Quazzie wrote: » They weren't rebuffed by the player. Suarez actively sought out Arsenal, and then when Arsenal made a perfectly legal bid for him, Liverpool brole contractual law and refused to sell. Not bitter, i was just pointing out earlier how Liverpool have a history of illegal activity when it comes to transfers.
GavRedKing wrote: » Question, why are Arsenal fans bitter about the Suarez transfer? They chanced their arm and got rebuffed by the player who signed an extension for a hefty rise with the promise that he'd be sold the following summer by Liverpool.
Quazzie wrote: » That's quiet a serious allegation to make. Have you any proof that any of this happened? I think it's a lot more likely that his agent went to Arsenal, and made them aware of it, because Suarez wanted to go there, as he was desperate to get away from Liverpool.
Giggsy11 wrote: » Apparently City were ready to pay more than PSG but Alves rejected them.
Agent Coulson wrote: » And Arsenal illegally tapped up his agent to find out how much the alleged buyout clause was and offered a £1 over it.
Quazzie wrote: » They illegally refused to deal with Arsenal when Arsenal triggered Suarez release clause. They think they're a law onto themselves for quite some time now.
Lukker- wrote: » In Spain it's binding AFAIK. But it can mean the tax burden is on the buying club.
GavRedKing wrote: » The general consesnus and reporting, whether its true or not, is that if a club meets a release clause, it only means the club then has to inform their player of the offer. It doesnt mean they have to sell the player at all.
dr.kenneth noisewater wrote: » Did this not happen months ago?
zerks wrote: » Liverpool in trouble again: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/07/11/exclusive-liverpool-accused-falsifying-document-heart-tapped/ The Liverpool tapping-up scandal was dramatically reignited on Tuesday after they were accused of submitting a “falsified” document to the Premier League when trying to lure a 12-year-old schoolboy from Stoke City. The Anfield club are facing imminent legal action from the unnamed boy, now 13, and his family, having failed to make amends for leaving both him unable to play academy football and his parents in thousands of pounds of debt more than three months after Telegraph Sport first revealed their plight. Compounding the litany of transgressions over which Liverpool became the first club to be punished under strict new Premier League rules - and the lengths to which they were allegedly prepared to go to conceal them - they have now been publicly accused of altering the date of a signature on his academy player registration application. Father and son completed the document on September 2 last year, three days before the latter began the new school year at his private school, the fees for which Liverpool had agreed to pay until he was 16. The club directed the pair not to date their signatures, an instruction the father ignored to ensure the moment was accurately recorded. The next time the family saw the document - after it had been submitted to the Premier League - all the signatures on it were dated September 21, including the father’s, beneath which a ‘1’ had been inserted after his initial ‘2’. The new date made it appear he and his son had signed more than two weeks after the latter had started school, rather than three days beforehand. The FA will probably do nothing and count it as "case closed" after imposing a transfer ban on signing academy players.
The Liverpool tapping-up scandal was dramatically reignited on Tuesday after they were accused of submitting a “falsified” document to the Premier League when trying to lure a 12-year-old schoolboy from Stoke City. The Anfield club are facing imminent legal action from the unnamed boy, now 13, and his family, having failed to make amends for leaving both him unable to play academy football and his parents in thousands of pounds of debt more than three months after Telegraph Sport first revealed their plight. Compounding the litany of transgressions over which Liverpool became the first club to be punished under strict new Premier League rules - and the lengths to which they were allegedly prepared to go to conceal them - they have now been publicly accused of altering the date of a signature on his academy player registration application. Father and son completed the document on September 2 last year, three days before the latter began the new school year at his private school, the fees for which Liverpool had agreed to pay until he was 16. The club directed the pair not to date their signatures, an instruction the father ignored to ensure the moment was accurately recorded. The next time the family saw the document - after it had been submitted to the Premier League - all the signatures on it were dated September 21, including the father’s, beneath which a ‘1’ had been inserted after his initial ‘2’. The new date made it appear he and his son had signed more than two weeks after the latter had started school, rather than three days beforehand.
LiamoSail wrote: » I heard Kenny Dalglish was tapped up too, not to mention Alan Hanson
zerks wrote: » Liverpool in trouble again:
Deleted User wrote: » Christian Ziege...Harry Kewell...
zerks wrote: » Could impact them transfer wise if the FA grow a pair.Between this and the VDV affair,they look less appealing to anyone considering doing business with them.
zerks wrote: » but this revelation that they changed the dates on documents along with tapping up VDV could have a bearing on future transfers.
RoboKlopp wrote: » Oh it is. Little victories etc. Liverpool are not signing much anyway. Was wondering has a ban already been given!
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5c1c06444977305a5e99f4ce35119320.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/11f397efbb618f280f346771bb290fe0.svg)
