Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours 2016, Mod Warning in OP, 10/7

JonnyM · 24-04-2016 11:08AM

I doubt Klopp sees Mignolet as his long term no 1 and would be a huge mistake not to bring in a top keeper in the summer.

Whether or not he took the no 1 spot but at the very least need to give mignolet something to think about and not just think it's a given that's he's no 1.

K-9 · 24-04-2016 11:26AM

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Some stuff I've lifted from Twitter...

https://twitter.com/JCuzzy1/status/724168908668854272

He shouldn't be anywhere near the team.

I read a stats article about our defence a few weeks back, we actually don't give up that many chances or shots at all, we just seem to always concede when we do!

Doubt it is all down to Mig, but yeah he's a big part of it and it doesn't seem to be improving.

K-9 · 24-04-2016 11:29AM

Saul T Nutzz wrote: »

Has it ever happened ie a club being punished for the transgressions of players?

Wasn't there a high profile case in Italy around 2000 or so, don't think the club involved got much of a punishment IIRC, could be wrong though.

Pyjamarama · 24-04-2016 11:41AM

If we adhere to the concept that Liverpool should be kicked out of Europa for beating United with a "drug cheat" do United have to give back all the titles they won with Rio? Or is intentionally missing a drug test to mask your activities more acceptable?

Buford T. Justice XIX · 24-04-2016 11:45AM

Harry Palmr wrote: »

look at the flap at 30 seconds in against Villa - exact copy of yesterday

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwH7vu60rAY

It's bad enough watching the errors the first time round.

I'll not be watching the repeats as well:(

K-9 · 24-04-2016 11:47AM

Pyjamarama wrote: »

If we adhere to the concept that Liverpool should be kicked out of Europa for beating United with a "drug cheat" do United have to give back all the titles they won with Rio? Or is intentionally missing a drug test to mask your activities more acceptable?

Exactly, as others said, where do you draw the line? Points deduction for any PL game Sakho played in and we got a result?

J Mysterio · 24-04-2016 11:48AM

I just am in despair of losing Sakho for Villareal, especially after having lost Origi and Can. The defence cannot cope without him - we need him. Painfully obvious after his brilliant displays recently and actually having managed to form a good bond with Lovren (of people).

I'm less concerned with the 'was it an accident'/ 'intentional doping' stuff than just mourning a dreadfull loss to the team.

Toure is a smart player with good game management but he just doesnt have the legs anymore. Skrtel is not particularly mobile either.

When is Joey Gomez back?

24-04-2016 11:50AM

JonnyM wrote: »

I doubt Klopp sees Mignolet as his long term no 1 and would be a huge mistake not to bring in a top keeper in the summer.

Whether or not he took the no 1 spot but at the very least need to give mignolet something to think about and not just think it's a given that's he's no 1.

At his best Mig is very decent, the issue is he can't be judged at his best as he doesn't play at that level consistently.

He came back well after being dropped last season for Jones but he has relapsed to being terrible on several occasions since.

As I see it he's good enough to be PL back up and play in the domestic cups, we need an undisputed #1 GK though, someone who on paper is much better than giving Mig something to think about.

I used to think there was something wrong in his personal life, bad investments, sick relative, wife taking a lash of it off a local scally, gambling problem or something.... I know have swung around to thinking he is just a 6/10 keeper for the mostpart and we need an 8/10 one at least.

Club needs to get a GK over the summer, number 1 priority imo.

LiamoSail · 24-04-2016 11:56AM

Pyjamarama wrote: »

If we adhere to the concept that Liverpool should be kicked out of Europa for beating United with a "drug cheat" do United have to give back all the titles they won with Rio? Or is intentionally missing a drug test to mask your activities more acceptable?

I think for that season, any game in which he played should have been awarded as a 3-0 win to United's opponents. Obviously you can't retrospectives introduce such a rule, hence were it in force at the time, there'd have been no title stripping; United simply wouldn't have won anything

24-04-2016 11:58AM

LiamoSail wrote: »

I think for that season, any game in which he played should have been awarded as a 3-0 win to United's opponents. Obviously you can't retrospectives introduce such a rule, hence were it in force at the time, there'd have been no title stripping; United simply wouldn't have won anything

What would happen then if more advanced techniques a decade later cleared a player of any wrong doing?

J Mysterio · 24-04-2016 12:02PM

LiamoSail wrote: »

I think for that season, any game in which he played should have been awarded as a 3-0 win to United's opponents. Obviously you can't retrospectives introduce such a rule, hence were it in force at the time, there'd have been no title stripping; United simply wouldn't have won anything

Because one player was doping? That's nonsense.

If you are going to have testing you need to have the proper infastructure in place so you can test all and do so regularly - to actually expose any widespread doping.

To just throw the book at a club rather than the guilty player when you find an isolated case is preposterous. They did the crime, if the club wasnt colluding they should just get a telling off.

Perhaps its incumbent on the clubs to have their own testing though that may be a responsibility of the FA in terms of introducing legislation.

kfallon · 24-04-2016 12:02PM

Augeo wrote: »

At his best Mig is very decent

lol - he's shít, David James lite!

LiamoSail · 24-04-2016 12:05PM

RoboKlopp wrote: »

What would happen then if more advanced techniques a decade later cleared a player of any wrong doing?

You could say the same about any punishment for any crime ever committed, if your intent is to argue against punishment. How can we send anyone in this country to prison if more advanced techniques a decade later could prove them not guilty?

All that can be done is a test that satisfies the standard of beyond reasonable doubt. While I don't claim to know much about drug testing, I believe with the expertise, technology and finance available, it can't be that difficult to develop a test that can detect the use of PED's to a high degree of accuracy

LiamoSail · 24-04-2016 12:09PM

J Mysterio wrote: »

Because one player was doping? That's nonsense.

If you are going to have testing you need to have the proper infastructure in place so you can test all and do so regularly - to actually expose any widespread doping.

To just throw the book at a club rather than the guilty player when you find an isolated case is preposterous. They did the crime, if the club wasnt colluding they should just get a telling off.

Perhaps its incumbent on the clubs to have their own testing though that may be a responsibility of the FA in terms of introducing legislation.

Entirely agree with your last point.

My aim would be to ensure that where PED's were used, no advantage was gained, hence games forfeited. The extent of how that punishes clubs would be a byproduct, rather than the aim.

The point is however that a club fielding a player using PED's, either intentionally or otherwise, will have benefited in certain games. Those results shouldn't be allowed stand IMO

J Mysterio · 24-04-2016 12:23PM

LiamoSail wrote: »

Entirely agree with your last point.

My aim would be to ensure that where PED's were used, no advantage was gained, hence games forfeited. The extent of how that punishes clubs would be a byproduct, rather than the aim.

The point is however that a club fielding a player using PED's, either intentionally or otherwise, will have benefited in certain games. Those results shouldn't be allowed stand IMO

If a player is caught out, the club is punished anyway. They get tainted with bad publicity and their asset will lose value. They also lose the use of their player - who, in this instance is an important first team player - and that will cost the team in the long run.

I think we would have beaten Newcastle if we had Sakho. Im nervous now for Thursday whereas I had been v. optimistic for the Cup.

Anyway, if the FA want to introduce a mandatory comprehensive testing scheme which clubs have to implement, good. Untill then, the player is (potentially) at fault, not the club

LiamoSail · 24-04-2016 12:29PM

J Mysterio wrote: »

If a player is caught out, the club is punished anyway. They get tainted with bad publicity and their asset will lose value. They also lose the use of their player - who, in this instance is an important first team player - and that will cost the team in the long run.

I think we would have beaten Newcastle if we had Sakho. Im nervous now for Thursday whereas I had been v. optimistic for the Cup.

As I said, it's about righting a wrong rather than just punishment. Liverpool still gained an advantage in a tie, albeit unknowingly, through a player using a banned substance. Banning Sahko from future games coupled with the financial implications for the club doesn't go any way to righting the wrong,ma warding the opponents a three nil victory does however

J Mysterio · 24-04-2016 12:30PM

Disagree.

SuperTortoise · 24-04-2016 12:31PM

LiamoSail wrote: »

Entirely agree with your last point.

My aim would be to ensure that where PED's were used, no advantage was gained, hence games forfeited. The extent of how that punishes clubs would be a byproduct, rather than the aim.

The point is however that a club fielding a player using PED's, either intentionally or otherwise, will have benefited in certain games. Those results shouldn't be allowed stand IMO

Yes, but not by a substantial margin, now my knowledge of PED's is small, but i imagine it would be of a greater benefit to say a midfielder or a wing back, they need to cover more ground than a CB and therefore their fitness and stamina levels would need to be higher.
And even then talent and skill on the ball will shine through more than endurance.

I don't believe it has the same benefit as it would in say a pro cyclist for example, where endurance is the biggest factor, and now add in he is one of eleven players so his influence is even less now, in that case would it be fair to punish an entire club for the mistake of one individual?

If the club knew what was going on(i doubt it) then of course further action needs to be taken, but right now if Sakho gets banned then he will have deserved it and LFC will take enough of a hit through negative media/sponsors etc and doing without their best CB for however long the ban is for.

ceegee · 24-04-2016 01:24PM

Pyjamarama wrote: »

If we adhere to the concept that Liverpool should be kicked out of Europa for beating United with a "drug cheat" do United have to give back all the titles they won with Rio? Or is intentionally missing a drug test to mask your activities more acceptable?

What activities do you think he was masking that were out of his system when tested 2 days later? Also, he made contact with the testers while they were still at the club to see if he could come back and take the test that afternoon but they refused. He also offered to have hair follicle testing done. This is all on record.

So given the available evidence, why do you think its more likely that Rio was "masking his activities" (which he somehow felt confident were out of his system by 2pm that day when he rang) rather than him being an idiot (see pretty much any twitter post / interview for proof of same) who forgot about the test and went shopping?

corwill · 24-04-2016 01:27PM

LiamoSail wrote: »

As I said, it's about righting a wrong rather than just punishment. Liverpool still gained an advantage in a tie, albeit unknowingly, through a player using a banned substance. Banning Sahko from future games coupled with the financial implications for the club doesn't go any way to righting the wrong,ma warding the opponents a three nil victory does however

I can absolutely see your argument for a change to the rules from the beginning of some future season on that basis. I think it would require a lot of nuance would be tricky to implement, and I'm not sure it's necessarily the way to go. The rules as they stand, the "2 or more" approach, if, IF, enforced with proper rigour, seems to me to set the balance right.

But please let there be no talk of inherently unjust retroactive rule changes and punishments for any club, whether LFC or otherwise, it would just be fodder for the malicious, disingenuous hypocrites who seem to swarm all over the club at the drop of a hat.

marklazarcovic · 24-04-2016 01:30PM

still fuming about that fcking flap by our keeper,id imagine his team mates are sick of his mistakes too

24-04-2016 01:33PM

Luis Suarez has scored more league goals in 2015/16 (34) than Mario Balotelli in his last five seasons(29)

dogbert27 · 24-04-2016 01:35PM

marklazarcovic wrote: »

still fuming about that fcking flap by our keeper,id imagine his team mates are sick of his mistakes too

I wonder what percentage of goals conceded over the last three years were a result of

1. Flapping at a ball
2. Being beaten at the near post

24-04-2016 01:44PM

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Luis Suarez has scored more league goals in 2015/16 (34) than Mario Balotelli in his last five seasons(29)

Suarez' shin guards didn't do much for his goal scoring prowess...

Harry Palmr · 24-04-2016 01:56PM

jpboard1 · 24-04-2016 02:15PM

SuperTortoise wrote: »

LiamoSail wrote: »

Entirely agree with your last point.

My aim would be to ensure that where PED's were used, no advantage was gained, hence games forfeited. The extent of how that punishes clubs would be a byproduct, rather than the aim.

The point is however that a club fielding a player using PED's, either intentionally or otherwise, will have benefited in certain games. Those results shouldn't be allowed stand IMO

Yes, but not by a substantial margin, now my knowledge of PED's is small, but i imagine it would be of a greater benefit to say a midfielder or a wing back, they need to cover more ground than a CB and therefore their fitness and stamina levels would need to be higher.
And even then talent and skill on the ball will shine through more than endurance.

I don't believe it has the same benefit as it would in say a pro cyclist for example, where endurance is the biggest factor, and now add in he is one of eleven players so his influence is even less now, in that case would it be fair to punish an entire club for the mistake of one individual?

If the club knew what was going on(i doubt it) then of course further action needs to be taken, but right now if Sakho gets banned then he will have deserved it and LFC will take enough of a hit through negative media/sponsors etc and doing without their best CB for however long the ban is for.

Have heard this argument over and over. In professional sport it is all about small margins. If something will give you an edge, it will be used.

jpboard1 · 24-04-2016 02:16PM

Anybody else having trouble with the quote function in the new format?

dogbert27 · 24-04-2016 02:23PM

jpboard1 wrote: »

Anybody else having trouble with the quote function in the new format?

There is no new format!! :mad:

dogbert27 · 24-04-2016 02:38PM

Yesterday Diego Simeone got sent off for encouraging a ball boy to throw on a second ball to prevent a Malaga counter attack that had them clear through on goal.

The ref had to immediately stop the game.

While this is morally wrong it prevented his team dropping points and maintain parity with Barceolona.

All I could think was why the F didn't Rodgers think of it when Gerrard slipped!!! :pac:

Gbear · 24-04-2016 02:56PM

dogbert27 wrote: »

Yesterday Diego Simeone got sent off for encouraging a ball boy to throw on a second ball to prevent a Malaga counter attack that had them clear through on goal.

The ref had to immediately stop the game.

While this is morally wrong it prevented his team dropping points and maintain parity with Barceolona.

All I could think was why the F didn't Rodgers think of it when Gerrard slipped!!! :pac:

That kind of thing is utterly unacceptable.

He should get a 10+ game ban from the stadium for that kind of blatant cheating.

I'd take that if it was the Gerrard slipping situation but having managers interfere with what's going on the pitch should be treated incredibly seriously.

Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours 2016, Mod Warning in OP, 10/7

Comments