ECHO Comment: "Fears of Witch-hunt Against Liverpool FC"

[Librarian]

By Kenny Dalglish

The football governing body's so-called 'independent regulatory commission' is anything but, writes Kenny Dalglish

What Luis Suarez did when he bit Branislav Ivanovic was unacceptable. No one is disputing that.

As far as I am aware, no one at Liverpool Football Club is running away from their responsibilities over that.

The club has said that he was wrong. Luis, himself, has admitted that he was wrong, and they were both right and wise to accept the punishment yesterday.

The issue is clearly in the length of the player’s ban and the fact that the FA’s disciplinary system is a horrible mess.

Let’s start with the fact that the FA said before they had appointed the so-called ‘independent’ regulatory commission that Suarez deserved more than the normal three-game ban.

Well, by saying that, they prejudiced the findings of the commission before it has even begun.

They appointed the people to sit on it and they have told them they are there to give him more than three games.

So those three people know they have to give the player more than three games just to justify their existence.

How ‘independent’ does that make the three-man commission?

I wish the FA would just stop playing with words. Because this panel wasn’t truly independent and to say it was is blatantly misleading.

The FA chooses who sits on it to begin with. Does that make it ‘independent’?

And who sits on it? An ex-player, an FA council member and a lawyer already known to the FA.

So there’s an FA council member on an ‘independent’ FA commission. That’s convenient.

And there’s an ex-player, who would probably like to do more work for the FA. That’s convenient, too.

Are they paid, by the way? Are they paid by the FA? Do they do it for free? I don’t know the answer to those questions but

I’d like to know.

The point is that the structure of an FA disciplinary procedure like this is inherently unfair.

If you commit a crime in this country, you get the right for your case to be heard by a jury that has no affiliation or responsibility to the people prosecuting you.

That’s not how the FA works it. In fact, their disciplinary system has now become so confused and riddled with anomalies that it is farcical.

They hide behind excuses about the referee saw it or didn’t see it, punished it or didn’t punish it.

So Jermain Defoe bites Javier Mascherano on the arm and gets a yellow card. Nothing more.

Suarez bites Ivanovic and gets 10 games. Why? Because the referee didn’t see it.

He still spoke to him about something and looked like he was warning him but he didn’t see it.

For the benefit of football in this country, there has got to be greater clarification of the rules and more balance in the way offenders are judged.

The most important thing is not the length of the sentence but how they reach it and that information needs to be made public at the time the punishment is announced. That would have alleviated much of the unnecessary discussion about the ban handed down to Suarez.

The FA has been in need of widespread reform for a long time. The need is getting more and more pressing.

Someone needs to clarify the 'no biting' rule, it's very confusing.

 

[Del]

Someone needs to clarify the 'no biting' rule, it's very confusing.

As far as I am aware, no one at Liverpool Football Club is running away from their responsibilities over that.

The club has said that he was wrong. Luis, himself, has admitted that he was wrong, and they were both right and wise to accept the punishment yesterday.

They have very rarely spoken about him biting, Most of the stuff coming out of the club was to **** off the F.A or to defend Suarez's character

 

[Gwladys St. Glory]

PMSL...love it.

 

[Neiler]

 

[hullefc]

The FA has been in need of widespread reform for a long time.

Could this be since Brian Marwick left the FA, that there is a need for widespread reform?

It is easy really reform the FA by making sure that all employees support LFC. Just like the 20 odd ex LFC players that are in the media. Odd really, how many ex LFC players get media jobs, must be in the rules or on the job advert - do you support LFC yes or no? If yes you will be advantaged to the next stage. If no then **** of you Fergie loving c***.

 

[ScouseBlueBoy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erJ-QV2-s2o

The above link is to a song by Utopia from their 'Deface The Music' album, which is a Beatles 'tribute' of sorts.

The song is called: 'Everybody Else Is Wrong'.

Instead of making banners they should simply sing this over and over and over.

 

[Chang Elephant]

If Kenny sees a problem with the FA procedures he needs to arrange a meting with them and bring members of the Adams North London crime family to support his argument.

 

[toffee matt]

just had a long chat with my mate who's a Villa fan. He's convinced it's all related to Hillsborough and the FA's hatred of us and fear of what they face in the next year or so. Probably a stretch - but this IS directed at us as a club

This cant be real.

 

[davek]

By Kenny Dalglish

The football governing body's so-called 'independent regulatory commission' is anything but, writes Kenny Dalglish

What Luis Suarez did when he bit Branislav Ivanovic was unacceptable. No one is disputing that.

As far as I am aware, no one at Liverpool Football Club is running away from their responsibilities over that.

The club has said that he was wrong. Luis, himself, has admitted that he was wrong, and they were both right and wise to accept the punishment yesterday.

The issue is clearly in the length of the player’s ban and the fact that the FA’s disciplinary system is a horrible mess.

Let’s start with the fact that the FA said before they had appointed the so-called ‘independent’ regulatory commission that Suarez deserved more than the normal three-game ban.

Well, by saying that, they prejudiced the findings of the commission before it has even begun.

They appointed the people to sit on it and they have told them they are there to give him more than three games.

So those three people know they have to give the player more than three games just to justify their existence.

How ‘independent’ does that make the three-man commission?

I wish the FA would just stop playing with words. Because this panel wasn’t truly independent and to say it was is blatantly misleading.

The FA chooses who sits on it to begin with. Does that make it ‘independent’?

And who sits on it? An ex-player, an FA council member and a lawyer already known to the FA.

So there’s an FA council member on an ‘independent’ FA commission. That’s convenient.

And there’s an ex-player, who would probably like to do more work for the FA. That’s convenient, too.

Are they paid, by the way? Are they paid by the FA? Do they do it for free? I don’t know the answer to those questions but

I’d like to know.

The point is that the structure of an FA disciplinary procedure like this is inherently unfair.

If you commit a crime in this country, you get the right for your case to be heard by a jury that has no affiliation or responsibility to the people prosecuting you.

That’s not how the FA works it. In fact, their disciplinary system has now become so confused and riddled with anomalies that it is farcical.

They hide behind excuses about the referee saw it or didn’t see it, punished it or didn’t punish it.

So Jermain Defoe bites Javier Mascherano on the arm and gets a yellow card. Nothing more.

Suarez bites Ivanovic and gets 10 games. Why? Because the referee didn’t see it.

He still spoke to him about something and looked like he was warning him but he didn’t see it.

For the benefit of football in this country, there has got to be greater clarification of the rules and more balance in the way offenders are judged.

The most important thing is not the length of the sentence but how they reach it and that information needs to be made public at the time the punishment is announced. That would have alleviated much of the unnecessary discussion about the ban handed down to Suarez.

The FA has been in need of widespread reform for a long time. The need is getting more and more pressing.

Dalglish playing to the gallery again to show how he's still King of the KKKult.

The FA is a private organisation that governs football - the one's Liverpool turned to to get themselves pitchforked back into the CL when they hadn't qualified, btw - they're not subject to holding up the principles of civil law, they can do what they like.

 

[davek]

If Kenny sees a problem with the FA procedures he needs to arrange a meting with them and bring members of the Adams North London crime family to support his argument.

Spot on. The breathtaking hypocrisy of that feller. The champion of rules and regulations - until the rules and regulations stand in the way of a massive little earner and then the gangster mates come out to force the matter home.

That disgusting fried Mars Bar eating old **** should be in Walton nick.

 

[kenada_blue]

Liverp10l

By Kenny Dalglish

The football governing body's so-called 'independent regulatory commission' is anything but, writes Kenny Dalglish

What Luis Suarez did when he bit Branislav Ivanovic was unacceptable. No one is disputing that.

As far as I am aware, no one at Liverpool Football Club is running away from their responsibilities over that.

The club has said that he was wrong. Luis, himself, has admitted that he was wrong, and they were both right and wise to accept the punishment yesterday.

The issue is clearly in the length of the player’s ban and the fact that the FA’s disciplinary system is a horrible mess.

Let’s start with the fact that the FA said before they had appointed the so-called ‘independent’ regulatory commission that Suarez deserved more than the normal three-game ban.

Well, by saying that, they prejudiced the findings of the commission before it has even begun.

They appointed the people to sit on it and they have told them they are there to give him more than three games.

So those three people know they have to give the player more than three games just to justify their existence.

How ‘independent’ does that make the three-man commission?

I wish the FA would just stop playing with words. Because this panel wasn’t truly independent and to say it was is blatantly misleading.

The FA chooses who sits on it to begin with. Does that make it ‘independent’?

And who sits on it? An ex-player, an FA council member and a lawyer already known to the FA.

So there’s an FA council member on an ‘independent’ FA commission. That’s convenient.

And there’s an ex-player, who would probably like to do more work for the FA. That’s convenient, too.

Are they paid, by the way? Are they paid by the FA? Do they do it for free? I don’t know the answer to those questions but

I’d like to know.

The point is that the structure of an FA disciplinary procedure like this is inherently unfair.

If you commit a crime in this country, you get the right for your case to be heard by a jury that has no affiliation or responsibility to the people prosecuting you.

That’s not how the FA works it. In fact, their disciplinary system has now become so confused and riddled with anomalies that it is farcical.

They hide behind excuses about the referee saw it or didn’t see it, punished it or didn’t punish it.

So Jermain Defoe bites Javier Mascherano on the arm and gets a yellow card. Nothing more.

Suarez bites Ivanovic and gets 10 games. Why? Because the referee didn’t see it.

He still spoke to him about something and looked like he was warning him but he didn’t see it.

For the benefit of football in this country, there has got to be greater clarification of the rules and more balance in the way offenders are judged.

The most important thing is not the length of the sentence but how they reach it and that information needs to be made public at the time the punishment is announced. That would have alleviated much of the unnecessary discussion about the ban handed down to Suarez.

The FA has been in need of widespread reform for a long time. The need is getting more and more pressing.

They changed the law since the Defoe incident you daft chunt, Kenneth. See "exceptional circumstances"

 

[davek]

They changed the law since the Defoe incident you daft chunt, Kenneth. See "exceptional circumstances"

You'll be kneecapped for that lad.

 

[Jags..class]

At least we wont have to put up with watching him cheat and injure players for a while.

 

[kenada_blue]

You'll be kneecapped for that lad.

I grew up in Kirkby... I can handle Sir Kenneth and his plazzie Gangsters.

 

[bluejock]

Mods, I really really would like to be able to rep Davek in some form, be it rep, thumbs or even perhaps a cheeky finger.