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

SuperTortoise

When is an official statement due from UEFA? Are we talking about weeks/months before we find out how long he'll miss if any?

Harry Palmr

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

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

corwill

LiamoSail wrote: »

You're trying to derail a debate about doping in sport into one about tribalism. The point I'm arguing is irrelevant to who I support. I'm not saying that Liverpool won the tie because of Sahko's use of a banned substance, I'm saying it influenced the tie and hence it wasn't a straight match.

Also, I'm a Liverpool fan. So you can **** off with the above. Unlike yourself, where I stand on an issue such as doping isn't dependent upon how it suits the club I support

I misinterpreted your post as a wind-up from a non-LFC fan. I'm sorry.

cj maxx

Harry Palmr wrote: »

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

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

I didnt even get to 30 secs
Infuriaring , depressing viewing that.

K-9

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

The rules are that the club can't be punished unless 2 or more players are charged. Nothing will happen to the club, that's the rules.

Indeed, the team gets sanctioned if it is at a systemic level. Punishing a club because one lad takes some cocaine or ped's seems harsh.

Liam McPoyle

K-9 wrote: »

Indeed, the team gets sanctioned if it is at a systemic level. Punishing a club because one lad takes some cocaine or ped's seems harsh.

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

NukaCola

I cant stand Mignolet, he really puts me off watching us play......and its a shame because he looked a very decent signing at the time, mainly down to me thinking he could improve.....he never did, if anything he got worse, and he doesn't learn from his mistakes either.......every keeper makes mistakes, even basic mistakes, but Mignolets mistakes are consistently awful, follow a similar pattern of him switching off and making wrong decisions and should be completely avoidable. Whats worse is that his shakyness is infectious, you get the feeling that the backline have no confidence in him.

If he continues to be our number 1 i'd see it as a huge blind spot for Klopp, and is ultimately costing his team points on a regular basis....I dont get how Klopp could be so ruthless with Bogdan for awful mistakes but is happy to hand Mignolet a new contract while he costs us a lot more.... I just dont know what he brings to the starting 11....I would hope that its a case of lack of quality at GK that he's getting away with it....Ward seems a decent option but maybe not ready......

LiamoSail

K-9 wrote: »

Indeed, the team gets sanctioned if it is at a systemic level. Punishing a club because one lad takes some cocaine or ped's seems harsh.

It is harsh, but to punish the club to that extent isn't the aim, the aim is to ensure that the result of a tie which was influenced by PED isn't allowed to stand. The punishment the club suffer is just a byproduct of that.

Such punishment however I'd only favour when PED's were found to have been used, rather than recreational drugs.

LiamoSail

As for Mig, he needs punting imo.

Forster wouldn't be a bad replacement. Having seen a lot of him at Celtic, I was in favour of signing him over Mig a few years ago. Beyond that, and assuming Ter Segan is too ambitious, not really sure who should come in, but it can't be too difficult to find a more reliable keeper than Mig

SuperTortoise

NukaCola wrote: »

I cant stand Mignolet, he really puts me off watching us play......and its a shame because he looked a very decent signing at the time, mainly down to me thinking he could improve.....he never did, if anything he got worse, and he doesn't learn from his mistakes either.......every keeper makes mistakes, even basic mistakes, but Mignolets mistakes are consistently awful, follow a similar pattern of him switching off and making wrong decisions and should be completely avoidable. Whats worse is that his shakyness is infectious, you get the feeling that the backline have no confidence in him.

If he continues to be our number 1 i'd see it as a huge blind spot for Klopp, and is ultimately costing his team points on a regular basis....I dont get how Klopp could be so ruthless with Bogdan for awful mistakes but is happy to hand Mignolet a new contract while he costs us a lot more.... I just dont know what he brings to the starting 11....I would hope that its a case of lack of quality at GK that he's getting away with it....Ward seems a decent option but maybe not ready......

I guess he does'nt see Ward as a No.1, if he did he would have got a decent run of games by now, other positions have been rotated partly because of the fixture buildup but partly because i think he's taking a good look at our entire squad and seeing who needs to go in the summer.

The one game i've seen Ward play in i thought he was good but then again i do remember saying the same about Bogdan after his debut!

JonnyM

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

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

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

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

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

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

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?

JonnyM

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

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

LiamoSail

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

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

Augeo wrote: »

At his best Mig is very decent

lol - he's shít, David James lite!

LiamoSail

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

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

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

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

Disagree.

SuperTortoise

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

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

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

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

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

dogbert27

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

Riesen_Meal

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

jpboard1

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

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

dogbert27

jpboard1 wrote: »

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

There is no new format!! :mad:

dogbert27

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

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.

dogbert27

Gbear wrote: »

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.

Most he's going to get is a three game ban.

ERG89

RoboKlopp wrote: »

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

Luis scored more in his last 2 games(8) than Mario has in his last 2 seasons in all competitions (7).

Turtyturd

'Louie' an elite elite man ball warrior?

marklazarcovic

dogbert27 wrote:

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

dogbert27 wrote:

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

Cost us some amount of points

dogbert27

marklazarcovic wrote: »

Cost us some amount of points

For those two basics of a goalkeeper you have to look at both the player and the coach.

Will be as disappointed going in to the new season if John Achterberg is still there as much as Mignolet.

mormank

Chardee MacDennis wrote: »

main issue here i think is we shouldnt want another stop gap or 'up and comer'. We need someone proven. Similar to when Spurs signed Lloris (a signing I have envied for a while and if there hadn't been a Spurs resurgence, someone i would have targeted), he was Ligue 1 keeper of the year for 3 years in a row at Lyon.

I agree but I just can't see the solution. I can't see where the next Lloris is playing right now, where he is gettable for us.

P.S. that's not to say he doesn't exist by the way, just that I can't name this solution but I'm not paid big bucks to do so.

dogbert27

Just throwing it out there for discussion because as people say, there doesn't seem to be an obvious goalkeeper so what about Iker Casillas on a two year deal?

34 years of age which isn't old for a keeper. Bags of experience at the highest level. Knows how to command an area.

corwill

dogbert27 wrote: »

Just throwing it out there for discussion because as people say, there doesn't seem to be an obvious goalkeeper so what about Iker Casillas on a two year deal?

34 years of age which isn't old for a keeper. Bags of experience at the highest level. Knows how to command an area.

Shadow of his former self, though.

mav79

We don't even need a world class keeper, just a competent one would be a huge improvement for next season.

K-9

Harry Palmr wrote: »

It's fecking huge, though that's probably a reflection on how small the stadium is conpared to Old Trafford or the Emirates.