think he was doing his mate any favours.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:07 am  

Cibaman wrote: flipper wrote: Wigan28/Leeds18 Andy wrote: flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z These last three paras from the Guardian piece sum up perfectly why I'm still scratching my head at Liverpool's stance..... Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting". Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said." Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again. indeed, suarez, comolli, kuyt, dalglish and the club as a whole are painted in a bad, conspiratorial light, yet no apology to evra, or acknowledgement of any wrong doing, just more surly ill advised statements from the club, i wouldn't be surprised if there is more to come Is Garry Cook still out of work? If not Liverpool could perhaps recruit him to improve their PR department. Did anyone hear and understand Mark Lawrenson's comments, on 5 Live just before kick off, on Dalglish's drinking habits? Something along the lines of "he never used to drink as a player, now he's the last to be dragged out of the resturant". I couldnt work out whether he was insinuating he had a problem, or just saying in a cack handed way that he was uptight as a player, became more relaxed when he retired, reverted to type when he became a manager. Either way I dont think he was doing his mate any favours. they are on youtube, i thought he hinted at a problem, and almost seemed to reign himself in from saying more at one point http://www.daylife.com/photo/0drWf7e5FQ ... erpool+F.C.

Cibaman wrote: flipper wrote: Wigan28/Leeds18 Andy wrote: flipper wrote: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu http://twitpic.com/82t10z These last three paras from the Guardian piece sum up perfectly why I'm still scratching my head at Liverpool's stance..... Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting". Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said." Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again. indeed, suarez, comolli, kuyt, dalglish and the club as a whole are painted in a bad, conspiratorial light, yet no apology to evra, or acknowledgement of any wrong doing, just more surly ill advised statements from the club, i wouldn't be surprised if there is more to come Is Garry Cook still out of work? If not Liverpool could perhaps recruit him to improve their PR department. Did anyone hear and understand Mark Lawrenson's comments, on 5 Live just before kick off, on Dalglish's drinking habits? Something along the lines of "he never used to drink as a player, now he's the last to be dragged out of the resturant". I couldnt work out whether he was insinuating he had a problem, or just saying in a cack handed way that he was uptight as a player, became more relaxed when he retired, reverted to type when he became a manager. Either way I dont think he was doing his mate any favours. they are on youtube, i thought he hinted at a problem, and almost seemed to reign himself in from saying more at one point http://www.daylife.com/photo/0drWf7e5FQ ... erpool+F.C.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:04 am  

Are Liverpool fans not embarassed by Kenny Dalglish? Makes Rafa look sensible. Keep backing the racist Kenny.