Skully

Skrtel Suarez Henderson

Downing Kuyt Skrtel

Carroll Suarez Skrtel

Can anyone remember that programme Michael Robinson did for Spanish TV about the then current reds players - Pepe, Torres, Arbeloa - meeting Kenny, Souness & Sammy Lee in a restuarant talking about past experiences & current ones etc Would post a link but in work & can't access youtube Would love LFC TV do something similar with Digger , Luis, Glen Johnson Dirk & some local lads past & present to do the same hearing about them but also as a subtle way of getting our view out on this bollocks about Luis - I'd rather we did a balls on table presser but that's not going to happen is it - mind you LFC TV would likely ditch it for another edidtion of Smalltalk :-( Any merit? I know we are unlikely to shift opinion but at least would hear from current lads

Here you go - you should view the ESPN clip is well, on another thread, very good watch - he's came out with so many good things in last few months, should collate them all & send to mongs in media / FA & maybe even our owners to highlight you can argue coherently against the tide. Radio: Barnes: 'Racism within football is not being dealt with properly' | Radio talkSPORT

Completely agree - also for someone not employed by the club , his recent comments on ESPN /Talklsport /BBC hve been much more helpful than half arsed apologies & bad PR from up on high. But yes for wier picture, I believe people would more likely listen to Digger than Powar & his ilk

Wasn't sure where to put this but pasted for those interested.Club could do a lot worse than having him as ambassador and not just bcause of recent events. Love the guy It’s not about football, it’s about destroying modern myths of colour, race and superiority In 1987 a black friend of mine went into a shop to buy a coat. He asked the assistant if they had it in black and she said no, they only had it in nigger brown. She was a lovely woman, but what would we say if that happened today? If I were to ask players of my generation if they had made a racist comment in a football match, anyone honest would almost certainly say yes. No one batted an eyelid 20 years ago. Now when Alan Hansen says “coloured” rather than “black” (because black used to be an insult) or Luis Suárez says “negrito”, everyone jumps up and down to distance themselves from such remarks. They believe racism has been consigned to the past. When Thierry Henry led the campaign to kick racism out of football it might have changed attitudes towards Henry, but it didn’t change anything for the black guy on the Holloway Road. I am often asked if black players can make good managers. That is an inherently racist question, built on an assumption that a manager’s qualities are based on colour, even though the people asking it don’t mean it to be. The Football Association ticks all the right boxes with its policies and campaigns, the Government passes legislation, the Prime Minister gets involved because someone didn’t shake someone’s hand, people queue up to say ignorance is no excuse. But they are wrong. Ignorance is the excuse. To stop it, we have to start talking seriously about race. The idea that race is about colour is relatively modern. When Aristotle spoke about races he was differentiating between uncivilised barbarians and civilised Greeks. But it was introduced by governments, backed by the Church, to validate slavery and colonialism, to justify treating some people as less equal than others. Just as Linnaeus classified plants, so people were classified by the colour of their skin. Academics tried to prove differences in skull formation to give scientific support to the idea that black people were morally and intellectually inferior. But race is not a scientific reality. You could find a tribe in Africa who are genetically closer to Europeans than to an African tribe a hundred miles away. Some Saudis have whiter skin than Italians. The notion of “whiteness” is an ideology of superiority. Nothing similar has ever existed in black culture. Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda do not see themselves as the same. When the Labour MP Diane Abbott talked on Twitter about “divide and rule” her claims depended on a sense of black identity that wasn’t correct. Empires that conquer new territory find they cannot impose their own ideas for long. The only way to evolve is to assimilate cultures. The Greeks and Romans learnt that and we are learning it now in Britain. In the 1970s when the Arsenal and England footballer Ian Wright arrived from Jamaica, his family would have retained their Caribbean identity. And Tony Adams, his Arsenal and England team-mate, would have had his English culture. But their children, like other black, white and Asian children, have grown up together and formed a new British culture. I was on a train listening to four boys who all sounded like Vicky Pollard. One was black and one was white and, in what sounds like a joke, the others were Asian and Chinese. Their shared culture superseded any sense of race. It would probably be the same for John Terry and Anton Ferdinand. If they were at a nightclub they would be more likely to gravitate to each other because they wear the same jeans and move in the same world than to someone of the same colour who had nothing in common with them. As long as racism exists in society it will exist in football. Passing laws saying it is illegal might stop fans shouting abuse in public, but it won’t stop racist feelings any more than theft laws stop people stealing. It won’t stop if we ban players who make racist remarks. As football finds itself at the heart of arguments about handshakes and insults, let’s use it to make real progress. There is a positive change between the generations and we can speed that up by destroying some basic myths about colour, race and superiority. John Barnes is a former Liverpool and England footballer

His latest words of wisom what a cunt. Such a bad article I felt dirty reading it. Luis Suarez is heading for the Anfield exit after lying to his manager and undermining the club. Not even his belated apology for betraying Liverpool boss Kenny Dalglish looks likely to stop the club’s owners from offloading him in the summer. Suarez was condemned yesterday by Dalglish and managing director Ian Ayre, who insisted he has let down the club, the manager and his team-mates for refusing to shake the hand of Manchester United’s Patrice Evra on Saturday. In an uncompromising statement issued by Ayre and endorsed by American owners John Henry and Tom Werner, the club detailed the betrayal they feel after Suarez insisted to Dalglish he would shake hands, but then went back on his word. Dalglish issued his own apology, after viewing a tape of the incident, and realising just how much he had been misled by the striker he has backed so vehemently. Liverpool will now begin an internal disciplinary hearing against Suarez, which is likely to lead to punishment that will include a fine agreed with the PFA. But in the longer term, it is also likely to see the owners cut their losses and sell the striker in the summer, after the club made a complete U-turn on their previously staunch defence of the Uruguayan. Suarez issued his own apology yesterday, admitting: “I have spoken with the manager since the game at Old Trafford and realise I got things wrong. “I’ve not only let him down, but also the club and what it stands for and I’m sorry. I made a mistake and I regret what happened.” But that is unlikely to save him, with Dalglish angered by the position he was put in after the match, when Suarez’s misleading comments left him defending his player on TV. Liverpool will not publicly outline any plan to move on Suarez in summer, because that would undermine their negotiating position. Yet he can hardly be allowed to stay after being accused of lying by his club and betraying Dalglish so badly when he sat in the manager’s office last Wednesday and insisted he would shake hands. Dalglish is known for his loyalty, but now he feels Suarez has undermined the traditions of the club he loves, there will be no forgiveness. Although he would not say it himself, Dalglish’s feelings were revealed by his close friend Alan Hansen, who insisted Suarez had “let Kenny down” despite receiving “unequivocal support”. Liverpool’s condemnation yesterday was a clear indication their owners can no longer accept the damaging effect the affair has had on the club’s reputation. There is a feeling within the heirarchy the only way to draw a line under the row is to allow Suarez to leave in summer and rebuild relations with both the FA and Manchester United. EXCLUSIVE: Luis Suarez heading for Liverpool exit - Transfer News - MirrorFootball.co.uk

Maybe I'm being naive in the extreme but how come shaking one black mans hand (Valencia) but not another where its clear their is mutual loathing be construed as racist? The comments all over media are outrageous, thank god for John Barnes. I'd love to hear Ian Wrights view on Fergies comments

Haha that's so true, he doesn't seem to realise that his teams style of footy is so mind numbingly bad that you come out in a deep trance. What a difference a year makes - the Baggies have caught on it seems

Yep in a round about way....clown ROY Hodgson feels that Albion’s woeful home form is costing them vital support and admits The Hawthorns is a sad place without its traditional “boing boing”. The Baggies’ head coach wants to see the famous terrace phenomenon return after a series of poor results have left the fans reluctant to celebrate on home soil. Boos echoed around the ground at the final whistle following yesterday’s defeat and Hodgson understands the fans’ frustrations. However he knows that victories are the only way to win back the crowd. “Last year, from the very first moment (I arrived), we were doing the ‘boing boing’ because people were half expecting us to go down,” he said. “Now this year we never hear the ‘boing boing’ anymore. “You just hear a fearful silence of, ‘How is it going to go?’ “You can feel the anxiety. That transmits itself to us. “There is nothing we can do about it, except win. That’s what we’ve got to do. “All the time we don’t win, that’s how it’s going to be, whether we like it or not. “People are human beings. We all get down when we lose and up when we win. “We came away from Stoke and Fulham happy and yesterday we go home sad. That’s the life we chose.” West Brom: The Hawthorns is a sad place and I miss the Boing Boing - Roy Hodgson - Sunday Mercury

Christ the man is unbelievable.... Terry suffering a "social lynching"...err no mention of our mixed race number 7. Utter twat Martin Samuel: Social lynch mob have hit their target | Mail Online Innocent until proven guilty. It's just a catchphrase now. It's one of those things we say. We don't much mean it. Allegedly is the same. Ever noticed how they use allegedly on shows like Have I Got News For You? It's a punchline. They throw it in with a raised eyebrow and a cheeky grin. Maybe that is what we should do here. John Terry is innocent until proven guilty. Little pause for comic effect. Wink to the camera, wait for the laugh. Allegedly. Flashpoint: Ferdinand and Terry clash at Loftus Road In the end, it came down to a shouting contest and the lords of Twitter, the frantic self-publicists in Westminster such as Damian Collins MP and the sages of the newsprint and airwaves shouted loudest. They did not always shout with great understanding, or even logic, but they shouted to the rolling rhythm of a bandwagon that was hurtling towards its inevitable destination. A social lynching, a friend of mine called the events of the last few days. He's just one of those old-school hacks, and football's not even his thing any more; but his instincts were right, and he nailed this one. If Terry was to be removed before his trial, it had to be a football decision. If Fabio Capello, the England manager, thought that he divided the dressing room, or his presence would prove a distraction, then he had to act, as he did before the World Cup, the first time Terry was sacked. Backing: Capello (right) and Terry Capello, however, remained staunchly behind his captain this time. He was in Italy when the decision was taken, a manager paid £6million annually but not trusted to make selection calls. His successor should be taking notes. The next crisis for the England team - and there will be one, because there always is - should be dropped directly on the toes of the FA board, those wizards of governance. The impossible job just got a little easier: for £6m, the FA now employ a man in a tracksuit, no more. Aggravation is on their watch. Good luck all. The board will get their tummies tickled this morning, no doubt, and be widely praised for taking a firm line. The opposite is true. The tough call would have been to resist, to say a man cannot lose his job without being given the chance to defend himself in due process and that however unfortunate the timing of Terry's trial, it remained a matter for the courts. Emmanuel Frimpong, on loan to Wolves and one of the Twitter stormers, did not seem to understand this. The FA were out of order, he said. 'If Anton Ferdinand was in the England team and was being charged for racism, would the FA wait?' As if the FA set court dates. His words were reported as further evidence of the mood against Terry, rather than an argument with a bus-sized hole in its centre. Trial by social media: Terry accused Like that of Jason Roberts, who compared Terry's situation to Rio Ferdinand's in 2003, left out of the England squad before his hearing for missing a drugs test. The difference being there was no question of whether Ferdinand was guilty. He should have taken the test, he was absent. Case closed. The FA knew the verdict in advance. A comparison would be if Terry had racially abused Anton Ferdinand as he walked past, midway through a television interview, on camera, with utter certainty for all to see. There would be no question of waiting for formal process then. A decision could be made that night, without complaint. Nobody here condones racism. It is the fact Terry has pleaded not guilty and could be found so that is the awkward complication, because we shouldn't condone pre-judgment either. Still, the FA say their action in no way suggests wrongdoing on Terry's part. Allegedly. Terry will not play for Chelsea against Manchester United on Sunday. He would not have played in last weekend's FA Cup match against Queens Park Rangers either, but was concerned it would be interpreted as a tactical injury to avoid a poisonous atmosphere and the handshake issue. His knee injury, however, could be a serious one. Terry spent Friday afternoon undergoing further tests, having consulted a specialist on Thursday, and his participation in England's next match with Holland on February 29 has to be doubtful. This would leave him with the rest of the season to make a decision on whether to be available for England at Euro 2012. He will not be rushed into making the call, but is very conflicted on the issue: upset at what he sees as a lack of support by the FA, but loyal towards Capello, who was known to be against the decision of the FA board, taken above his head. Capello told Terry as recently as Thursday night that he would still be his captain next summer and remains convinced he is the best man for the job. Failed in his role: Capello felt Steven Gerrard did not lead effectively The idea he restored Terry to the role out of pity is laughable. Capello believes English football is unique in seeking leadership from its captain and feels Steven Gerrard did not fulfil that role in 2010. Even Terry's supposed mutiny in South Africa is now viewed benignly by Capello, who says he was the only player with the confidence to speak up about dissatisfaction in the camp. It is not unthinkable, if Terry goes to Euro 2012, that the manager will continue to lean on him as Sir Clive Woodward did Lawrence Dallaglio, after he was replaced by Martin Johnson following a tabloid scandal. Johnson came into his own on match days, but Dallaglio remained Woodward's man behind the scenes, his real World Cup captain. It is now for Terry to decide whether he wishes to risk another social lynching purely by being part of Capello's squad. Yet no doubt whenever anyone refers to the disgraced ex-captain, the shamed ex-captain, the dishonoured, twice-sacked pariah and former England captain they will be careful to remind all that he is, of course, innocent until proven guilty. Allegedly. Read more: Martin Samuel: Social lynch mob have hit their target | Mail Online

Carroll Bellamy Spearing Bar the missed pen was refreshing to see the ref allow a tackle

Bellamy Dirk - best game in ages Henderson - never stopped chasing

From Tony B in tommorow's Times - anyone see the kid? I know he's highly rated but thats about it Liverpool are ready to go head-to-head with Manchester City in the race to sign Nathan Redmond, the 17-year-old winger who is regarded as the most outstanding prospect to emerge at Birmingham City for several years. He made his debut at the age of 16 years and 173 days against Rochdale in the Carling Cup in August 2010, when he became the club’s second-youngest player, behind Trevor Francis. Redmond has been urged to remain at St Andrew’s by Chris Hughton, the Birmingham manager, but his willingness to stay looks set to be tested by growing interest from two of the biggest clubs in the Barclays Premier League. Birmingham would look for a fee in the region of £12 million for the teenager, a price that neither Liverpool nor City are prepared to match for a player who has only ten league appearances to his name. But Birmingham are aware of the growing rivalry between Liverpool and City to capture the country’s best available emerging talent and would hope to spark an auction for the England Under-18 player’s services in the event that his departure becomes inevitable. City are still smarting after the Merseyside club beat them to the signature of Jordan Ibe, the 16-year-old forward, from Wycombe Wanderers, whom they had been tracking since his first-team debut last August, and will aim to flex their financial muscle in an attempt to ensure that Redmond does not evade them. But Liverpool will hope that their recent record of attracting a string of promising young players will give them the advantage. Liverpool made an inquiry for Redmond last summer only to have their interest rebuffed, but they will reignite their attempts to sign him should they be given any indication that he could be allowed to leave

Downing - Wotsits. Have all ingredients, just don't deliver

Tony Barrett Last updated January 5 2012 12:01AM. Bit long but at least has some balance to what has been spouted recently......... “I think it is very dangerous and unfortunate that [the public] don’t actually know the whole content of what went on at the hearing. I’m not prepared, and I can’t say it, but it is really unfortunate you never got to hear it.” — Kenny Dalglish Apart from urging Luis Suárez to seek advice from Fair Trials International, it is hard to know how Kenny Dalglish could have hammered home the message that Liverpool feel the forward did not receive a fair hearing with greater force than the pronouncements that accompanied acceptance of his eight-game ban for racially abusing Patrice Evra. “You don’t actually know the whole content of what went on at the hearing” was one soundbite from the Liverpool manager. An official club statement, meanwhile, accused “the Football Association and the panel it selected” of having “constructed a highly subjective case against Luis Suárez based on an accusation that was ultimately unsubstantiated”. Suárez’s punishment was reluctantly accepted, but Liverpool continue to dispute the procedures that led to it. Their frustration is not caused by the verdict or the penalty that followed it, but is born of a belief that those procedures are deeply flawed. Here, The Times highlights the main reasons for Liverpool’s resentment and the causes of their burning sense of injustice at how the three-man panel, chaired by Paul Goulding, QC, arrived at its decision. Why was evra deemed a reliable witness by the commission? When Evra first went public with his allegations, he claimed that Suárez called him a “n*****” before alleging that “negro” had been the insult. Similarly, Evra initially reported that he had been abused in this manner “ten times”, a figure that differed from Sir Alex Ferguson’s post-match claim of five to Andre Marriner, the referee. Liverpool wonder how such marked inconsistencies can tally with evidence being reliable, particularly given that the commission eventually settled on the word “negro” having been used by Suárez on seven occasions, a figure that is not supported by any corroborative evidence. Was evra coached through his evidence? When Dalglish claimed that some evidence submitted at the hearing was “not in the report”, he is thought to have been referring to Liverpool’s belief that Evra was guided through his witness statement by the FA. This allegation relates to their contention that, while Evra was allowed to watch video footage of the confrontation while formulating his evidence, Suárez was denied the same privilege, having to rely on personal recollections only. This was a factor, Liverpool believe, in the forward not being able to offer recollections that were as thorough or as accurate as those of his accuser. Suárez’s evidence was described as “inconsistent” and “unreliable” by the panel. Is a higher standard of proof needed for such serious charges? Liverpool’s concern that Suárez will be labelled a racist (despite the commission’s stipulation that this is not the case) has hardened their belief that a greater burden of proof is required to sustain allegations of such gravity. According to civil law, under which the hearing took place, the panel had to work only on the balance of probability, a threshold that falls short of the “beyond all reasonable doubt” standard required in criminal law. With the stigma attached to Suárez as a result of the verdict, Liverpool contend that the balance of probability was not sufficient for this case. Why wasn’t evra charged? By his own admission, Evra started the verbal confrontation that led to Suárez referring to him as “negro”. During the course of their spat, Evra told Suárez in Spanish, “Habla otra vez asi, te voy a dar una porrada” (“Say it to me again, I’m going to punch you”), a threat that appeared to put him in breach of FA regulations. The commission’s 115-page report states: “Rule E3, with the sub-heading ‘General Behaviour’, provides as follows: ‘(1) A participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.” Liverpool remain perplexed that Evra has not been charged despite admitting having threatened Suárez, particularly given that there has been no clarification offered as to why not. Was suárez a victim of his own honesty? From the moment that Damien Com-olli, the Liverpool director of football, questioned Suárez about the allegations, the 24-year-old freely admitted to having used the word “negro” on one occasion. Liverpool believe that this honesty and their attempts to help Marriner to understand what took place in what they believed was a misunderstanding between Suárez and Evra allowed the FA to build a case against him. They feel that such transparency was never taken into account and was instead used evidentially against Suárez when the chances of charges following without Liverpool’s co-operation and admissions would have been slim in the absence of other corroboration. Liverpool believe that this sends out the signal to clubs and players to plead the fifth amendment and refuse to co-operate should they be investigated. Suárez statement “I admitted to the commission that I said a word in Spanish once, and only once, and I told the panel members that I will not use it again on a football pitch in England. I never, ever used this word in a derogatory way and if it offends anyone then I want to apologise for that.”

Apart from Bascombe, is this first report questioning that Evra isn't poor little victim that rest of media have played him out to be? I'm not clever enough to add to how it affects this case but hopefully a more balanced media reaction from now on PS Obviously Luis used a completely different word.... Patrice Evra video using n-word on YoutTube | Mail Online

Agger Spearing Henderson

Bellamy Gerrard Skrtel Thought Jay & Agger were good also

Skrtel Johnson Adam

Suarez Carroll Spearing

Loved that. So much I thought I'd go back & read match thread - hindsight a wonderful thing but some of comments & scapegoating of players laughabe. Enjoy & what a difference 12 months make

Kuyt Carra Enrique

Kenny should get him in to speak to young lads at academy - I'm an old fart but listened to it again it was that good, inspiring.