What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2014/15 Premier League

saint.nick

Coach
Messages
19,401
I never said Terry was convicted, I said everyone knows he's a racist (by today's PC standards).

Now, my measure is that a) I saw what Slippy Terry said on footage, b) Ferdinand is adamant about what he heard, c) He received a ban from The FA, and d) he even apologised about what he did. He wouldn't need to apologise if he did nothing wrong. Terry also f**ked his team mate's wife.
On the other hand, we have the Gerrard incident. This incident wasn't on footage, had no witnesses but a few people in a dark room, and Gerrard wasn't charged. Gerrard also hasn't been banned by The FA for it. I know that would be impossible, but I'm just highlighting that the Gerrard incident has much less evidence.

As far as I can recall, Gerrard has a reputation for being a likeable, great footballer who is also bit prone to slipping on banana peels. Terry has the reputation of being a racist, grass-cutting, thug world class footballer who is also prone to the odd slip.
 

WireMan

Bench
Messages
4,479
I never said Terry was convicted, I said everyone knows he's a racist (by today's PC standards).

Now, my measure is that a) I saw what Slippy Terry said on footage, b) Ferdinand is adamant about what he heard, c) He received a ban from The FA, and d) he even apologised about what he did. He wouldn't need to apologise if he did nothing wrong. Terry also f**ked his team mate's wife.
On the other hand, we have the Gerrard incident. This incident wasn't on footage, had no witnesses but a few people in a dark room, and Gerrard wasn't charged. Gerrard also hasn't been banned by The FA for it. I know that would be impossible, but I'm just highlighting that the Gerrard incident has much less evidence.

As far as I can recall, Gerrard has a reputation for being a likeable, great footballer who is also bit prone to slipping on banana peels. Terry has the reputation of being a racist, grass-cutting, thug world class footballer who is also prone to the odd slip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjwDMomc7IU

He was charged.

Note point d. Something Liverpool FC should've learnt a while ago.

Only Liverpool fans think that abut him.
Which is strange as he all but signed for Chelsea a few years back but changed his mind when his family was threatened...

I don't want to take sides though.
There is a reason Terry wasn't in Brazil. In fact there are several.
 

saint.nick

Coach
Messages
19,401

And cleared. \\\\:D/


Only Liverpool fans think that abut him.
Which is strange as he all but signed for Chelsea a few years back but changed his mind when his family was threatened...

Garbage. Predominately only Utd supporters have it in for Gerrard, and even then, I know a few Utd fans who actually like him. There's a reason that all the neutrals were crying, 'win it for Gerrard' last season. If JT were chasing his first ever EPL, you'd never hear, 'win it for JT'. You are speaking from your imagination.

And don't try to subtly take a moral high ground on Liverpool fans, when United fans did the exact same thing to Rooney.
 

WireMan

Bench
Messages
4,479
And cleared. \\\\:D/




Garbage. Predominately only Utd supporters have it in for Gerrard, and even then, I know a few Utd fans who actually like him. There's a reason that all the neutrals were crying, 'win it for Gerrard' last season. If JT were chasing his first ever EPL, you'd never hear, 'win it for JT'. You are speaking from your imagination.

And don't try to subtly take a moral high ground on Liverpool fans, when United fans did the exact same thing to Rooney.


:lol:


Gerrard slipping vs Chelsea was met by the Universal laughing of everyone in the land.

Just because some rent a gob scouser on Aussie telly tells you we all want Gerrard to in the league does not make it true.

He handed in a transfer request and a gang of masked men came round his house to make him change his mind.

You have got so much wrong about Gerrard in this thread. Seriously just stick to ragging on the Renties.

It is more fun anyway. :D
 

saint.nick

Coach
Messages
19,401
:lol:


Gerrard slipping vs Chelsea was met by the Universal laughing of everyone in the land.

Just because some rent a gob scouser on Aussie telly tells you we all want Gerrard to in the league does not make it true.

You must have been living under a rock until that fateful day, because a large portion of neutrals on social media (I seem to be quite younger than you, so I'm probably a lot more in tune with that kind of stuff than you are), and also television, wanted liverpool to win for Gerrard, but you're in denial about that.

Also, you do realise that people laughed so much because of the massive irony? Everyone would laugh regardless of who it was, but the irony gave some extra fuel. I don't know why that even had to be explained. It's common knowledge.

He handed in a transfer request and a gang of masked men came round his house to make him change his mind.

I don't need you to now recount the whole story to me (what are you trying to prove?), Because I didn't even deny it. You seem so eager to remind me of it though, so I'll remind you that a gang of masked and hooded men gathered around outside Rooney's mansion, displaying a banner which read, 'Join City & Die'. So stop trying to take a moral high ground again. It's actually quite a common characteristic of Utd fans, if I were to drop your levels of stereotyping.

You have got so much wrong about Gerrard in this thread. Seriously just stick to ragging on the Renties.

I seemed to have got so much wrong because I'm not suiting your anti-Gerrard agenda, otherwise in reality I only got the footage fact wrong, which was kind of minor to my point anyway
 

WireMan

Bench
Messages
4,479
You must have been living under a rock until that fateful day, because a large portion of neutrals on social media (I seem to be quite younger than you, so I'm probably a lot more in tune with that kind of stuff than you are), and also television, wanted liverpool to win for Gerrard, but you're in denial about that.

Also, you do realise that people laughed so much because of the massive irony? Everyone would laugh regardless of who it was, but the irony gave some extra fuel. I don't know why that even had to be explained. It's common knowledge.

Yup you are clearly quite a bit younger than me.

Don't believe everything on the telly. It is not a truth box.




I don't need you to now recount the whole story to me (what are you trying to prove?), Because I didn't even deny it. You seem so eager to remind me of it though, so I'll remind you that a gang of masked and hooded men gathered around outside Rooney's mansion, displaying a banner which read, 'Join City & Die'. So stop trying to take a moral high ground again. It's actually quite a common characteristic of Utd fans, if I were to drop your levels of stereotyping.


United are not on any high ground for morals.
It is Liverpool who are in the gutter looking up.


I seemed to have got so much wrong because I'm not suiting your anti-Gerrard agenda, otherwise in reality I only got the footage fact wrong, which was kind of minor to my point anyway

Nope, you seemed to have got so much wrong because you have actually got so much wrong.

If you are going to call Terry because what he did was on camera and he was charged whilst Gerrard is different because there is no footage and he wasn't charged. It then looks a little silly if the truth was he was charged and it was on camera.

That is everything wrong.

But then you got the whole Suarez-Evra thing wrong to. So at least you're consistent. :D
 

saint.nick

Coach
Messages
19,401
Yup you are clearly quite a bit younger than me.

Don't believe everything on the telly. It is not a truth box.

Haha, that's ironically naive, jumping to the old 'don't believe the media' resort. I don't need to be so suspicious when people offer thoughts on who they want to win the f**king premier league. It's sport talk, not some kind of sensationalist agenda, So wake up a little bit.

United are not on any high ground for morals.
It is Liverpool who are in the gutter looking up.

Well that's exactly the same as adopting a moral high ground, by claiming we're in the gutter. I implied you're adopting a high ground over us, not everyone. Nice try though.

Nope, you seemed to have got so much wrong because you have actually got so much wrong.

If you are going to call Terry because what he did was on camera and he was charged whilst Gerrard is different because there is no footage and he wasn't charged. It then looks a little silly if the truth was he was charged and it was on camera.

That is everything wrong.

But then you got the whole Suarez-Evra thing wrong to. So at least you're consistent. :D

Actually, the main reason I'm calling Terry is because he was banned by The FA :D I guess what the Gerrard footage fails to show however is why he hit him. On the other hand with Terry, there's absolutely no excuse for what he did. I mean, who knows, he could have said something so offensive to him that he couldn't help himself. This is where people with all the faux outrage like you, Haffa and Jimbo need to pull your heads out of your arses. Getting in a pub altercation doesn't make you a thug.

And what did I get wrong about the Suarez-Evra case? I think I've hardly mentioned it...
 
Last edited:

WireMan

Bench
Messages
4,479
Haha, that's ironically naive, jumping to the old 'don't believe the media' resort. I don't need to be so suspicious when people offer thoughts on who they want to win the f**king premier league. It's sport talk, not some kind of sensationalist agenda, So wake up a little bit.

You really don't understand "sports talk" do you?

Not sensationalist? No Agenda?


Seriously?




Well that's exactly the same as adopting a moral high ground, by claiming we're in the gutter. I implied you're adopting a high ground over us, not everyone. Nice try though.


United have not adopted any ground.

LFC went to the gutter through a T-shirt wearing campaigns to defend a racist all by themselves.



Actually, the main reason I'm calling Terry is because he was banned by The FA :D I guess what the Gerrard footage fails to show however is why he hit him. On the other hand with Terry, there's absolutely no excuse for what he did. I mean, who knows, he could have said something so offensive to him that he couldn't help himself. This is where people with all the faux outrage like you, Haffa and Jimbo need to pull your heads out of your arses. Getting in a pub altercation doesn't make you a thug.

The court case showed why he hit him, it was an argument over a song.

You wouldn't be wanting to try to claim any moral high ground about this would you? ;-)


And what the f**k did I get wrong about the Suarez-Evra case? I think I've hardly mentioned it...

Everything...

From earlier in thread.
Everyone knows that Slippy Terry is a racist. There is a big difference between shouting 'black ****', and saying 'negrito' in a culturally ignorant manner.

Moral high ground again?
 

saint.nick

Coach
Messages
19,401
You really don't understand "sports talk" do you?

Not sensationalist? No Agenda?


Seriously?

You're reading too much into it. There's no reason for pundits on tv to lie about who they personally want to see to win the premier league. Shaka Hislop- "I see City winning the league, But it'd be nice for Liverpool to win it". Why would he lie about that?
There's sports agenda and then there's agenda on everything else in the world. Sports agenda is pretty different and unimportant.


United have not adopted any ground.

LFC went to the gutter through a T-shirt wearing campaigns to defend a racist all by themselves.

I wasn't talking about the club, I was talking about the fans. I like to distinguish between the two in football.

The court case showed why he hit him, it was an argument over a song.

You wouldn't be wanting to try to claim any moral high ground about this would you? ;-)

Firstly, let's remember that Gerrard was found not guilty. Secondly, I doubt that he hit him because the DJ said, I'm not playing that song'. Sure, it started the argument, but it then digressed away from the issue of the song and then escalated from there. Who knows what was said in the whole fight which made Gerrard want to punch him.

Everything...

From earlier in thread.

Sorry, but you misunderstood what I said. I'll explain myself better. On face value, what Suarez said to Evra indeed was racist, and he deserved to be punished. But, what he said was a ramification of his own cultural ignorance. He didn't mean any malice in the words, and that's proven by the fact he's known to have called other black team mates 'negrito'.

Can you now see why JT calling someone a black **** is different?
 
Last edited:

Big Sam

First Grade
Messages
8,976
Ok so because someone's living under a rock and doesn't recall Terry's actions (hence my deleted post), here is the source that he was convicted by the English Football Association for racism:

John Terry is considering an appeal after the FA's disciplinary hearing found him guilty of "using abusive language" towards QPR's Anton Ferdinand last October which "included a reference to colour and/or race".

The independent regulatory commission delivered its verdict on Thursday after a four-day hearing, ruling that Terry must serve a four-game ban and pay a fine of £220,000.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/sep/27/john-terry-verdict-chelsea-guilty

Are we really supposed to source old news events that are common knowledge??
 

WireMan

Bench
Messages
4,479
You're reading too much into it. There's no reason for pundits on tv to lie about who they personally want to see to win the premier league. Shaka Hislop- "I see City winning the league, But it'd be nice for Liverpool to win it". Why would he lie about that?
There's sports agenda and then there's agenda on everything else in the world. Sports agenda is pretty different and unimportant.




I wasn't talking about the club, I was talking about the fans. I like to distinguish between the two in football.



Firstly, let's remember that Gerrard was found not guilty. Secondly, I doubt that he hit him because the DJ said, I'm not playing that song'. Sure, it started the argument, but it then digressed away from the issue of the song and then escalated from there. Who knows what was said in the whole fight which made Gerrard want to punch him.



Sorry, but you misunderstood what I said. I'll explain myself better. On face value, what Suarez said to Evra indeed was racist, and he deserved to be punished. But, what he said was a ramification of his own cultural ignorance. He didn't mean any malice in the words, and that's proven by the fact he's known to have called other black team mates 'negrito'.

Can you now see why JT calling someone a black **** is different?

Right ok,
1. Sports journalists all have an agenda, they sensationalise everything and ex professionals are really not worth listening to. There are 2 or 3 pundits who are alright, Hansen, Carra and Neville are good when not talking about there old clubs. Other than that, meh.

2. Distinguish what you like, you said what you did to try and get the moral high ground over a Chelsea fan and somehow didn't manage it. I mean come on. Chelsea are west ham with money. They are this tiny club who the media build up, and they think all four of there fans are all nawty, there captain is a racist and there manager just bottle jobbed the league and will probably get the sack again next summer. Yet you still failed. Come on!!!!!

3. Read up about the Gerrard case. You may find it interesting.

4. Read up about the Evra case. Seriously do it. On face value yes, he was a massive racist. In the real world taking into account the culture of his country, he is still a massive racist. Listen to them defend him for that bite. Uruguay have had a collective shocker over Suarez.

5. At leat JT's defence made sense. Believe him or not, it still made sense.

6. I don't really care one way or the other. I just like to keep people honest. Plus arguing over unimportant things is fun. :p :D
 

saint.nick

Coach
Messages
19,401
Look, I recognise sports agenda and that exists, but it has nothing to do with my original point. They don't say, 'Well I guess it'd be nice to see Liverpool to win' because they're evil and manipulative and bla bla bla.
I wasn't trying to get some big moral high ground, I just wanted to call out how hypocritical they were. But how the hell am I supposed to get a moral high ground based on the fact they're a shit little lucky club with a manager who failed to win a trophy?
I find your view on Suarez extremely cynical. Uruguay are not this big evil country. I've done reading on the evra case, and what I found is while Suarez deserved his punishment, the whole process behind it by The FA is embarrassingly flawed.
I don't care if JT made sense or not. Gerrard not guilty, JT guilty.
I need to take a break from LU. The soccer section is so much more interesting than the league section though...
 
Last edited:
Messages
545
Look, I recognise sports agenda and that exists, but it has nothing to do with my original point. They don't say, 'Well I guess it'd be nice to see Liverpool to win' because they're evil and manipulative and bla bla bla.
I wasn't trying to get some big moral high ground, I just wanted to call out how hypocritical they were. But how the hell am I supposed to get a moral high ground based on the fact they're a shit little lucky club with a manager who failed to win a trophy?
I find your view on Suarez extremely cynical. Uruguay are not this big evil country. I've done reading on the evra case, and what I found is while Suarez deserved his punishment, the whole process behind it by The FA is embarrassingly flawed.
I don't care if JT made sense or not. Gerrard not guilty, JT guilty.
I need to take a break from LU. The soccer section is so much more interesting than the league section though...

Actually if you read the Evra case findings by the FA independent panel ( I think it was 2 old drinking mates of Fergie on the 3 man panel), the from memory 300 plus page document to explain their decision basically come down to the panel believed one mans word over the others as there was no real proof or independent witnesses in the case. It was a mickey mouse decision and one that Liverpool should have fought a lot harder and taken it to the Court Arbitration Sport.

As for the current decision by FIFA, I expect that once the World Cup is over it will be quietly announced in the weeks that follow that FIFA have reduced the all football activity ban from 4 months to 1 month (meaning he will miss the pre-season). The pity is by this time Luis will most likely be a Barcelona player.

There are many reasons this reduction will occur but from what I have heard, the big clubs are already asking that FIFA put in writing that bans that occur when a player is on international duty can not carry over to club football. They never have in the past and FIFA know that they are setting a dangerous precedent and one that could lead to the big clubs making their (they after all pay the players massive wages week in week out) players unavailable for international football.
 

saint.nick

Coach
Messages
19,401
At the moment, it's not looking likely that Suarez's ban will be reduced. Unless Liverpool know something that we don't, I really don't think it's wise to keep Suarez in the sheer hope that his ban is reduced. Based on that, I think that if we sell Suarez to Barca, get Sanchez and all of that other money, Liverpool will be in a far better off position than keeping Suarez while he's banned for the first 10 games. Like I've said before, we rely on the guy too much to make a title challenge. So bringing in Sanchez and other great players will make us a lot more balanced.

You made an interesting point about the racism case though.
 

thorson1987

Coach
Messages
16,907
A couple of things Suarez can't do during his ban

- Be in team photo unless it's down outside of Anfield (or whatever club he ends up at)
- Promote new strips

And the clincher,

- can't do any football related charity work
 

WireMan

Bench
Messages
4,479
I need to take a break from LU. The soccer section is so much more interesting than the league section though...
Totally, the NRL section is boring.
This is much more fun.

Actually if you read the Evra case findings by the FA independent panel ( I think it was 2 old drinking mates of Fergie on the 3 man panel), the from memory 300 plus page document to explain their decision basically come down to the panel believed one mans word over the others as there was no real proof or independent witnesses in the case. It was a mickey mouse decision and one that Liverpool should have fought a lot harder and taken it to the Court Arbitration Sport.

As for the current decision by FIFA, I expect that once the World Cup is over it will be quietly announced in the weeks that follow that FIFA have reduced the all football activity ban from 4 months to 1 month (meaning he will miss the pre-season). The pity is by this time Luis will most likely be a Barcelona player.

There are many reasons this reduction will occur but from what I have heard, the big clubs are already asking that FIFA put in writing that bans that occur when a player is on international duty can not carry over to club football. They never have in the past and FIFA know that they are setting a dangerous precedent and one that could lead to the big clubs making their (they after all pay the players massive wages week in week out) players unavailable for international football.

Actually if you actually read it, he racially abused evra several times.
Liverpool fc ran a whole campaign making up lies to discredit evra.
In the end he was guilty and even the LFC staff said he was guilty.

Fifa have been getting sh*t from everywhere recently. Suarez doing this is pennies from heaven for them. The story is now banning a player, not cash bonuses for the board to vote Blatter in again.

I agree he should only be banned from international duty though. He players for his country when he got banned the last time.

The threat of players not playing is unlikely though. Can you imagine Liverpool banning Suarez from playing international football? No chance Suarez would agree to that.
 

Latest posts

Top