The OFFICIAL Liverpool Supporters thread

brokencrossbar1 · January 14, 2009, 11:40:22 AM

I wouldn't think so, it is not football related. They didn't get involved in Joey Barton's case involving the assault in Liverpool, but they did suspend him over whacking his team mate. The FA would have no grounds to get involved officially, but unofficially he might never get the England captain's armband again of convicted.

Gabriel_Hurl · January 15, 2009, 01:54:41 PM

Finnan on the way back to the league - with Hull City

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_4796994,00.html

Minder · January 15, 2009, 02:14:36 PM

Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on January 15, 2009, 01:54:41 PM
Finnan on the way back to the league - with Hull City

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_4796994,00.html

LL has just ejaculated

Norf Tyrone · January 15, 2009, 02:29:45 PM

Quote from: Hound on January 14, 2009, 10:10:20 AM
I heard there was CCTV. I would expect there to be CCTV is such a place, and if there wasnt I would have expected Liverpool to pay off the victim to make it go away (which they couldnt do if there was CCTV evidence).

But I dont believe its near as bad as said above, otherwise surely he would have been charged with assault rather than affray.

There was CCTV in the Terry/Morris/ Byrne case that showed that Terry was innocent but he still was taken to court.

QuoteI wouldn't think so, it is not football related. They didn't get involved in Joey Barton's case involving the assault in Liverpool, but they did suspend him over whacking his team mate. The FA would have no grounds to get involved officially, but unofficially he might never get the England captain's armband again of convicted.

The FA have banned players while charged in the past... why not again?

isourboydownyet · January 15, 2009, 02:46:16 PM

Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 13, 2009, 07:24:51 PM
Rumour has it over here that there's video evidence Gerrard went over to yer man in the bar, hit him knocking him down, started to kick him when he was on the ground. Gerrard's mates waded in and he went away and came back with a bottle and threw it at the boy on the ground.

Bad if that's true but could be bullshit.

this is totally untrue,of the offences committed Gerrard was minimal.i know your going to ask me how i know,just trust me i know.

new devil · January 15, 2009, 02:48:31 PM

How do you know

Minder · January 15, 2009, 02:52:43 PM

Quote from: new devil on January 15, 2009, 02:48:31 PM
How do you know

Just trust him

Hound · January 15, 2009, 04:19:30 PM

Quote from: Norf Tyrone on January 15, 2009, 02:29:45 PM
The FA have banned players while charged in the past... why not again?

Who have the FA banned for getting arrested for a non-football incident?

ExiledGael · January 15, 2009, 05:46:14 PM

Quote from: Hound on January 15, 2009, 04:19:30 PM
Quote from: Norf Tyrone on January 15, 2009, 02:29:45 PM
The FA have banned players while charged in the past... why not again?
Who have the FA banned for getting arrested for a non-football incident?

Wasn't Woodgate banned?

full back · January 16, 2009, 11:48:09 AM

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-new s/2009/01/16/liverpool-fc-exclusive-rafa-benitez-rejects-new -contract-100252-22708447/

RAFA Benitez has rejected the contract offered to him by Liverpool Football Club.

The Spaniard insists he will only agree to the new deal if given more control over football matters - rather than having to answer to a club chief executive.

Benitez, who insists money is not an issue, has informed American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett of his stand.

Today he said: ""The owners feel that the manager's decisions need to be subject to the chief executive.

"But I know that I am subject to results and to our fans and they are the best judges I will ever have."

corn02 · January 16, 2009, 11:48:48 AM

Rafa will be gone in the summer if that is the case.

full back · January 16, 2009, 11:52:35 AM

Not looking good for Rafa
He will have to go on the sick, what with him first cracking up, then having no job

Minder · January 16, 2009, 11:57:57 AM

If Rafa takes on Gillette and Hicks there will only be one winner, i suppose winning the league would give him a fair bit of leverage in any talks........

corn02 · January 16, 2009, 12:00:32 PM

Quote from: Minder on January 16, 2009, 11:57:57 AM
If Rafa takes on Gillette and Hicks there will only be one winner, i suppose winning the league would give him a fair bit of leverage in any talks........

He can be stubborn at times. Of course we don't know the ins and outs, but it can't be good for the team.

Hound · January 16, 2009, 01:34:51 PM

I wouldnt be Rafa's biggest fan. Wouldnt bother me if he left, but it would bother me greatly if the new man wanted to bring in a heap of new faces and we lost the best of the Spanish players we have.

In this case of this argument, I would be on the side of the yanks if Rafa wants total control of the transfers.
The yanks have to be in charge of budgets if they are to run a successful club.

But if all Rafa wants is control of how the agreed budget is spent, then I don't think its unreasonable. If Rafa thinks a player is worth X amount and that amount is within the overall budget, then it shouldnt need review/approval from above.

Agger's agent was seen in Milan earlier in the week, but he has denied his visit was anything to do with Agger.