The answer may well be yes* The club who supported a violent racist regardless of his actions even to the point they were willimg to tarnish the clubs name are crucifying some guy for swapping shirts at half time. Now us normies know which is the worse offence but liverpool, and in particular the manager find the shirt swapping deplorable. They fully support tge violent actions of a racist though. *of course they are ******s. It liverpool ffs. What do you expect?
I think the insinuation was that Mario knew he had played **** and was gonna be subbed at half time, and that he didnt care? At least thats what I think they are saying, and why they are up in arms about it.
Good point. Fans and manager outraged at some shirt swapping because the player involved is crap but excusing of racism and thuggery because the player involved was very good. Shameful really.
But this is the club who did a tshirt campaign supporting a racist. They really need to reassess their priorities.
Rodgers decided to buy Balotelli when any person with a brain wouldn't have touched him with a barge pole. No point moaning about him, we all know he's a complete cock and a lazy arrogant one at that so anything he does, or how plays or performs or doesn't perform, is absolutely 100% Rodgers' fault and no one else's. Rodgers himself believes his own press, always has, and clearly thought he could make a silk purse out of this particular sows ear. He is/was wrong, the stupid vain t**t, and it'll end up costing him big time. Can't say I pity him much to be honest.
Its a fair point and one that makes your club look evem worse than it already is. Willing to chuck a player under a bus but supported a genuine scumbag regardless of whar he did (multiple times). Liverpools priorities are all wrong. Badly.
To be fair he was only £16m, so it wasn't a big risk financially. The major risk was that they didn't have someone capable to step in should Sturridge get injured for a long time, which unluckily for them, happened fairly early on in the season. I probably would have taken a punt on him at £16m in their shoes. But then again I wouldnt have turned my nose up at Remy for what seemed to be a ****ing stupid reason, because he is playing for us no problem, and scoring. (Remy 2 in 4, Mario 0 in 5 - League games that is) and he was cheaper
Perhaps not, although I personally don't think he's worth 16 pence. The big, huge, massive glaring risk that is obvious to most people, bar Brendan though of course, is that he's a lazy, stroppy, good for nothing, feckless, disruptive waste of space. Why would anyone go near him? And no, it's not hindsight as I made this clear as soon as there was a rumour they'd go for him. Perhaps not in so many words but I paraphrase!!
UIR, I hate Liverpool as much as anyone but your club allowed Ronaldo to take the piss for 18 months wanting to jump ship. Do you think you'd have done the same for a player like Cleverley? Every club has different standards for different standards of players (United are no exception) Now abuse away keyboard warrior.
I thought the insinuation was that, regardless of whether he got subbed or not, he was basically giving up. Saying Real had won and doing his post match shirt swap in anticipation of doing f** all in the second half. If anything, the decision to sub him was confirmed by him swapping shirts, not the other way round. Remember the flak Mourinho got for trying to shake hands with Lambert and Keane five minutes before the end against Villa? Imagine if he'd tried to do that at half time. Not a big risk financially, just a stupid decision. Replacing Suarez with Lambert and Balotelli was just utterly stupid. Liverpool knew they were totally reliant on Suarez last season so why not spend some of that cash on a young proven striker? Remy and Pelle were both available, both low cost and both with decent striking records. So why go for over the hill Lambert, who was only ever likely to be a backup, and proven risk Balotelli instead of just buying a reasonably aged, reasonably priced striker who will work hard and score goals with no drama? Only answer is that, as Chief says, Rodgers was convinced he could somehow 'harness' Balotelli's talent and make him a great player. It's fine to do that as some sort of side bet, like with SAF taking on Owen as our reserve striker in 2009, but not when you are replacing your main goalscorer and most important player.
I have no idea what ronaldo staying a year longer while helping us to more actual success has to do with anything.
The difference is that whilst Ronaldo wanted out he was still giving 100% for the team, scoring by the bucket load, helping us win two titles and the CL, and still putting in a full shift, in attack and defence, after 90 minutes of getting panned by Barca. He didn't admit defeat and give up halfway through our biggest game of the last five years.
Yup. I dont recall him then forcing his way out by having a nibble on someones arm. Infact there are very few negatives surrounding ronaldos time at united. Even when he uses to sulk at being subbed. Guys a model pro.
Agree with all of that. Lambert especially was a baffling decision. I guess Rodgers' thinking was that Sturridge was going to step up and be the new Suarez, but me personally i would have gone for Remy had I been them, but their loss is our gain. He has been pretty good for us so far in Costa's absence.
