Any ban starts from when he was suspended, so he's done over three months already.
The curious case of Jake Livermore.
- Thread starter Bigelow
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Any ban starts from when he was suspended, so he's done over three months already.
The hearing was cancelled and has yet to be rescheduled (as far as we're aware).
I can only imagine Jake has postponed it due to gathering some sort of evidence, I would assume the case would be on time otherwise.
The FA postponed it, no idea why, but they were supposed to be sorting a new hearing date, either this week or next week.
Steve Bruce said that the new dates offered to Jake were not acceptable. But would not expand on that.
So the delay goes on.
I suspect that the FA may give Jake a suspended sentence after time served. twt.
So the delay goes on.
I suspect that the FA may give Jake a suspended sentence after time served. twt.
Not acceptable? Not like he is busy?
Wonder what he is waiting for, or is he just trying to stall? Must be a reason or the F A wouldn't allow an adjournment.
All Steve Bruce said to Burnsy was that the new dates given to Jake were not acceptable.
Even if Jake is allowed to carry on playing by the FA, WILL he be in any frame of mind to play atm ?
But I hope that the club stay with Jake. It is not as though he has done anyone any real harm is it ? Other than himself that is.
It's a real catch-22 with Jake. His head may not be in it but if he realises 'this lot are going to stick by me when nobody else will likely' he would, hopefully after some time regathering his feet in the game, knuckle down and work hard on regaining his name. In my opinion no club higher than ourselves will touch him because of it.
Also worth noting, some players actually benefit from playing. Totally depends on the mindset of the bloke of course
The only way we'll get any money back on jake is if he plays again for us & plays well for a season or two! Hopefully this will be the case?
What an unbelievably stupid thing to say.
I hope this hearing is dealt with before September is out and I hope the mitigating personal circumstances will be taken into account. The last player that I can remember who was banned for cocaine use was Adrian Mutu who was banned for seven months when he was a Chelsea player and subsequently 'sacked' by Chelsea for breach of contract. Surely Jake, with his tragic circumstances, would not receive a ban longer than the one given to Mutu?
Mutu failed a test out of competition, where the standard penalty is a three to six month ban, Livermore failed on a match day, which is a mandatory two year ban.
I suspect that mitigating circumstances will see the FA make an exception and not impose the normal penalty, but I still don't expect him back any time soon.
As you say we can't stop paying him his full wage until he's banned, as his ban backdates to the moment he started his suspension then surely we can backdate our fine and claim back every penny he's stolen from us since?
Stolen is a pretty harsh word mate. I would suspect all players would have clauses in their contracts about their pay level whilst suspended for this, that or the other.