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

8-10

I would be happy if Sakho missed the Euro's

Kirby

To be fair, it's not like he's innocent. He took something. The debate appears to be surrounding whether or not that substance should or shouldn't be on the list. But it's not like it was a false positive here.....he did actually take the substance. Nobody else has been popped for it. You cant lay the blame everywhere else. Some personal responsibility is required here.

TitianGerm

Kirby wrote: »

To be fair, it's not like he's innocent. He took something. The debate appears to be surrounding whether or not that substance should or shouldn't be on the list. But it's not like it was a false positive here.....he did actually take the substance. Nobody else has been popped for it. You cant lay the blame everywhere else. Some personal responsibility is required here.

If it's not on the list or not meant to be on the list then of course he (or anyone) can take it and it's not illegal.

BorneTobyWilde

Uefa made the list
They didn't check it twice
Now we don't know
.. who's naughty or nice

Pyjamarama

Kirby wrote: »

To be fair, it's not like he's innocent. He took something. The debate appears to be surrounding whether or not that substance should or shouldn't be on the list. But it's not like it was a false positive here.....he did actually take the substance. Nobody else has been popped for it. You cant lay the blame everywhere else. Some personal responsibility is required here.

You could say taking vitamin supplements help you be a better player. If its not on the banned substance (or shouldn't be) then he literally did nothing wrong. And thats a real literally not an internet literally.

Kirby

Yes but no other player has been popped for this....so its not exactly something innocent or benign. Lawyers look for technicalities. That's part of their job.

But surely the question should be "Did he take PEDS" and not "is this particular PED on the banned list".

TitianGerm

Kirby wrote: »

Yes but no other player has been popped for this....so its not exactly something innocent or benign. Lawyers look for technicalities. That's part of their job.

But surely the question should be "Did he take PEDS" and not "is this particular PED on the banned list".

Just because no one else hasn't been seen to be caught or taking them dosent mean they are not taking them.

I believe that the clubs should test players twice/three times a year and then the FA/UEFA should test a selection of players from every club at least once a year.

Then at least you know there will be wide spread clamp down on the taking of PEDs.

Pyjamarama

Kirby wrote: »

Yes but no other player has been popped for this....so its not exactly something innocent or benign. Lawyers look for technicalities. That's part of their job.

But surely the question should be "Did he take PEDS" and not "is this particular PED on the banned list".

Players are always going to try and get whatever edge they can, if he took something that was legal but you or I classify it as a PED he still did nothing wrong. You can bring the morality question into it but thats a whole can of worms when it comes to sport. Its cheating to claim for a corner when you know it hit you last but every player does it. Obv taking PEDs is far more extreme but unless its something listed then he did nothing wrong.

It's pretty clear.

You can take it if it's not banned.

©Michael Owen 2016

Kirby

emmetkenny wrote: »

Just because no one else hasn't been seen to be caught or taking them dosent mean they are not taking them.

I believe that the clubs should test players twice/three times a year and then the FA/UEFA should test a selection of players from every club at least once a year.

Then at least you know there will be wide spread clamp down on the taking of PEDs.

You can't ask the clubs to police it themselves. They have a vested interest in winning. No, it has to be the governing bodies job the enforce the rules.

NukaCola

If its not on a list of banned substances you can take it. If it should then thats someones fault for not putting it on the list.

Why should he be held accountable? There should be no grey area here.

RainMakerToo

Kirby wrote: »

Yes but no other player has been popped for this....so its not exactly something innocent or benign. Lawyers look for technicalities. That's part of their job.

But surely the question should be "Did he take PEDS" and not "is this particular PED on the banned list".

Well part of the problem could be that it seems to have fallen into the weight loss/diuretic category. They themselves are not PEDs, quite the opposite in fact. But they could be used to mask PEDs by helping to flush them out of the system. So maybe they are more diligent in keeping the PED list up to date, but not other banned substances that are not actually PEDs themselves.

Kirby

NukaCola wrote: »

If its not on a list of banned substances you can take it. If it should then thats someones fault for not putting it on the list.

Why should he be held accountable? There should be no grey area here.

That's exactly my point. If what he took wasnt performing enhancing then he should be fine. If he cheated than he shouldn't get away with it just because somebody made an error on the list.

It seems as if people are perfectly happy for a player to take PEDS and then shrug their shoulders and say "well....if it's not on the list.....". It was apparently supposed to be on the list. His lawyers seem to be doing their job of obfuscation here. Getting away with it on a technicality isnt the same thing as being clean.

TitianGerm

Kirby wrote: »

You can't ask the clubs to police it themselves. They have a vested interest in winning. No, it has to be the governing bodies job the enforce the rules.

Yes but if heavy fines were introduced for not complying the clubs would also be more than willing to do routine tests themselves.

At the end of the day the clubs don't want their name)brand tarnished by one player.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Kirby wrote: »

That's exactly my point. If what he took wasnt performing enhancing then he should be fine. If he cheated than he shouldn't get away with it just because somebody made an error on the list.

It seems as if people are perfectly happy for a player to take PEDS and then shrug their shoulders and say "well....if it's not on the list.....". It was apparently supposed to be on the list. His lawyers seem to be doing their job of obfuscation here. Getting away with it on a technicality isnt the same thing as being clean.

How can it be cheating if the product wasn't on the banned drug list?

Should we now make up laws to punish people retrospectively for taking products that were perfectly legal when consumed?

And who determines which products should be retrospectively banned?

Come on now, it's quite clear.

If he took a product that wasn't on the banned list, which is quite specific in the products banned and quantities that will trigger a ban, then he was incorrectly banned by UEFA.

If he took a product that was banned but recent findings show that it shouldn't have been on the list then they were right to ban him and then let the ban lapse and update their list.

Harry Palmr

If you google higenamine you find sites likes this http://www.mrsupplement.com.au/higenamine, you'd have thought WADA/UEFA would have known about it and made a decision.

Riesen_Meal

Harry Palmr wrote: »

If you google higenamine you find sites likes this http://www.mrsupplement.com.au/higenamine, you'd have thought WADA/UEFA would have known about it and made a decision.

Always knew Sakho was a bit of an animal, from the above link :

" (3). Similarly, animal studies have shown that it may have a role in the treatment of some forms of erectile dysfunction "

mosstin

Fieldog wrote: »

Always knew Sakho was a bit of an animal, from the above link :

" (3). Similarly, animal studies have shown that it may have a role in the treatment of some forms of erectile dysfunction "

Well, in his other job he needs scaffolding so it should come as no surprise that he might need a bit of support.

Agent Coulson

Maybe they pulled out of the Gotze deal because they suspected he was on the same fat burners as Sakho because of his much publicized and photographed erections :0

martyos121

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Maybe they pulled out of the Gotze deal because they suspected he was on the same fat burners as Sakho because of his much publicized and photographed erections :0

We really do need more players who can rise to the occasion though.

5starpool

Silly season has upped a gear. Higuain to Liverpool. Pretty solid rumour I'd say.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/gonzalo-higuain-fancies-liverpool-transfer-8077110#ICID=sharebar_twitter

I've run this rumour through my 'Likelyhoodometer'™ and it has come out at a disappointing 1.9% sadly.

5starpool

5starpool wrote: »

Silly season has upped a gear. Higuain to Liverpool. Pretty solid rumour I'd say.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/gonzalo-higuain-fancies-liverpool-transfer-8077110#ICID=sharebar_twitter

I've run this rumour through my 'Likelyhoodometer'™ and it has come out at a disappointing 1.9% sadly.

Unreal finisher. Stuff of fantasy to see him at Anfield. I wouldn't care if he cost us £80 million and was on 200 grand a week.

Arsenal would have won the title as least once in the last 3 years if they bought him. I think he was linked with them about 3 years ago.

Him and Kante would have us fighting for the title. It's a shame that a player like this is now a completely unrealistic purchase for us.

I'm starting to dislike the fact that we are associated with finding 'unknown' talent rather than being able to acquire a player like Higuain.

Boo to reality.

Mr.H

I'm loving the over reacting on this forum regarding Sakho

First of all this is the statement released by UEFA in regards to the incident
"The 30-day provisional suspension ends today. The chairman of the control, ethics and disciplinary body decided not to extend it."

"The player would thus be free to play as from tomorrow. A decision on the case will be made within the next few days."

The SSN report mentions
The 26-year-old submitted his defence to UEFA's disciplinary committee on Monday and as part of that his legal team questioned whether the substance in the supplement should even be on the prohibited list given some apparent scientific evidence on its effects.


That right there reads to me that the substance was indeed on the list. Therefore we are not talking about a substance that wasnt lsited. This is my understanding. UEFA are talking about removing it from the list, NOT adding it.

Now my understanding could be wrong as this is just my reading of a news report and not a behind the scenes look at first hand knowledge of the case.


BUT if this wasnt on the list then it wouldnt be illegal and would be just as free to use as slimfast (which is just a dimmed down version of what he used btw)

The rumours where that Klopp thought Sakho was too overweight and unfit when he arrived at the club and refused to play him until he got fitter. This would tie in to the fact that he tried to reduce his weight as fast as possible. I highly doubt his mentality was to lose weight so he could................. be not as strong............. not exactly a PERFORMANCE ENHANCING RESULT for a defender is it??

Can we please stop with the melodrama of calling what Sakho took a PED as it clearly is not by any definition a PED for a defender. If he was a player who played a position that required a lot of pace and a slight frame fair enough but ffs.............

Sakho panicking for his footballing career (new manager with a huge reputation comes to the club and tells him he is too heavey and not fit enough) decides to take something to help lose weight. Products readily available in your nearest supermarket do the exact same thing. Its just he seems to have taken something stronger perhaps prescribed.

But if it was on the list then he deserves at least a slap on the wrist (doesnt sound like anything malicious such as Rio's cocaine issues) and if it wasnt on the list then I think Sakho deserves compensation from UEFA.

In fact if it wasnt on the list the club should seek compensation from UEFA. The f##kers are quick to fine us so why shouldnt the club seek compo. If a player was banned without merit, from a match that could have secured Champions League and a cashfall of 50+ Million then why wouldnt they seek compo? I am not saying Sakho missing the game cost Liverpool but it is an argumentative factor that potentially contributed the the loss of a lot of money

~Rebel~

Mr.H wrote: »

The rumours where that Klopp thought Sakho was too overweight and unfit when he arrived at the club and refused to play him until he got fitter. This would tie in to the fact that he tried to reduce his weight as fast as possible. I highly doubt his mentality was to lose weight so he could................. be not as strong............. not exactly a PERFORMANCE ENHANCING RESULT for a defender is it??

Can we please stop with the melodrama of calling what Sakho took a PED as it clearly is not by any definition a PED for a defender. If he was a player who played a position that required a lot of pace and a slight frame fair enough but ffs.............

Sakho panicking for his footballing career (new manager with a huge reputation comes to the club and tells him he is too heavey and not fit enough) decides to take something to help lose weight. Products readily available in your nearest supermarket do the exact same thing. Its just he seems to have taken something stronger perhaps prescribed.

I'd never heard Klopp having a problem with his weight, it's always been Rodgers that was reported as having issues with his conditioning when he arrived for preseason. And indeed, Sakho was a starter right from Klopp's first game in charge, and started every single game he was fit for under Klopp. So none of that "fear for his career under Klopp" stuff makes any sense.

And the issues with far burners are that they are typically used by athletes as they mask actual PED's in testing, rather than being performance enhancing in and of themselves.

K-9

5starpool wrote: »

Silly season has upped a gear. Higuain to Liverpool. Pretty solid rumour I'd say.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/gonzalo-higuain-fancies-liverpool-transfer-8077110#ICID=sharebar_twitter

I've run this rumour through my 'Likelyhoodometer'™ and it has come out at a disappointing 1.9% sadly.

"Higuain fancies Liverpool even though they haven't shown any interest" isn't as good a headline and wouldn't attract any clicks.

martyos121

K-9 wrote: »

"Higuain fancies Liverpool even though they haven't shown any interest" isn't as good a headline and wouldn't attract any clicks.

Be even funnier if they were on about his brother Federico, who plays in the north American centre for soon-to-be retired footballers, aka the MLS.

citytillidie

Check out the hash tag on Twitter #giftsforgrange. Some guy wore a very vile tshirt about hillsbrough to a beer garden with in hours his name and address is found and people are posting what they have ordered to his home

Dickerty

As of last night -

2K in takeaway
10 Diggers
4 Taxis
Coleslaw
A Clown
A mini-horse
A pallet of Coca-Cola
Female AND Male Strippers

citytillidie wrote: »

Check out the hash tag on Twitter #giftsforgrange. Some guy wore a very vile tshirt about hillsbrough to a beer garden with in hours his name and address is found and people are posting what they have ordered to his home

Dickerty

Has anyone seen a list of which youth players we are releasing yet?
Rossiter is off to Rangers and Sinclair to Watford, I think Dunn might go and McLaughlin needs to do something...

54and56

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

How can it be cheating if the product wasn't on the banned drug list?

Because UEFA/WADA are playing a game of cat and mouse and are always catching up.

Let's agree that marijuana is on the list of banned substances as are a long list of synthetic marijuana products but a new synthetic marijuana product called "Mega Spice" is released tomorrow and won't make it onto UEFA/WADA's list of banned substances for at least 3-4 months as they have testing protocol's to follow before they can add any new substance to the list.

Your argument would suggest that in the interval its absolutely fine and dandy for professional footballers to fill their boots with as much Mega Spice as they like as Mega Spice isn't on the banned list..........yet.

Technically a Barrister/QC would probably be able to make the argument and get their client off on the technicality but the reality is the guy dosed up on a substance virtually identical to a banned substance and no amount of technicalities are going to change that fact.

Mr.H

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I'd never heard Klopp having a problem with his weight, it's always been Rodgers that was reported as having issues with his conditioning when he arrived for preseason. And indeed, Sakho was a starter right from Klopp's first game in charge, and started every single game he was fit for under Klopp. So none of that "fear for his career under Klopp" stuff makes any sense.

And the issues with far burners are that they are typically used by athletes as they mask actual PED's in testing, rather than being performance enhancing in and of themselves.

OK regardless of which manager thought which (it doesnt really matter and your probably right), why wouldnt there be a "fear for his career" when he has the impression of being unfit or overweight?? It would be the same if a player was told he has lost his pace or is too old. These things definitely weigh on a players mind (excuse the pun).


As for the PED situation, it hasnt been suggested by anyone but people online that Sakho has taken PED's. He has taken this supplement which some claim can be used to mask PED's but he hasnt been caught taken PED's regardless.

He wasnt caught eating a person either, but we cant say he is a cannibal just because we think he could be eating chicken to mask the human flesh he has consumed. We are a society that relies on proof and everything else is just malicious hearsay designed to discredit by someone with an agenda (not suggesting you have an agenda but the original people online suggesting it likely do)

mcgovern

From what I can see, the substance he took was not on the banned list.

The test checked for the presence of something which would indicate he had taken a banned drug.
The drug he took, also caused the presence of said something, which flagged him as having taken the banned drug - so a false positive.

This was a known false positive, and so some organisations had warned against taking it, because they knew it would mean you'd fail a drug test, without taking any banned substances.

Sakho either didn't know about this, or ignored it. He then tested positive.
His lawyers argued that the drug that caused him to test positive was not banned. They won and he's no longer banned.

Mr.H

Ah I see. Is that fact or just "the word doing the rounds"?

It would make you think was he being ignorant about it or is the list of things you cant take just HUGE

Francie Barrett

Dickerty wrote: »

Has anyone seen a list of which youth players we are releasing yet?
Rossiter is off to Rangers and Sinclair to Watford, I think Dunn might go and McLaughlin needs to do something...

I'd say we'll get the list this week, if not next week. They generally don't tend to hang around with the culling.

8-10

martyos121 wrote: »

Be even funnier if they were on about his brother Federico, who plays in the north American centre for soon-to-be retired footballers, aka the MLS.

I never knew he was his brother!

Riesen_Meal

Bobby and the missus having fun in the sun....

She's fairly easy on the eye...

Agent Coulson

Is Bobby turning into the new Enquire I wonder how long it will be till some fans accuse him of stealing a living for posting selfies and doing that snapchat thing.

K-9

Okay, I'm confused and befuddled about this doping thing.

ERG89

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Is Bobby turning into the new Enquire I wonder how long it will be till some fans accuse him of stealing a living for posting selfies and doing that snapchat thing.

I don't feel sorry for him missing on the Copa now
Ah he has to gain a lot of weight first, came across this tho....

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/602355/Liverpool-Transfer-News-Jose-Enrique-quits-Twitter-Instagram-fight-for-place

Thank god he's gone :pac:

Agent Coulson

ERG89 wrote: »

I don't feel sorry for him missing on the Copa now
Ah he has to gain a lot of weight first, came across this tho....

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/602355/Liverpool-Transfer-News-Jose-Enrique-quits-Twitter-Instagram-fight-for-place

Thank god he's gone :pac:

He's missing to Copa but is in the Olympic squad I think which is in August I would prefer if he was in the Copa next month being honest.

hefferboi

Talks of Allen to Celtic this morning. You couldn't make it up!

Mr.H

hefferboi wrote: »

Talks of Allen to Celtic this morning. You couldn't make it up!

c'mon 20 million bid........................... surely the welsh Xavi is a steal at that price

hefferboi

Dickerty wrote: »

As of last night -

2K in takeaway
10 Diggers
4 Taxis
Coleslaw
A Clown
A mini-horse
A pallet of Coca-Cola
Female AND Male Strippers

Saw this on Twitter and the majority are delighted and think it's very funny. Am I the only one that thinks it's a bit silly? If there was 2k worth of takeaways ordered, who foots the bill? The chipper can't uncook the food and your man doesn't have to pay as he didn't order it and it's all over Twitter that he didn't order so the chipper will just be down 2k.

I've seen stupid ways of getting back at someone but that's probably the worst I've ever seen.

hefferboi

Mr.H wrote: »

c'mon 20 million bid........................... surely the welsh Xavi is a steal at that price

Imagine if Rodgers first signing was Allen, though!

K-9

They did. He's only 26 so we'd get £7/8 Million which is half Celtic's war chest! Can't imagine Desmond giving Rodgers too much budget control!

Dickerty

Dickerty wrote: »

As of last night -

2K in takeaway
10 Diggers
4 Taxis
Coleslaw
A Clown
A mini-horse
A pallet of Coca-Cola
Female AND Male Strippers

Also a crane!

Knex*

hefferboi wrote: »

Talks of Allen to Celtic this morning. You couldn't make it up!

The easiest rumour they ever made :pac:

On a serious note though, he's way too good for the SPL.

LuckyLloyd

K-9 wrote: »

Okay, I'm confused and befuddled about this doping thing.

People not engaged in elite sport medical / testing programs are always going to be on some level. The banned substance list is constantly changing and difficult to understand as a layman to start with. The exact testing protocols and methods are deliberately unclear and constantly changing. And there is a further complication in terms of how / why athletes use certain substances and what advantage is being gained.

In this case, the media narrative is about Sakho taking a fat burner and what athletic advantage (if any) he would derive from same. His legal team arguing that the substance provides no performance enhancing advantage and should be removed from the banned list on that basis sounds reasonable at face value.

My understanding was that substances like the one at issue in this case have been utilized as masking agents in the past and are on the banned list for that reason. I also fail to understand why Sakho in 2015 / 16 would have had a physical / psychological reason to use this type of substance. I therefore reach an admittedly cynical conclusion - he's using it to hide something else.

Thus far I'm happy with how the club have acted and I'm happy to see Sakho has engaged a useful team to argue his position. Ideally the final decision in a few days will have a published written version that will offer clarity on the matter. But - as with all things doping and sport - the official lines in terms of testing and results are probably very different to what is actually going on.

Knex*

citytillidie wrote: »

Check out the hash tag on Twitter #giftsforgrange. Some guy wore a very vile tshirt about hillsbrough to a beer garden with in hours his name and address is found and people are posting what they have ordered to his home

Dickerty wrote: »

As of last night -

2K in takeaway
10 Diggers
4 Taxis
Coleslaw
A Clown
A mini-horse
A pallet of Coca-Cola
Female AND Male Strippers

hefferboi wrote: »

Saw this on Twitter and the majority are delighted and think it's very funny. Am I the only one that thinks it's a bit silly? If there was 2k worth of takeaways ordered, who foots the bill? The chipper can't uncook the food and your man doesn't have to pay as he didn't order it and it's all over Twitter that he didn't order so the chipper will just be down 2k.

I've seen stupid ways of getting back at someone but that's probably the worst I've ever seen.

Yeah, can't help but feel that this far more of a hindrance to the businesses, than it is for the fella they're trying to get back at.

Matching stupidity with stupidity.

Knex*

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

People not engaged in elite sport medical / testing programs are always going to be on some level. The banned substance list is constantly changing and difficult to understand as a layman to start with. The exact testing protocols and methods are deliberately unclear and constantly changing. And there is a further complication in terms of how / why athletes use certain substances and what advantage is being gained.

In this case, the media narrative is about Sakho taking a fat burner and what athletic advantage (if any) he would derive from same. His legal team arguing that the substance provides no performance enhancing advantage and should be removed from the banned list on that basis sounds reasonable at face value.

My understanding was that substances like the one at issue in this case have been utilized as masking agents in the past and are on the banned list for that reason. I also fail to understand why Sakho in 2015 / 16 would have had a physical / psychological reason to use this type of substance. I therefore reach an admittedly cynical conclusion - he's using it to hide something else.

Thus far I'm happy with how the club have acted and I'm happy to see Sakho has engaged a useful team to argue his position. Ideally the final decision in a few days will have a published written version that will offer clarity on the matter. But - as with all things doping and sport - the official lines in terms of testing and results are probably very different to what is actually going on.

Yeah, typically fat burners are used to hide the use of HGH. However, I read yesterday that they type that Sakho used are not at all effective as a mask agent, so that it couldn't be that.

Not sure yet as to the actual validity of that, however.