Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [19 - 23rd April 2013]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tom84 said:
Personally I would have thought any record revenue deals are being completed in spite of Suarez not because of him, I mean he doesn't really have the face to sell shirts does he and couple that with him having been found guilty of racism and now this he's hardly a sponsors dream :/

That's just me surmising though, you obviously know more about your kit deals and what not and the reason for them materialising more than me :)
Click to expand...

I didn't say the deal was signed directly because of him, I was highlighting how the so called damage he's supposed to have done to the club hasn't effected the club signing major deals. We sold out the MCG within a day for our pre-season game this coming summer - who do you think those supporters are hoping to see the most, Suarez or Lucas?

As I asked, who attracts more sponsors & supporters, a flawed genius like Suarez or the squeaky clean Phil Neville? The answers obvious. Of course a squeaky clean genius would be better though.
 
BaZ87 said:
The irony is that we were in with a chance of qualifying via the fair play league. I doubt that's the case now though..
Click to expand...

When I looked a couple of months ago, for once England weren't on course to finish in the top 3 or whatever is required, it was dominated by Scandinavian teams, so we may not get any teams in by the back door this time around.
 
Mr Jack said:
You cannot let players start on the ref. Frankly I think they get away with far too much in football anyway.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Didn't a rugby player get banned for 26 weeks for spitting on someone?

Found it, although it was reduced to 14 weeks (link)

The FA need to establish a system like the tier system used in rugby and start setting precedent for violent conduct. Also, get rid of the stupid "but the referee saw it and acted on it, so we can't retrospectively punish a player" nonsense rule.

Punching, head butting or biting someone deliberately should mean a minimum 6 month ban in my book.
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
Lets be honest, Di Canio was a **** back then and he's still a **** now.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

EVH said:
Agreed. Didn't a rugby player get banned for 26 weeks for spitting on someone?

Found it, although it was reduced to 14 weeks (link)

The FA need to establish a system like the tier system used in rugby and start setting precedent for violent conduct. Also, get rid of the stupid "but the referee saw it and acted on it, so we can't retrospectively punish a player" nonsense rule.

Punching, head butting or biting someone deliberately should mean a minimum 6 month ban in my book.
Click to expand...

I agree in principle.

The standard of refereeing in England remains very poor though.
 
Tom84 said:
Personally I would have thought any record revenue deals are being completed in spite of Suarez not because of him, I mean he doesn't really have the face to sell shirts does he and couple that with him having been found guilty of racism and now this he's hardly a sponsors dream :/

That's just me surmising though, you obviously know more about your kit deals and what not and the reason for them materialising more than me :)
Click to expand...
Whereas Rooney the granny-banging supermodel is clearly holding your commercial revenue down. :p

Entertaining banter but ATEOTD history shows that footballing performance is all that fans care about. After all if being a massive *&^% was a disqualifier to a successful career then El-Hadji Diouf would never have made it out of 5-a-side leagues.
 
Last edited:
HangTime said:
When I looked a couple of months ago, for once England weren't on course to finish in the top 3 or whatever is required, it was dominated by Scandinavian teams, so we may not get any teams in by the back door this time around.
Click to expand...

Last I heard was that the Premier League was 4th and Liverpool were in line to take the PL's spot if it got into the top 3. No idea how close or likely it was that the PL would get into the top 3 though.
Rich_L said:
Whereas Rooney the granny-banging supermodel is clearly holding your commercial revenue down. :p
Click to expand...

You do realise that Utd are sponsored by Mr Potato?
 
BaZ87 said:
I didn't say the deal was signed directly because of him, I was highlighting how the so called damage he's supposed to have done to the club hasn't effected the club signing major deals. We sold out the MCG within a day for our pre-season game this coming summer - who do you think those supporters are hoping to see the most, Suarez or Lucas?

As I asked, who attracts more sponsors & supporters, a flawed genius like Suarez or the squeaky clean Phil Neville? The answers obvious. Of course a squeaky clean genius would be better though.
Click to expand...

You make points that I cant argue and like you said when you quantify the damage of the negative headlines they aren't hurting you in a revenue sense so it just comes down to how big an issue it is for the club to have their name associated with Suarez everytime he has his latest little controversy?

Not being a Liverpool supporter I dont really know how I'd feel on the matter :/
 
Suarez has got himself lengthy bans in three of the last four seasons. Liverpool have a lot of money wrapped up in Suarez yet there's a decent chance he's going to miss a quarter of the season by being a tool. Plus, sooner or later, his moment of idiocy is going to cost whichever team harbours him a key match by being a tool at the wrong moment.
 
Tomorrow's Daily Mirror.


BIpmP_FCAAAA25T.jpg:large
 
Although DM is full of **** if he did decide to leave I'd be pretty annoyed, he owes a tonne to the club and the fans
 
Last edited:
BaZ87 said:
I really don't understand non Liverpool supporters saying we should sell him. They clearly don't have Liverpool's interests at heart and seemingly don't care whether Suarez learns his lesson and changes but Liverpool should sell him :confused:
Click to expand...

He didnt learn between Ajax and now - so why is he suddenly going to learn now?

The only way he might have learnt is if the ban was across one season, the psychological impact (if any at all) is dramatically lessened by having it split over two different seasons.

Liverpool cant afford to get rid of him from a playing point of view - but can they afford to keep him before he drags the club even further down in a "worldwide" way.....for a 3rd time? Surely its only a matter of time before he does something else thats equally as bad.
 
BaZ87 said:
With the greatest respect, you're still complaining about Bergkamp being punished retrospectively when other players weren't and still aren't.

The big issue here is the consistency or lack of consistency rather than the ban in isolation. If the FA were consistent in what they done then I suspect that even those that maybe didn't agree with the length of the ban would understand and accept it. It's hard to understand and accept the FA's decisions when they seemingly make things up as they go along.
Click to expand...

I was just using that as an example of the FA lacking consistency even on things they say they do not do. Just because Aguero didn't get pulled up doesn't mean he shouldn't have also received a lengthy ban.
 
FrankJH said:
He didnt learn between Ajax and now - so why is he suddenly going to learn now?
Click to expand...

Who said he would learn? The point I was making is that those people saying Liverpool should sell him have not made any suggestions about him learning or changing. They're seemingly happy for him to join another a club and carry on as he is - he just can't stay at Liverpool.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom