Colchester it is then.

1 Like
1 Like

One of these things is not like the others…

Seriously though, Gerrard was stupid from the club and he was always going to get away with it due to being Mr. Liverpool (and I assume you’re responding to the Phil Collins stuff?)

Firmino is an ongoing probe (three weeks so far) and the match report and videos are pretty inconclusive, so it’s pretty hard for them to take a stance. Although it would have been nice for them to restate a policy of 0 tolerance for racism for them to follow through with should anything come to light.

Suarez was an embarrassing shitshow - the people involved in which (marketing, comms, manager, all sorts of backroom staff) are no longer with the club, so hopefully the change of policy is more reflective of that, albeit perhaps knee jerk and not showing enough ‘duty of care’? It’s difficult, because baring in mind the wages he’s on (in football terms not much, but in average terms - fucking tons) is it right that he should continue to benefit from being paid well and have such a enviable job so the club can hopefully nurture and change him?

People tried to change all sorts of players in the past and they stayed cunts (article writer comes to mind…) I’d like to see more preemptive stuff from all clubs with education in these things and support from youth through to senior teams, but each club can only do so much, and at some point they have to draw a line and show repercussions. They can do that while still providing support to the victim.

Yes I’m not blindly ignoring the fact that Flanagan is hardly an integral squad member, especially compared to the others, but he was always very well liked in the club set up, and if it sets a precedent should another player at any level behave in such a way they get treated the same, it’s not the worst thing.

Don’t be fooled the rocks that I got, I’m just I’m just

7 Likes

weren’t you only 6 at the time?

I broadly agree here but for the fact that the other institutions don’t inherently place kids on a ridiculous pedestal and introduce them to a world where they can potentially have everything they want in life.

I’m being hyperbolic but there’s definitely an argument that football clubs should have more of a responsibility for the socialogical side of players that are under their wing in a way that isn’t necessarily the case for schools etc

1 Like

Pay for top brass at investment banks, hedge funds, etc. is not any different to that of Premier League footballers.

They have the same problem in terms of churning out absolute weapons as well…

3 Likes

really gutted this wasn’t about Arsenal and isn’t a gun joke
can we pretend it is

Yes

the thing about Arsenal is it keeps housing absolute weapons

2 Likes

Do they take them out of schools at about 11 as well?

Clubs are obligated to employ qualified teachers to their academies and educate players to school leavers age

definitely seems to work

1 Like

City bankers tend to be educated at schools that give them a pretty warped view of the world.

1 Like

Well yeah, that’s why I’m saying that clubs have a duty of care to provide more sociological “education” alongside the minimum academic requirements

1 Like

Yeah you literally were making the same point as me. I wasn’t suggesting they don’t get an education, but was suggesting that when you ‘groom’ someone for a role from a young age (and like you say, put them on a pedestal) as well as knowing that they will potentially become role models as they get older, social education or whatever you want to call it, is important and falls as more of a responsibility to the clubs than someone who just clocks in and out of a 9-5.

That said I do think it’s worth remembering that

2 Likes

I meant when he got caught driving several times over the limit and there was a broad LAD! reaction by the tabloid press.

The same tabloid press who’d given Rooney (a more famous player, admittedly) doing the same wall-to-wall front and back page coverage for several weeks.