Liverpool FC Forum

Player power always wins and Suarez is just working the media and everyone involved.

If Rodgers did tell him he could go this summer then that was wrong as well (if true) as its not
up to him to say that and he shouldn't have done it.

Contract argument will be settled eventually and if we have screwed up then its our fault really
but hopefully that wont be the case.

Easy to cast Suarez as the villain but nobody really knows what been said and agreed behind
closed doors and could be that he has a genuine case and his employers have messed him
about which is wrong even if he has caused us problems in the past.

parchpea » Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:53 pm wrote:Player power always wins and Suarez is just working the media and everyone involved.

If Rodgers did tell him he could go this summer then that was wrong as well (if true) as its not
up to him to say that and he shouldn't have done it.

Contract argument will be settled eventually and if we have screwed up then its our fault really
but hopefully that wont be the case.

Easy to cast Suarez as the villain but nobody really knows what been said and agreed behind
closed doors and could be that he has a genuine case and his employers have messed him
about which is wrong even if he has caused us problems in the past.

Well, if that was the case I'm sure we'd have heard this two weeks ago. He's pulled this one out the hat IMO because of the positive reception he got from the crowd at the weekend.

Kenny Kan » Wed Aug 07, 2013 5:00 pm wrote:

parchpea » Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:53 pm wrote:Player power always wins and Suarez is just working the media and everyone involved.

If Rodgers did tell him he could go this summer then that was wrong as well (if true) as its not
up to him to say that and he shouldn't have done it.

Contract argument will be settled eventually and if we have screwed up then its our fault really
but hopefully that wont be the case.

Easy to cast Suarez as the villain but nobody really knows what been said and agreed behind
closed doors and could be that he has a genuine case and his employers have messed him
about which is wrong even if he has caused us problems in the past.

Well, if that was the case I'm sure we'd have heard this two weeks ago. He's pulled this one out the hat IMO because of the positive reception he got from the crowd at the weekend.

Could be right. We don't know what's gone on behind closed doors but he could have put himself on the market long before August. If he wants to play in their qualifier he has to move by the 12th

Kenny Kan » Aug 7th, '13, 17:00 wrote:

parchpea » Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:53 pm wrote:Player power always wins and Suarez is just working the media and everyone involved.

If Rodgers did tell him he could go this summer then that was wrong as well (if true) as its not
up to him to say that and he shouldn't have done it.

Contract argument will be settled eventually and if we have screwed up then its our fault really
but hopefully that wont be the case.

Easy to cast Suarez as the villain but nobody really knows what been said and agreed behind
closed doors and could be that he has a genuine case and his employers have messed him
about which is wrong even if he has caused us problems in the past.

Well, if that was the case I'm sure we'd have heard this two weeks ago. He's pulled this one out the hat IMO because of the positive reception he got from the crowd at the weekend.

Agree with that. He and his advisor's (whoever they are) totally totally didn't expect the reception that the fans gave. As a result, this mess ensued....

All parties are working the oracle to look like the good guys in this and whilst Suarez
has form I would not put it beyond the club to have mistakes and caused problems
either.

We will probably never know the truth but my point is employer/employee disputes
usually show errors on either sides, and whilst this is football it doesnt make it that
different other than both parties can use the media to their advantage.

Anyway you dress it up, Suarez is a disloyal, disrespectful rogue. He's said many things and done the opposite, and does indeed have previous. The powers that be will now be working to move him on (if they weren't already) for the best deal possible to us. I'd he goes to Arsenal, so be it. He was already hated by most fans in England. He has no idea what he has with us.

All of this that he's stirred up will simply unite the fans and players even more. And it gives the chance for the owners to pull a stroke of public relations genius out of the bag.

If there's any doubt in verbal disputes, usually previous character and behaviour are taken into account. This court talk is nonsense. I doubt Suarez would want a case v's Liverpool FC if he really wants to play for Arsenal. Not sure Arsenal would want such a thing either. Suarez isn't worth it for us or them.

Taking two employers to court to force moves doesn't speak volumes about a players' integrity. Not sure anyone else would be interested if he does this

this might sound like I a little out of touch with things but can Suarez not be punished due to actions of his agent? Wenger says he was told he wants to leave. Is Suarez' agent allowed to actively contact clubs and say these things. Didn't one rag publish an article saying his agent told them if they bidded over £40m we had to let him go?

RedAnt » Wed Aug 07, 2013 4:24 pm wrote:Anyway you dress it up, Suarez is a disloyal, disrespectful rogue.

We have had a brilliant player for 2,5 seasons and we will get back at least twice what we payed for him. All in all this transfer has been a great success. If he wants to leave then let him (preferably to a club outside of england).

We did same with Christian Ziege years ago:

In March 2002 Liverpool were fined £20,000 for making an unlawful approach for Ziege while he was still under contract at Middlesbrough. Ziege also bagged a £10,000 fine for his troubles.
Liverpool had made a bid of £5.5m for the player, the exact amount of his get-out clause, and reportedly considerably lower than other offers that Boro received.

That side of it is something all clubs do but it is/was unlawful if you can prove it

Hes actually gone to PFA about this which is ridiculous.  They actually think he has a point, and should be allowed to leave if he wishes. If that is the case then contracts shouldn't exist anymore, it should be pay as you play.

The whole thing is shambolic,  but I'm happy at our stance... we value him at £50m and if that valuation isn't met, then I'm afraid he stays.

End of story.

Gordon Taylor has confirmed that the Professional Footballers' Association are helping Luis Suarez with his bid to leave Liverpool but admitted the striker could be left in limbo due to the ambiguous clause in his contract.

Suarez has claimed the Anfield club are refusing to honour an agreement that allows him to join a Champions League side for a fee of over £40million, after they rejected an offer in excess of that amount from Arsenal.

Liverpool insist that, under the terms of the deal, they are under no obligation to sell and only have to inform the Uruguayan that a bid has been made for his services.

Speaking on the Alan Brazil Sports Breakfast, Taylor desribed it is a 'delicate situation' and revealed his fears that the saga could rumble on and on.

“These buy-out clauses have caused no end of problems in the past and they continue to do so because of the way they were drafted at the time,” he said.

“He believes the £40m amount that is mentioned, if that is offered that gives him the right to go.

"Liverpool, from their side, are saying that is a minimum figure from which they will consider negotiation and of course they will want to keep the player, unless they replace the player with someone as good or better, which is not going to be easy in a short period of time.

"We have raised this issue with the Premier League, that buy-out clauses should have a great deal more clarity because I’ve never seen one yet that hasn’t caused trouble.

"It’s also down to discussions Luis had with the manager as well and of course you have the owners involved.

“There are different ways it can be interpreted. If it goes to the Premier League it will take time and the window is then closed. It is a delicate situation and we are trying to help.

“We have been asked to try and help to sort the situation out and we have been trying to do that.

"The lad has had a chequered past but he is also an extremely good footballer and this is about a situation on the interpretation of a contract.

"You want contracts to be straightforward and clear and on this issue it is not clear. It is open to different interpretation by lawyers so, at the end of the day, it is about if an agreement can be reached."

The contract means you are guaranteed the wages for the term term and the club can ask for a fee a bigger fee
as compensation if you leave early , but it does not mean you have to stay at that club.

It is not the case here but clubs also want shut of players they have under contract as well, like Downing.

Suarez is a pain in the backside but we knew that when we took him on and when offered a new deal despite
his poor behaviour and problems with us, but no employee should be held in a job against their will and I doubt
that legally that is possible and where the union step in.

parchpea » Wed Aug 07, 2013 7:05 pm wrote:The contract means you are guaranteed the wages for the term term and the club can ask for a fee a bigger fee
as compensation if you leave early , but it does not mean you have to stay at that club.

It is not the case here but clubs also want shut of players they have under contract as well, like Downing.

Suarez is a pain in the backside but we knew that when we took him on and when offered a new deal despite
his poor behaviour and problems with us, but no employee should be held in a job against their will and I doubt
that legally that is possible and where the union step in.

You can fight to terminate a contract but have no right to do so. We, as a business deserve full value for our assets and that's what he is. On the face of it you can say its an employment issue but in football there's a lot more attached than simple employment, saying otherwise is a simple and inaccurate analogy. I get the reasons behnid contracts and transfer fees and if we wanted shot of him he doesn't have to go, look at Wayne Bridge - on the flip side if he wants out its more difficult for us.

parchpea » Wed Aug 07, 2013 6:05 pm wrote:
Suarez is a pain in the backside but we knew that when we took him on and when offered a new deal despite
his poor behaviour and problems with us, but no employee should be held in a job against their will and I doubt
that legally that is possible and where the union step in.

Suarez isn't being held in a job against his will though, no more so than any of us. He willingly signed a contract and is obligated to honour it. It's not like he's being abused or anything, or has a genuinely valid reason. He's paid more than most of us could ever dream of for doing something he loves. As I've already said, if we continue this way, into civil topics rather than sporting, then we might aswell take him to court for many things, not least the loss of income for time served off the field. His personal losses would be a pittance compared to lost points which has the potential to be direct losses for the company.

I wish football was still a game, played my gentleman