cymrococh Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 I'm not surprised by this. I don't think the club should have got involved so publicly. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/de...michael-shields The Football Association is to write to Liverpool for an explanation into the orchestrated support shown for the jailed fan Michael Shields during Monday's 0-0 draw with West Ham United at Anfield. Officials at Soho Square are considering whether to bring disciplinary charges after taking exception at the manner in which Liverpool have publicly backed a man who has been sentenced to 10 years in prison for the attempted murder of a Bulgarian waiter, Martin Georgiev, in May 2005. Another Liverpool fan admitted being responsible for the crime before later retracting his confession and Shields' case will go before a high court review tomorrow. The FA, however, is alarmed that Liverpool should openly use a live televised game to try to influence the matter. Rafael Benítez's players wore T-shirts bearing the slogan Free Michael Now during their pre-match warm-up and the actress Sue Johnston was invited on to the pitch with Shields' parents to make a speech calling for the justice secretary, Jack Straw, to "do the right thing". A mosaic was held up in the Kop spelling out Free Michael Now and the match-day programme contained an article declaring the 22-year-old's innocence. "Liverpool fan Michael Shields should be here at Anfield for tonight's game," it began. "Instead, he will be sitting in a prison cell." The FA's concern is linked to the recent disciplinary case against the Ipswich midfielder David Norris for supporting the former Plymouth Argyle goalkeeper Luke McCormick. Norris had been charged with improper conduct after making a handcuffs gesture in dedication to McCormick, who had been sentenced to seven years in prison for causing the death by dangerous driving of two young brothers. The FA's disciplinary department fined Norris £5,000 and is alarmed that Liverpool should also publicly back someone convicted of a serious crime and, in the process, open themselves to allegations of playing judge and jury. The matter became a subject of controversy on radio phone-ins yesterday and the FA will, at the very least, remind Liverpool that it does not believe it is the club's role to take on such issues. "We are not comfortable about this," one source told the Guardian. There is also an element of concern as Liverpool, according to the FA, had not informed the authorities of their plans. In 1997, their then striker Robbie Fowler was fined 2,000 Swiss francs by Uefa for revealing a T-shirt expressing his support for the city's sacked dock workers.
Stevie H Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 be interested to know if there's any positive impact to come from it, i.e. has the shields family heard anything from jack straw's office since etc? or will there just be an FA censure of the club and an as you were?
budgie Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 Lazy journalism tobring up the Luke McCormick stuff. He has at no point denied his guilt. Hardly a comparable situation.
Stevie H Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 Lazy journalism tobring up the Luke McCormick stuff. He has at no point denied his guilt. Hardly a comparable situation.true that, they're not at all similar. the FA always has a panicky reaction to anything that dares bring the real world into football though, so the mccormick line could even have come from them.
Stevie H Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 F*ck the FA.effectively what the club has said in this instance. a departure.
aka Dus Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 I think it makes a difference that the conviction was not in the same jurdistiction.
Jarg Armani Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 (edited) F*ck the FA. Absolutely. And that's two massively one eyed reports by daniel taylor in one week. Edited December 3, 2008 by Jarg Armani
Cunny Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 If (and I know its a big if) the FA source linked it to the Luke McCormick stuff, then how is it lazy journalism or one eyed? I know plenty of match going reds who were a little uncomfortable with the whole mosaic issue and the club's stance on Shields.
Jarg Armani Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 If (and I know its a big if) the FA source linked it to the Luke McCormick stuff, then how is it lazy journalism or one eyed? I know plenty of match going reds who were a little uncomfortable with the whole mosaic issue and the club's stance on Shields. alright, maybe i should have said 's*** stirring'. he's based the whole thing on a talksport phone in and 'a source at the FA'.
Stevie H Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 Absolutely. And that's two massively one eyed reports by daniel taylor in one week.he's a united fan with a foppish haircut.
Redkop Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 Whether it was right or wrong of the club to condone it, I bet the FA are already rubbing their greedy hands together, working out how much they can increase their coffers by.
Jarg Armani Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 he's a united fan with a foppish haircut. I know the one. Star of such articles as 'Sick Liverpool Fans Defecate On Alan Smith's Ambulance'.
Stevie H Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 I know the one. Star of such articles as 'Sick Liverpool Fans Defecate On Alan Smith's Ambulance'.yep. and similarly 'benitez refuses to apologise for aeroplane gesture made when babel scored winner'. he's a c***.
honourablegeorge Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 Lazy journalism tobring up the Luke McCormick stuff. He has at no point denied his guilt. Hardly a comparable situation. From the FA's point of view, they've just punished someone for making a gesture of support to a convicted criminal. Most of our team, our club and many of our fans have just done the same. Don't agree with the other lad being punsihed, but that's there they're coming from. The fact that Shields maintains his innocence is irrelevant, until he's proved innocent or pardoned, he's still legally a convicted criminal. Just glad it's the FA, who won't actually have the balls to do anything.
smithdown Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 yep. and similarly 'benitez refuses to apologise for aeroplane gesture made when babel scored winner'. he's a c***. F**king what? You made that up.
johngibo YPC Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 alright, maybe i should have said 's*** stirring'. he's based the whole thing on a talksport phone in and 'a source at the FA'. Calling Sankey a 'Liverpool fan' is at best lazy jounalism as well
The Hitman Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 I heard he was a Blue,not that it f*cking matters anyway. This is great,I love it when we stick it to the system.Fowler was f*cking great as well.
Jarg Armani Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 F**king what? You made that up. I think that one was made up, yes. He wrote an article about 'sick city fans' on monday. Has nobody on fleet street ever heard the stuff United's lot come out with every single game?? The mind boggles.
Stevie H Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 I think that one was made up, yes. He wrote an article about 'sick city fans' on monday. Has nobody on fleet street ever heard the stuff United's lot come out with every single game?? The mind boggles.that one was made up, yes. taylor's a manc fan and is the guardian's manchester-based correspondent. not surprising that he's penned a few anti-city and us pieces, but shabby editorial control.
fred milne Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 On more than one occasion he has quite openly referred to stuff he has read on Red Issue. I'm surprised the Guardian put up with it.
Tommy Cockles Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 he's a united fan with a foppish haircut. Can anything be more damnable? I hate him based on that information alone. Anyhow I think its reassuring that the simple act of being a Liverpool fan means that we can draw on the support of the club for any injustice that we might be on the wrong end of. I will be writing to the club with a view to a mosaic supporting me in my upcoming employment tribunal against Orange. "Pay Mark his outstanding holiday pay and admit breach of contract" should do the trick. A precedent has been set, after all.
Molby Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 Can anything be more damnable? I hate him based on that information alone. Anyhow I think its reassuring that the simple act of being a Liverpool fan means that we can draw on the support of the club for any injustice that we might be on the wrong end of. I will be writing to the club with a view to a mosaic supporting me in my upcoming employment tribunal against Orange. "Pay Mark his outstanding holiday pay and admit breach of contract" should do the trick. A precedent has been set, after all. amusing, but a bit risque don't you think?
Bigal Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 yep. and similarly 'benitez refuses to apologise for aeroplane gesture made when babel scored winner'. he's a c***. what???? when did that "happen"? the most I have ever seen rafa celebrate was when xabi scored against arsenal in his first season here, and he gave stevie a thumbs up. Thats it.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now