Guest sibon Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I'm probably going over old ground here but I can understand to a certain degree why Liverpool would not want to isolate Suarez because as a club they have invested a lot of money in him, remember Di Canio at Wednesday, the club shunned him and what did they gain from it ? Just a thought ! To an extent, I agree. Wednesday certainly didn't handle the DiCanio affair very well at all. Liverpool, if anything have gone too far in the other direction though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_W Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 To an extent, I agree. Wednesday certainly didn't handle the DiCanio affair very well at all. Liverpool, if anything have gone too far in the other direction though. Devil and the deep blue sea springs to mind, I'm sure this experience has taught Liverpool a valuable lesson, but they could have dealt with the issue quite insincerely in a way which appeased the media, the public and the player, instead they opted just to appease Suarez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wibbles Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 It was quite amusing to hear excuses from Liverpudlians last night. They ranged from the guy not being a local and went into the Kop to cause trouble (despite him being from the area) to the fans sticking together and saying the guy shouted "Manc Bustard" at Adeyemi rather than "black" - as if that makes it all right. He's not even a Manc. Most fans of any club would. That's football nowadays..it's wrong but that's what it is. Fans can't see past their own rose tinted glasses, just look at some of the blerts on here. Man U fans aren't disgusted or feel for Evra because he's been racially abused..they see it as an opportunity to goad a rival team. Look at Chelsea fans chanting towards Anton Ferdinand, Spurs chants to Adebayor Racism is live and kicking at every club and every club has it's racist supporters..only difference to date is that they've not been stupid enough to air it publicly. It's the latest 'craze' for the media to write about. Where are the reports of racism on a day to day basis? It gets headlines when it suits the papers and sky sports, not when it's in the best interests of fans. It's ok though, according to Ollie Holt calling someone a black so and so isn't racist. Obviously he's talking rubbish but even the people that write the headlines on which a lot of people base their opinions on hasn't got a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wibbles Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Devil and the deep blue sea springs to mind, I'm sure this experience has taught Liverpool a valuable lesson, but they could have dealt with the issue quite insincerely in a way which appeased the media, the public and the player, instead they opted just to appease Suarez. Is this the same Di Canio who made Nazi salutes towards Lazio fans? Now the press love him..short memories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J_Everitt_98 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 How can Luis Suarez be "guilty as charged" if theres no proof its Evra's word against his:huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J_Everitt_98 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 How can Luis Suarez be "guilty as charged" if theres no proof its Evra's word against his Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robS35 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 How can Luis Suarez be "guilty as charged" if theres no proof its Evra's word against his Didn't Suarez admit himself that he used the word ***** ? If so, not exactly Evra's word against Suarez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Didn't Suarez admit himself that he used the word ***** ? If so, not exactly Evra's word against Suarez. Also as the independent report pointed out Suarez's testimony contradicted: Himself, he changed his story several times Kuyt (liverpool teammate) Comolli (Liverpool director of football) Video evidence In stark contrast Evra's evidence was consistent with: Himself, his testimony was consistent Kuyt (of Liverpool hardly his best bud) Comolli (Liverpool director of football) Video evidence When you've got person A who is contradicted by team-mates & video evidence so has to keep changing their story and who ended up laughably claiming that he called person B "*****" and pinched him in "conciliatory and friendly" manner to try and defuse the situation. It's hardly surprising that little value is placed upon person A's word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fudbeer Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2900/fa-cup/2012/01/28/2871684/kenny-dalglish-praises-liverpool-fans-and-defends-abuse-of Geez Dalglish seems to be living in the 70's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fudbeer Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 And this is what you get when you don't deal with the issue correctly,Dalglish is a disgrace for the way he publicly supported a player found guilty of racism can't wait to hear how he defends him now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.