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

SuperTortoise

So, Brad Smith, 3m + add ons, great buy for Bournemouth.

I'd rate him ahead of Moreno and while i don't think he'll go on to be world class he's plenty good enough for a comfortable premership team.

Agent Coulson

Daniel Cleary joins Birmingham I think he was released so no fee.

But hopefully he kicks on now for the sake of the Irish team.

~Rebel~

Augeo wrote: »

I read that years ago and thought the irony was incredible....

"..........A few minutes later he did me again and started yelling the same stuff. I snapped. I said something that I knew would hurt him. I insulted his wife.

Paul went ballistic. He was livid. He spent the rest of the match trying to kick lumps out of me. When the final whistle went I was going down the tunnel when I caught sight of him out of the corner of my eye, about to land a punch. I ducked out of the way and scarpered. The guy had lost it completely; he wanted to kill me. He was a prime example of someone who could dish it out but could not take it. He had been calling me all the names, personal stuff that he must have known would hurt, and yet as soon as I retaliated in kind, he could not cope."

Takes offence to being called a poof yet decided insulting a chaps wife in retaliation was the way to go, also he didn't detail what exactly he said so I can only imagine if was nothing less than quite insulting.

Also he detailed in the other article how he wrote a letter of apology to Fowler yet Fowler's similar letter was a clear solicitor job with the intent of getting off the charge, of course Le Saux sent his from the bottom of his heart.

Also the crowds were years taunting Le Saux but he took exceptional offence to Fowler doing it, ffs lads, you'd want to be a tad naive to swallow that crap.

I don't think anyone is saying that Le Saux is a paragon of righteousness. But 2 wrongs don't make a right.

it's possible to feel for Fowler for the cocaine rumours, and also think he was an absolute dick in dealing with Le Saux.

Equally, I feel extremely sorry for what Le Saux had to put up with, while also still being aware he was a dick in the other incident.

Your argument seems to be that unless someone has literally never done anything wrong ever, that they deserve everything they get. That's quite obviously bollocks.

There is no great swathe you can draw across a player because of any one incident. I like Robbie for a large number of reasons, and I dislike him for many others, same as I (and all of us) do with every other nuanced, flawed, hypocritical human being I know.

Whatever way you look at it, the worst of all of these incidents is unequivocally Robbie's. Homosexuality, and the branding thereof, is simply a guaranteed sentence of a career of abuse in football. It's literally the most retarded thing about football culture, but there's a reason that even now, not a single minute of Premierleague football has been played by an openly gay man.

Agent Coulson

I think we can see and understand why gay footballers still fear letting their sexuallity be know to the public even in this day and age.


When some fans think the torrent of abuse they would get wouldn't have an effect on them that might drive them out of the game.

NukaCola

Augeo wrote: »

Also the crowds were years taunting Le Saux but he took exceptional offence to Fowler doing it, ffs lads, you'd want to be a tad naive to swallow that crap.

You cant see the difference between crowds doing it and a peer and international team mate doing it on the pitch?

J Mysterio

SuperTortoise wrote: »

So, Brad Smith, 3m + add ons, great buy for Bournemouth.

I'd rate him ahead of Moreno and while i don't think he'll go on to be world class he's plenty good enough for a comfortable premership team.

I thoughtbit was £6m? Bargain either way, he's a really good player and, as you say, just as good of not better than Albert.

Debil

Augeo wrote: »

I think le saux is quite frankly lieing
His worst fear was someone beckoning him to have a lash on the pitch in a gay taunt. And Fowler delivered.... nope. Not likely to be true IMO.

It's almost clever but not quite, plenty believe him though no doubt.

I'll say no more as we are wandering off topic.

Why do you think he's trying to be clever? There isn't any conspiracy here.

He describes being bullied, and it reaches boiling point at the end. It's a simple thing that plays out in school yards and workplaces everyday.

Not only that, but it happens in front of the bastions of law and order, and they do nothing.

While it's caused him personal trauma, the wider context of the article is being missed. It should have been a watershed moment for football, but instead it was an opportunity missed.

corwill

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying that Le Saux is a paragon of righteousness. But 2 wrongs don't make a right.

it's possible to feel for Fowler for the cocaine rumours, and also think he was an absolute dick in dealing with Le Saux.

Equally, I feel extremely sorry for what Le Saux had to put up with, while also still being aware he was a dick in the other incident.

Your argument seems to be that unless someone has literally never done anything wrong ever, that they deserve everything they get. That's quite obviously bollocks.

There is no great swathe you can draw across a player because of any one incident. I like Robbie for a large number of reasons, and I dislike him for many others, same as I (and all of us) do with every other nuanced, flawed, hypocritical human being I know.

Whatever way you look at it, the worst of all of these incidents is unequivocally Robbie's. Homosexuality, and the branding thereof, is simply a guaranteed sentence of a career of abuse in football. It's literally the most retarded thing about football culture, but there's a reason that even now, not a single minute of Premierleague football has been played by an openly gay man.

No arguments from me on any of that, nothing but sense in your post.

But I'm taking Robbie at his word that he's apologised twice, and that Le Saux has accepted his apology. On that basis, I'm not going to continue holding it against him.

Agent Coulson

Agent Coulson wrote: »

I think we can see and understand why gay footballers still fear letting their sexuallity be know to the public even in this day and age.


When some fans think the torrent of abuse they would get wouldn't have an effect on them that might drive them out of the game.

Pretty sure it's a stadium ban for homophobic chanting.

It wouldn't be tolerated in England anymore.

I reckon it's more to do with the neanderthals in the dressing rooms more than the fans on the terraces

ThunbergsAreGo

J Mysterio wrote: »

I thoughtbit was £6m? Bargain either way, he's a really good player and, as you say, just as good of not better than Albert.

Smith is some way behind Moreno and next season will show that

MD1990

Augeo's last few posts

corwill

MD1990 wrote: »

Augeo's last few decades

FYPFY.

MD1990

MD1990 wrote: »

Augeo's last few posts

Not at all.

What hole am I after digging? Have I excused homosexual abuse, player's taunting other player's wives? Nope.

Have I called anyone a wanker? Nope.

No hole dug, unless you reckon I somehow give a fiddler's fnuk what those who thanked the post I quoted think of me

I clearly don't :cool:

Kerrigooney

Augeo wrote: »

unless you reckon I somehow give a fiddler's fnuk what those who thanked the post I quoted think of me

I clearly don't :cool:

Why bother mentioning it so?

corwill

corwill wrote: »

FYPFY.

Last few decades? Where does decades come into this.
you share some other posters difficulty counting.

MD1990

Augeo wrote: »

Not at all.

What hole am I after digging? Have I excused homosexual abuse, player's taunting other player's wives? Nope.

Have I called anyone a wanker? Nope.

No hole dug, unless you reckon I somehow give a fiddler's fnuk what those who thanked the post I quoted think of me

I clearly don't :cool:

Your digging a hole because your opinion on the Le Saux/Fowler incident is wrong.

Kerrigooney

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Why bother mentioning it so?

Why wouldn't I?
Clarification is always positive.

Kerrigooney

The sooner the football is back the better. Summer is torture around here.

MD1990

MD1990 wrote: »

Your digging a hole because your opinion on the Le Saux/Fowler incident is wrong.

Not at all, there was an incident, Fowler apologised, Le Saux went off and wrote newspaper articles bladdering on about it and seemingly questioned the sincerity of the apology etc. He focused on Fowler as he didn't want to rock the boat at Chelsea imo. The Chelsea dressing room was the real issue, where the matter originated and spread from.

It (the Fowler issue) was dealt with at the time by the relevant authorities.

I think people thinking Fowler is a total wanker over this issue is wrong but they are entitled to their opinion, as am I.

Kerrigooney wrote: »

The sooner the football is back the better. Summer is torture around here.

lol

some contribution

Doodoo

BullBlackNova wrote: »

I think a top 4 finish next season would require an awful lot of luck. There are so many dependent factors:

- If Karius settles right away
- If Sturridge stays fit
- If Firmino and Can improve as we all expect them to (and Origi)
- If Coutinho can find some consistency
- If Mané/Wijnaldum hit the ground running
- If Lovren/Matip/Sakho/Klavan can form a solid CB partnership
- If we capitalise on not having midweek games again (Chelsea also dont have this distraction, and Utd can entirely ignore if they want...)
- If Moreno is replaced/has a successful brain transplant before the season starts...

Sure, we might get lucky with some of these factors, but I don't see it all happening, at least not right away.

If all that happens and we only get fourth I will be sorely disappointed especially since so many of the expected top 4 teams have new managers and will have new players that will also need to gel.

MD1990

Augeo wrote: »

Not at all, there was an incident, Fowler apologised, Le Saux went off and wrote newspaper articles bladdering on about it and seemingly questioned the sincerity of the apology etc. He focused on Fowler as he didn't want to rock the boat at Chelsea imo. The Chelsea dressing room was the real issue, where the matter originated and spread from.

It (the Fowler issue) was dealt with at the time by the relevant authorities.

I think people thinking Fowler is a total wanker over this issue is wrong but they are entitled to their opinion, as am I.



lol

some contribution

Fowler took over 10 years to apologise

It is an interesting line of defence. According to Robbie’s rationale, it is OK to call a black man a “n*****” and pretend it is in the line of duty. I do not think so. I do not think even Robbie would argue that. He did not really have a defence and that was the best he could come up with. It was not a very good effort.
A month after Robbie offered me his backside, we were picked in the England squad. There was an awkward reunion at Burnham Beeches. Robbie did not have quite as much bravado in that situation. He looked like a naughty little boy.
Kevin Keegan was the manager and he wanted us to stage a public reconciliation for the press. I said immediately that unless Robbie said sorry, that was not going to happen. I did not want a public apology, just a private word would do. But he refused. He said that he had done nothing wrong, that it was just a bit of a laugh.

https://reflectionsasia.wordpress.com/2007/09/11/graeme-le-saux-how-gay-slurs-almost-wrecked-my-career/

Kerrigooney

Augeo wrote: »

lol

some contribution

Thanks.

MD1990

MD1990 wrote: »

Fowler took over 10 years to apologise.......

He might have taken over 10 years to apologise to Le Saux's satisfaction however...... I find it strange everything Le Saux claims is taken as 100% truth .......

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football-fowler-writes-to-le-saux-1080070.html ...........

that was an apology...........

Fowler's letter, beginning "Dear Graeme" and addressed to Le Saux, c/o Chelsea FC, Stamford Bridge, Fulham Road, Chelsea, London, said:

"I am in receipt of your without prejudice letter about what occurred on Saturday, 27 February at Stamford Bridge.

"I am sorry if you misinterpreted my actions during the game, which were not meant to cause any offence to yourself or anyone else. Hopefully this unhappy incident can now be brought to an end.

"I am sure you share my hope that when we play together again either on opposite sides or on international duty, people have no reason to judge us other than on our footballing abilities.

Best wishes,

R Fowler."

Kerrigooney

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Thanks.

Pas de probleme, HTH old boy

OwaynOTT

The last few pages

NukaCola

Augeo wrote: »

Not at all, there was an incident, Fowler apologised, Le Saux went off and wrote newspaper articles bladdering on about it and seemingly questioned the sincerity of the apology etc. He focused on Fowler as he didn't want to rock the boat at Chelsea imo. The Chelsea dressing room was the real issue, where the matter originated and spread from.

Thats a good point, the bullying he got at Chelsea was the start of the whole thing.

However, you seem to think Robbie was hard done by? Like his apology was good enough or satisfactory to Le Saux. The Robbie Fowler apology letter was published and reads like this

Fowlers Letter wrote:

Dear Graeme,

I am in receipt of your 'without prejudice' letter about what occurred on Saturday, February 27 at Stamford Bridge.

I am sorry if you misinterpreted my actions during the game, which were not meant to cause any offence to yourself or anyone else. Hopefully this unhappy incident can now be brought to an end.

I am sure you share my hope that when we play together again either on opposite sides or on international duty, people have no reason to judge us other than on our footballing abilities.

Best wishes,

R Fowler.

That is not a real apology for what was an obvious homophobic slur IMO. That and what happened afterwards, thinking he done nothing wrong and not apologising while on international duty in front of Kevin Keegan leads me to believe Robbie was not sincere with Le Saux. He focused on Fowler because he went over the top which is not, or at least should not, be surprising.

Also that article Le Saux wrote was after Robbies autobiography which, in 2005, 6 years later he still seen nothing wrong with his actions.

mosstin

Thread broken again. I'm gonna try switching it off and switching it back on again.

Knex*

Ye all have lovely holes

OwaynOTT

mosstin wrote: »

Thread broken again. I'm gonna try switching it off and switching it back on again.

Nah, think it needs to be nuked from orbit whilst simultaneously burnt with fire and hopefully that would make way for some new growth.

5starpool

Match on around 4.30am. I am getting up at 4am, but still won't see the game. Bah.

I do get to go on holiday though, so not all bad :pac:

Vicxas

Last few pages for someone who hasnt caught up:

NukaCola

NukaCola wrote: »

.....

However, you seem to think Robbie was hard done by? Like his apology was good enough or satisfactory to Le Saux. The Robbie Fowler apology letter was published and reads like this

100%, Le Saux ran with the Fowler issue, there was little to nothing about any other player taunting him. Le Saux rabbiting on about Fowler not apologising sincerely while never rocking the boat about the Chelsea issue, a cowardly way to exploit the limelight imo.

NukaCola wrote: »

.....
That is not a real apology for what was an obvious homophobic slur IMO. That and what happened afterwards, thinking he done nothing wrong and not apologising while on international duty in front of Kevin Keegan leads me to believe Robbie was not sincere with Le Saux. He focused on Fowler because he went over the top which is not, or at least should not, be surprising.

A matter of opinion.

NukaCola wrote: »

.....
Also that article Le Saux wrote was after Robbies autobiography which, in 2005, 6 years later he still seen nothing wrong with his actions.

You think in Robbie's book there was no remorse about the incident, can't agree there tbh.

NukaCola

Augeo wrote: »

100%, Le Saux ran with the Fowler issue, there was little to nothing about any other player taunting him.

He named Robbie Savage, Andy Townsend, Paul Ince and Gwyn Williams in the article alone. 100% Robbie was hard done? He was being a dope and deserved to get called on it.

Augeo wrote: »

A matter of opinion.

Robbie: Get up you poof
Le Saux receiving treatment. Gets up to take the free kick.
Robbie: Come and give me one up the a***, repeating it three or four times while bending over.
Le Saux: My family is in the stand
Robbie: Bollocks to your family.

Robbie: I am sorry if you misinterpreted my actions during the game

Cheers for the apology Robbie :rolleyes:

Augeo wrote: »

You think in Robbie's book there was no remorse about the incident, can't agree there tbh.

A quote from the incident in the book.

“Football’s a tough sport and to get to the top you have to be incredibly thick-skinned. A bit of name-calling never hurt anyone and the truth is I wasn’t being homophobic, merely trying to exploit a known weakness in an opponent who had done me a number of times.”

NukaCola

NukaCola wrote: »

.......





Robbie: Get up you poof
Le Saux receiving treatment. Gets up to take the free kick.
Robbie: Come and give me one up the a***, repeating it three or four times while bending over.
Le Saux: My family is in the stand
Robbie: Bollocks to your family.

Robbie: I am sorry if you misinterpreted my actions during the game.....

Again, that was Le Saux's wording, Robbie's was different iirc.
I would think neither account is 100% correct but they are both significantly different. What makes you accept Le Saux's as 100% fact?

Oh golly, he named 4 players, did he insist on apologies from them too? NOPE

cj maxx

After the ladt few pages , is le saux gay ?

NukaCola

NukaCola wrote: »

....




A quote from the incident in the book.

“Football’s a tough sport and to get to the top you have to be incredibly thick-skinned. A bit of name-calling never hurt anyone and the truth is I wasn’t being homophobic, merely trying to exploit a known weakness in an opponent who had done me a number of times.”

You don't mention where Fowler stated he was being childish.

cjmc

cjmc wrote: »

After the ladt few pages , is lasaix gay ?

Not at all.

messinkiapina

Augeo wrote: »

"I am sorry if you misinterpreted my actions during the game, which were not meant to cause any offence to yourself or anyone else. Hopefully this unhappy incident can now be brought to an end."

Robbie Fowler is my favourite Liverpool player ever... but LOL

messinkiapina

messinkiapina wrote: »

Robbie Fowler is my favourite Liverpool player ever... but LOL

Le Saux uses the exact same excuse for his comments regarding Ince's wife

Agent Coulson

cjmc wrote: »

After the ladt few pages , is le saux gay ?

He was educated and read newspapers back then that was enough to be seen as gay in those days.

He went to University and read The Guardian and didn't join his first pro club till he was 19 I think so he wasn't brought up like a lot of players then in the youth ranks so didn't go through all the hazing that went on there either.

NukaCola

Augeo wrote: »

Again, that was Le Saux's wording, Robbie's was different iirc.
I would think neither account is 100% correct but they are both significantly different. What makes you accept Le Saux's as 100% fact?

Ok Robbies version

Robbie: Get up you poof
Le Saux receiving treatment. Gets up to take the free kick.
Robbie: Come and give me one up the a***, repeating it three or four times while bending over.
Le Saux: But I'm married
Robbie: So was Elton John mate (from his biography)

Robbie: I am sorry if you misinterpreted my actions during the game....

I watched the footage of Robbie doing what he did, the only thing they differ on is what was said immediately after. That letter of apology is either a terribly worded apology or insincere. "I'm sorry if you misinterpreted my actions"? How could you possibly misinterpret what he did?

Also, when he tried to get a proper apology on international duty a few weeks later, Robbie said he done nothing wrong, with Kevin Keegan as a witness in his office and made another gay joke about Le Saux, so theres someone that can back up his story.

NukaCola

Augeo wrote: »

You don't mention where Fowler stated he was being childish.

Do you want me to quote the whole book :pac:

All I'm trying to say was Robbie was wrong, he wasn't sincere with his apology in the aftermath and Le Saux was right to call him out on it. Robbie was 24 at the time. A grown man, being childish is not an excuse.

Is Le Saux a saint? No. Am I trying to say he was a Saint? No.

Robbie is probably my favourite LFC football player but I wont defend him for the Le Saux incident, it was bad form.

mormank

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying that Le Saux is a paragon of righteousness. But 2 wrongs don't make a right.

it's possible to feel for Fowler for the cocaine rumours, and also think he was an absolute dick in dealing with Le Saux.

Equally, I feel extremely sorry for what Le Saux had to put up with, while also still being aware he was a dick in the other incident.

Your argument seems to be that unless someone has literally never done anything wrong ever, that they deserve everything they get. That's quite obviously bollocks.

There is no great swathe you can draw across a player because of any one incident. I like Robbie for a large number of reasons, and I dislike him for many others, same as I (and all of us) do with every other nuanced, flawed, hypocritical human being I know.

Whatever way you look at it, the worst of all of these incidents is unequivocally Robbie's. Homosexuality, and the branding thereof, is simply a guaranteed sentence of a career of abuse in football. It's literally the most retarded thing about football culture, but there's a reason that even now, not a single minute of Premierleague football has been played by an openly gay man.

You tellin' me that after all this time the Nevilles are actually straight!! :eek: :P

NukaCola

NukaCola wrote: »

Do you want me to quote the whole book :pac:......

No, but the piece where he admitted he was childish in relation to the incident is relevant to what I asked "You think in Robbie's book there was no remorse about the incident, can't agree there tbh."

NukaCola

Augeo wrote: »

Oh golly, he named 4 players, did he insist on apologies from them too? NOPE

Oh golly........what a strange phrase to use, anyway you said there was little or nothing about other players, I gave you four names in one article, 4 names is all of a sudden not enough, I wont bother replying to someone whose trying to take the piss out of me during an exchange of opinions. Lets just agree to disagree and leave it there.

mormank

J Mysterio wrote: »

I thoughtbit was £6m? Bargain either way, he's a really good player and, as you say, just as good of not better than Albert.

Ok guys settle down. Brad Smith is a good player with a very good delivery imo. However to say he is "just as good if not better than Albert" is just stretching it too far. I know Moreno has his critics but just look at their gametime while available over the course of the past two seasons. If Smith was "just as good as if not better than Albert" this would be reflected in their game time. It is not, and with two different managers thinking the same.

NukaCola

Augeo wrote: »

No, but the piece where he admitted he was childish in relation to the incident is relevant to what I asked "You think in Robbie's book there was no remorse about the incident, can't agree there tbh."

Admitting being childish is not an admission of deep regret, or remorse.

NukaCola

NukaCola wrote: »

Oh golly........what a strange phrase to use, anyway you said there was little or nothing about other players, I gave you four names in one article, 4 names is all of a sudden not enough, I wont bother replying to someone whose trying to take the piss out of me during an exchange of opinions. Lets just agree to disagree and leave it there.

No need to get all p1ssy. He mentioned 4 names, he wasn't pi1ssing and moaning in the media that they didn't apologise to him.

5starpool

OK, Fowler was a prick to le Saux, le Saux was a prick to Ince who was himsilf just a... well you get the idea.

Can't we just discuss some football and stuff? I'm looking forward to seeing how the Chelsea game pans out. A friendly in hot conditions won't be too illustrative of too much,but still, another step towards the start of the league.

NukaCola

mormank wrote: »

Ok guys settle down. Brad Smith is a good player with a very good delivery imo. However to say he is "just as good if not better than Albert" is just stretching it too far. I know Moreno has his critics but just look at their gametime while available over the course of the past two seasons. If Smith was "just as good as if not better than Albert" this would be reflected in their game time. It is not, and with two different managers thinking the same.

I'm not a big fan of Moreno but Smith is some way behind him in his development tbh.