I'm sure there must be some behavioural bonds in player contracts.

I strongly doubt that one specific to racism would get up, since I don't think it would be possible to enforce, absent a specific category for racial vilification offences at the FA. Also it would needlessly insult the players.

Rex wrote:

I do, and thankfully most Arsenal fans seem sane enough to agree with me.

I think most are just desperate for a top signing, any signing really. He splits opinion like Denilson in 2008.
I'd rather have Giroud.

RE: Flobaba

No. Not gladly. Like a lot of people I am very much torn over this. Right now, cool-headed and thoughtful, I do not want for something I love to be associated with someone I consider to be a degenerate (which, among footballers, takes a mighty effort to stand out from the pack), but I won't lie and say that during a game when my hands are sweaty and the success of on-field actions becomes my only hope that I won't leap from my seat and scream if that rat pops one into the net.

There are so many things about modern football that I find difficult to reconcile with my idealistic world view, yet none of them could come close to stopping me from enjoying the experience of 22 skilled athletes and a ball in a field. Besides, I like all the bright colours.

Burnwinter wrote:

I'm sure there must be some behavioural bonds in player contracts.

I strongly doubt that one specific to racism would get up, since I don't think it would be possible to enforce, absent a specific category for racial vilification offences at the FA. Also it would needlessly insult the players.

Yeah of course, but it needn't be specific to racism. Could it not be tied to the judgments of the governing body of the competition (FA, UEFA, whoever) so that it depends on their findings? i.e the clause is activated if one of these bodies takes disciplinary action and the player is found guilty - obviously only for non-football related transgressions. This distinction is pretty clear - diving is football-related and, while deserving of punishment, is merely a breach of rules as a footballer, whereas his other more serious behavioural issues breach social boundaries, laws and the rules of being a decent human. If the club believed he had been wrongly found guilty they could waive the fine.

Ok, this is all wildly unrealistic but until we get some better rumours or this is finalised it's all we've got. For the record I'd prefer Rooney over Suarez (yet still cringe) and Higgy over the both of them.

As for insulting the players, if Suarez can't accept that he has behavioural issues and therefore the damage he can potentially do to his club, then he can fuck off until he (hu)mans up and accepts responsibility for himself, full stop.

Well, that's just it. I don't think those categories of offence are sharply defined.

In the Evra case Suarez was charged with "abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour contrary to FA rules", including "a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra."

Which is about as vague as it gets albeit including a reference to racism.

In the Ivanovic case Suarez was charged with "violent conduct".

Everyone knows what the cases were about, but I'm not sure a contract lawyer would consider that a solid ground for distinction (though what do I know). Can of worms etc, also it would smacks of social engineering on the part of the signing club, without a clear consensus from the football community.

You're right of course. So lets just sign Higuain already.

Burnwinter wrote:

Will Wenger buy him and thus be condemned as an amoral unethical bastard or will he not buy and be condemned as a tightfisted useless bastard?

Life: a series of opportunities to choose the pretext on which Wenger should be condemned.

As the thread title says:It's a moral dilemma, how can Wenger be condemned let me count the ways.....

You're still refined enough to pretend the importance of the pretext. I respect that.

Isn't it ironic though that some of those who (erroneously) criticised me for being a cold amoral Machiavellian who placed winning above everything, are now looking up at me on my high horse.

You shuttle between nihilism and moral fascism - it's only a short one-truth hop between the two after all.

Come visit the rest of us in the distant suburbs of complex reality some time. 😉

Reports this morning saying Liverpool want £55m. They are having a laugh, reckon Suarez will force his way out.

Biggus, whats your stand on all these? You rather Wenger buy him and we win a trophy or you rather we stay class?

Err remember "enlightened self interest" its easy for me to cluck tut tut and stroke my beard as my moral compass has not been tested yet.
Suarez is merely a good (in the technical sense) player in a very average Liverpool side, certainly not worth jettisoning your values for.

Now if we were interested in Christiano Ronaldo and he was clicked eating black babies..........

Fantastic.Mr.Fox wrote:

Reports this morning saying Liverpool want £55m. They are having a laugh, reckon Suarez will force his way out.

😆

Clrnc wrote:

Biggus, whats your stand on all these? You rather Wenger buy him and we win a trophy or you rather we stay class?

Biggus wrote:

I want us to be hated because we are jammy and win things due to luck not because we have cunts playing for us.

If that non CL clubs wants 55 million i hope they keep him and suffer more ridicule and ignominy from football fans worldwide. Bet they would be dying to offload him for 20 mill next season! Disgusting football club

Madrid want 37m, Liverpool 55m ... I'd say just wait the window out, they'll change their tune come late August.

This increased emphasis on maximum recoup for outgoing stars could be another side effect of FFP, which is really going to hurt Liverpool.

They earn about £170m vs our £245m which is a huge difference in "allowed" outgoings.

Burnwinter wrote:

Madrid want 37m, Liverpool 55m ... I'd say just wait the window out, they'll change their tune come late August.

You see! anyone of us could do Wengers job.