Liverpool owner admits he lied about Suarez’ buy out clause

by Tony Attwood

The story of Arsenal’s apparent bid for Luis Suárez last summer is one that was used extensively by anti-Arsenal commentators as an example of how ineptly the transfer process is handled at Arsenal.

It was back in November 2012 that the Daily Mirror ran the headline, “Red alert! Buy-out clause means Suarez can leave Liverpool for £40m”

Undoubtedly others already knew of the clause, and in 2013 Arsenal offered £40,000,001 for the player.   Liverpool made a lot of noise about how silly Arsenal were because there was no such clause and they didn’t have to talk to Arsenal.

The story didn’t of course suggest Arsenal actually wanted to buy the player, because it always looked like Real Mad were the club most likely to take a player with a history of instability on the pitch, and the bid may well have been part of the vapour transfer trail that Untold has highlighted over the years.  Indeed it was an excellent cover for the early discussions about the possibility of getting Ozil.

But Liverpool made their noise, and with the media and the AAA always ready to jump on Arsenal, the “failure” of Arsenal to get their facts right became the story.  However it now seems that the owner of Liverpool FC lied, lied and lied again over the issue.  The situation was exactly as Arsenal stated.  There was a buy out clause.

Mr Henry, the owner of the club previously owned by Royal Bank of Scotland, has now made a speech at the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference says that he lied to Arsenal and the media on the grounds that contracts in English football are meaningless.  His exact words were, “apparently these contracts don’t seem to hold”.

No one should be surprised at this, because the story followed all the normal processes of the media believing one club, any club (as long as it is not Arsenal) and then creating a story around that.   The AAA lapped it up.

The Liverpool owner also said at the conference that Suárez “had a buyout clause of £40m.  Arsenal, one of our prime rivals, offered £40m plus £1. What we’ve found … is that contracts don’t seem to mean a lot in England – actually, in world football.   It doesn’t matter how long a player’s contract is, he can decide he’s leaving.

“We sold a player, Fernando Torres, for £50m, that we did not want to sell, we were forced to.  Since apparently these contracts don’t seem to hold, we took the position that we’re just not selling.”

In one sense Henry is right as Arsenal found when Barcelona did their infamous “DNA is in his blood” transfer of Cesc, who was on a very long contract with Arsenal at the time.

But the Liverpool statement, is to say the least, a little less than the truth.  Yes Liverpool took the position that they were not selling, but also they took the view that they could lie to the world’s media with impunity.   And indeed they can because the media were not ready to go digging – except of course that for a few weeks no one will ever trust a word out of Liverpool FC again.

However that is temporary.  In a few more weeks they will be the bright lights, and this story will vanish.

Yet it is not just Liverpool who have been shown to be ignoring contracts and lying to the media.  In August 2013 ESPN ran the story that Gordon Taylor, chief executive of the players’ union, had said that the club are not obliged to sell Suárez.

This followed articles in the Telegraph and the Guardian in which Suárez was quoted as saying that he had the legal right to force through a move to Arsenal, despite Liverpool’s rejection on 23 July 2013.

Liverpool then countered with the statement (now shown to be untrue) that they only had to inform Suarez of any offers above £40 million – and do not have to sell at that price.   Suárez countered with a statement that  Liverpool had promised that he could leave if the club failed to qualify for the 2013-14 Champions League, which of course did happen.

At one stage Suárez said, in the Telegraph, “We have the backing of the PFA,”  but Mr Taylor, the head of the union, refuted this and said that the clause did not exist in that form.

Quite how players and agents will now treat the PFA after this revelation remains to be seen, but it can’t really have done the union’s  standing any good.  Either the PFA lied, or else it relied on evidence from Liverpool FC – and an employees trade union should never just rely on information from employers.  That’s rather obvious really.

But Taylor at the PFA was clear, saying in an interview with the Press Association: “If you are going to have a supposed buy-out clause, it should be that – but it is different as it says [that] if there is no qualification for the Champions League and if there is a minimum offer of £40 million, then the parties will get around the table to discuss things. But it does not say the club has to sell….

“It is not edifying and that is why I feel we had to do our best to get round the table and see if there are grounds for consideration for the move but it (the clause) is not specific and 100 per cent certain.

“We are in touch with both parties to try to see if some resolution can be achieved that is satisfactory to both sides.”

Of course the PFA can argue that they acted in the best interest of the player – especially as it emerged later that Suárez was able to get a massive pay rise in return for not pushing through his desire to leave, but even so it still does not speak well for the PFA in my view.

Nor does it say much for the management at Liverpool as  Suárez repeatedly stated in his interviews that Brendan Rodgers had assured him he could leave with the failure to get into the Champions League in 2013.

But the story moved on.  In December 2013  it was announced that Suárez had signed a four-and-a-half year contract at £200,000-a-week plus bonuses.   This contract again says Suárez can leave if Liverpool should again fail to qualify for the Champions League but that he cannot sign for a Premier League club without their express consent.
So there we have it.  According to Liverpool, contracts don’t mean anything in football.   Of course, we’ve always suspected as much, but it is good to have Mr Henry confirm it.


117 Replies to “Liverpool owner admits he lied about Suarez’ buy out clause”

  1. Interesting article, though it does sound a little bit like sour grapes from the writer that Arsenal didn’t manage to pull off the deal. I can understand that considering that if Arsenal had got Suarez instead of Ozil, they’d very likely be title favourites. Its interesting that Arsenal didn’t take it any further. If in fact there was a “true” buyout clause, I’m sure they would have queried the validity of the clause. The fact that a representative of the PFA verified that it wasn’t a clear cut buyout clause perhaps was enough for Arsenal, and so they quit the deal. Now it looks like Suarez might (and its only a small chance) just take Liverpool to the title leaving Arsenal to fight it out with Spurs for fourth spot again! Oh, how different things might’ve turned out if John Henry hadn’t lied!

  2. Would it be possible for you to share a link to the interview with Mr. Henry?

  3. Are you surprised? John Henry wants to win trophies. He took over the Red Sox who had won nothing in over 80 years and brought them trophies. Please enlighten me what Kronke has done with his US teams? ( I honestly don’t know but have read that his teams are specialists in failure, to coin a phrase).

    That’s what Wenger misunderstood I believe. He transposed his values onto the Liverpool owner, that is that AW thought that if he’d sell his best player, RVP, to direct rivals for £24 million then Henry would sell Suarez for 40 million. But Liverpool have now prioritized success on the field over money in the bank, something that Arsenal appear loathe to do. If Arsenal wanted Suarez they could have stumped up 50 million and a pound, he be worth every penny as it’s doubtful Pool would be where they are without him and we’d probably be four or five points better off.

    The real amazing thing about the RVP sale is that Wenger said that if he wanted he could spend 40 million on a player in 2011. Not sure whether that was after he sold RVP or before. If it was before then why the hell did he sell RVP? It obvious the club wouldn’t have been in financial hardship if we’d kept him. If it was after then why didn’t he spend a lot on a proper replacement. I’m fairly sure that he claimed Giroud was not RVP’s replacement, though I maybe incorrect. One thing is certain though he’s not half the player RVP was so hardly an adequate replacement.

    As for Henry’s calumny, well he sounds like a cutthroat businessman which is hardly a surprise.

  4. Well there’s a surprise. Rupert taking the critical of Arsenal viewpoint rather than critical of the guilty party viewpoint. Some things never change.

  5. Well well.. I see people around the web are still using this to beat up Arsenal with. Oh yes, Arsenal’s values are worthless and Wenger is a fool for believing that a contract means something. We should stop paying our players whenever we choose, because you know, contracts mean nothing. Just pay off the PFA chairman to say that it’s not clear how much the player should be paid. We should also use that saved up money to invest in some top class refereeing talent because you know, it is all about winning trophies. Who cares how you get there? This is cut-throat business.

    If people continue to accept wrongdoing simply because it gets them something in exchange (that too something as fleeting as a trophy), then what does that make them? The reason the EPL is likely to be and remain a hotbed of corruption and money laundering etc is because most people don’t care enough about it. It’s like the circus for the mob in Rome.

  6. Yes, Rupert seems to be praising dishonesty as good business practice, whilst criticising AW for his honesty and integrity.

    Regardless of success on the field, I know on which side I’d rather be.

  7. Why don’t you guys call a spade a spade & not an agricultural instrument. Henry/Liverpool is a liar…….

  8. I do not think we’re not winning trophies because of a lack of good players. The players we have are good enough( if an average Man U team can do it, then even Arsenal can do it.) However, if the manager lacks a bit of a winning mentality, it rubs off onto the players. Last Saturday, I realised that in order to win trophies again, may be we will have to wait for a change of management. My fear is that one of these days, the tinnies will sort themselves out, then we will be in real trouble.

  9. @Mick, I don’t support the practices of greedy businessmen but this is the real world where lies and deceit are commonplace. If you seriously think that Kronke is whiter than white you must be pretty naive. He certainly doesn’t mind the way Walmart, his wife’s little concern, treat their employees.

    I’d love a world where everyone was fair and just and I believe it’s possible when you eradicate humanity! But first one could do worse than eliminate some of the evil that takes its form in the shape of Putin, Mugabe, Museveni and Kim Jong-un to name a few. Football matters dwarf in comparison to the misery these shitbags bring to the world.

  10. I respected Liverpool’s decision not to sell. After seeing my club decide so many times to sell players we wanted to keep, how could I not?

    It sends out a message too Henry believes contracts should be binding and that Liverpool are not a selling club. I think contracts should be binding too. Arsenal honoured their contractual obligations and paid wages throughout long periods when players were injured, so players need to honour their contractual agreements instead of holding the club to ransom. Wallcott springs to mind, Van Persie too, Alex Song too. Ashley Cole was just plain disgusting and a lifelong Gooner too, just shocking. Rosicky, Sagna and Bergkamp are stand out loyal players, as too were Adams of course and Dixon. Wilshere has already said if Arsene leaves he will have to reconsider his future at Arsenal, so his loyalty is only to the manager, Podolski future seems fragile. For sure, any Arsenal fan has respect Liverpool and Suarez himself who believed what Rodgers told him – something which is coming to fruition.

  11. @ Rupert and getting facts straight – Colorado Avalanche won the Stanley cup in 2001. So that equals Red Sox only world series.

    @ Legal implications – I think that the party at fault here, from a legal perspective, is the PFA. Liverpool – like any party to a contract – can breach it, and will have to face the implications. The problem here that there is a regulartory/advisory body that was supposed to inspect the situation and give its legal opinion regarding whatever was at stake. Other parties, among them are Suarez and Arsenal, relied on the PFA and I believe that the PFA are liable for, at least, negligence.

    Sadly there is nothing that Arsenal can do against Liverpool at this stage, in my opinion. However, it might be worth noting that the PFA’s stance and the fact Liverpool is not sanctioned my serve as a future precednt when other players’ contracts are reviewed.

  12. @Rupert
    I don’t give a f**k whether you support the practices of greedy businessmen or not. What irritates me is your perpetual siding with the anti Arsenal view as opposed to the majority of folk on this site who support the aims and ethics of the club. You eagerly grasp every stick available to beat the club or Wenger doing so in the full knowledge it will annoy and infuriate the bulk of us who frequent Untold. That makes you a troll and I for one am sick of you.

  13. Tommie

    Exactly, the PFA seems like it acted a party to the deception. If nothing else, the PFA accepting Liverpool’s stance would certainly have made it tougher for Suarez to sue Liverpool for breach of contract. (I doubt Arsenal could sue Liverpool because Arsenal were not a party to the contract) IN the end, I think Suarez opted to agree to a pay rise and the chance to move to Madrid or something should it arise in the future, with the PFA giving their blessing to such a compromise.

    All said and done, it worked out for Liverpool this time, but it raises questions about Liverpool’s working in the transfer market, and the LFA’s role, and I think it might put some top players off when negotiating with Liverpool because now they know that Liverpool don’t believe in honouring contracts.

    Plus, comparing the Suarez situation to the RVP situation is disingenous, as people seem to be jumping on the bandwagon of ‘greedy Arsenal’ with that one. RVP was 3 years older, more injury prone, had only one year on his contract as opposed to Suarez’s 3, released a statement designed to destroy his relationship with the club (and his teammates) especially since he was club captain, and refused to move abroad despite Arsenal willing to accept lower bids. Arsenal also have a new stadium to pay for, in contrast to Liverpool who wasted 50m pounds to not move stadium, and are blighting the residential area around their stadium so they can expand it.

  14. Rupert is the biggest prick on here without doubt.
    After every draw or defeat you can bet your bottom dollar that he trolls all over the website.
    He is one sad man with not a good word to say about Arsenal ever.

  15. Rupert

    Your logic seems to be that it has to be an all-or-nothing when it comes to getting rid of ‘evil’. Start big seems to be your motto, as you ignore the small(er).

    Ignore if someone is getting killed on your streets, as thousands are getting killed in Iraq. You know, it just doesn’t matter enough.

    Also, though I don’t agree with Putin being evil, ever thought that there is a likelihood that if Chelsea is being run as a money laundering vehicle, some of the proceeds might be going to Putin? No? Too fantastic to ever occur? Ok.. But don’t pretend you are high and mighty when bringing up ‘evil’ in politics, when you do so only to excuse corrupt practices in football.

  16. Sometimes I am sure he also misspells his surname by one wrong letter

  17. @Tommie Gun, the Boston Red Sox have won three world series under Henry. Get your facts straight.

  18. @Shard, I’d eliminate evil everywhere, big or small. Abramovic has blood on his name indirectly. I don’t excuse corrupt practices in football at all. I’m saying that there’s no surprise it exists. It should be stamped out and I thought that’s what I made clear; just because I accept it happens doesn’t mean I support it.

  19. Yes yes.. John W. Henry is so fantastic. Just another thing that we can criticise Arsenal for. Not having such a fantastic owner. Arsenal are bad, everyone else is good. We get it.

  20. Rupert, moral high ground???….But here you have sunk too low.

    Lets be clear. Henry said Arsenal had activated the release clause. And he chose not to bind by the contact. Liverpool are at fault here and ARSENAL has nothing to do with it.

    I still think that ARSENAL knew Liverpool wont sell, so they made an attempt to vaporize it and to some extent succeeded. We got Ozil. I prefer Ozil, who can assist Giroud, Poldi, Sanogo, Akpom, Ox, Ramsey….than have a ball hog.

    BUT curiously, the timing of his revelation. Why now???

  21. It is almost predictable that those who seek to denigrate Arsenal see something to be admired in Liverpool’s behavior.

    There is nothing wrong with Liverpool not wanting to sell their player, what was wrong was they way Liverpool leaked the story to the media. What happened to confidentiality? The story that they chose to leak about the buy out clause was a lie or series of lies, accompanied by “what are they smoking?” Henry and Rodgers smugly sat back and watched Arsenal and Wenger ridiculed, wrongly, in the media.

    In any business, whether a sporting or other venture, the most important managerial quality is honesty, without honesty reputation and confidence are transient. Just now Henry seems to think he has been clever, he even seems to be getting off self appreciating his duplicity, but he has made real prats out of himself and Rodgers.

    Of course, being a dishonest prat is quite acceptable to the EPL, FA, PGMOL, media etc.

  22. Are there people seriously supporting the dickhead who asked what was being smoked at the emirate , while he was all the while blowing smoke up our arses ?

  23. @ Rupert – yes you are right, the red sox won 3. Now where is your apology for saying Kroenke won nothing?
    Thought so.

    Re the contractual situation – the problem with Henry’s admission and the PFA’s stance, is that clubs will be able, from now on, to contend that PFA does not enforce clubs to act according to their contractual obligations. If contracts in football mean nothing, then it is football clubs that should be most concerned by it.

    It means that the “new” release clause, and the fact that Suarez can “only” go to a non english club, mean nothing. Since football is a players/agents’ market, and not a clubs’ market, the understanding the contracts are not enforcable is self destructive.

    I can go on and on, but I’m still shocked by the immense stupidity of actually admitting to Suarez having a valid release clause.

  24. You could cut and paste any season from the last eight years onto this season and you wouldn’t be able tell the difference. All the problems and issues with the team are centred on the manager – I am just stunned that people still cannot see it. Here is nine years of abject failure in May….

  25. Caveat emptor
    law : the principle that a person who buys something is responsible for making sure that it is in good condition, works properly, etc.

    When a sale is subject to this warning the purchaser assumes the risk that the product might be either defective or unsuitable to his or her needs.This rule is not designed to shield sellers who engage in Fraud or bad faith dealing by making false or misleading representations about the quality or condition of a particular product. It merely summarizes the concept that a purchaser must examine, judge, and test a product considered for purchase himself or herself.

  26. @Walter
    Every bit of this article is presumed from whatever Henry said as the only fact.The Liverpool man he can say whatever he want now.The fact remain at that time Suarez contract paper has been studied by both Arsene and Arsenal people and reached the point to surrender and move on.

    If and it is a big if what Henry is saying is true the very first one should be held accountable is Arsene and his group.

    To me as an ordinary fan I can only say our men was outsmarted by the American fella.
    Transfer market is all shoddy business.All clubs to get the best player do something doggy . Obviously the extent vary.
    Had my club taken this action to fend off Manu and Barca approach wouldn’t give a f****k.

    If what we are hearing now is true (which I don’t believe) Arsene and his transfer team has let down the club.But as I say the PFA people even commented at that time that there where no clause on Suarez contract.

    I don’t buy Henry words and I dont jump quickly to criticise this or that.

  27. Bjtgooner
    I agree with everything you said and I don’t think Arsenal and Wenger did much wrong during the entire Suarez saga except the actual amount of the original bid. £40M and 1 was a stupid idea then and it looks even worse now and as I said it before , you don’t start any business negotiations with a bid that might antagonize the other party.

    As for people who said the €40M and 1 was a perfectly normal amount designed to trigger the release clause , I have only two things to say.

    One- buying a player is never as straightforward as bidding at an auction setting and the selling club can throw up roadblocks if you piss them off or try to look too clever.

    And two- if it was such a straight forward bid , the transfer market archives should be full of ‘and 1 ‘ bids for high profile players and I can’t name a single one , can you?
    This is what Henry was referring to when he said ‘ I wander what they are smoking at the Emirates’

  28. @Alex,
    Please explain how ‘Arsene and Arsenal people’ could have got access to the Suarez contract.

  29. It is ridiculous to blame Arsene Wenger and Arsenal for this situation. If Liverpool lied to stop us from getting Suarez, they are the culprits.

  30. South Wales Gooner

    Arsen Wenger broke into Liverpool headquarters and with a flashlight between his teeth searched every single file cabinet until he found the Suarez file …. or Guardiola instructed by his unhappy client, Suarez , called Wenger and told him his client would be interested in playing for Arsenal and there was a £40M release clause in his contract……, well , I think it was the first one:)

  31. @Tom

    I don’t know the exact terms of the release clause, would a bid of £40m trigger it, or did the bid have to be above £40m to pull the trigger? If the latter it would explain Arsenal’s bid.

  32. Tom

    I suspect it is because most release clauses specify a value, rather than saying ‘in excess of’ a certain value. Or maybe, there are many bids made and accepted which have a pound added on to them, and the clubs act with propriety and don’t make it public. It was only Liverpool who made the bit about the one pound public, and seeing as they are admitting to having lied about the clause now, I don’t see why we should take their protestations at the time with any seriousness. Their owner is just playing to the gallery and trying to gain favour among his customers. It seems to be working too, but from the amount of time that Liverpool spent talking to the media about the transfer, my guess is they were drumming up interest from Madrid in the hope of getting more money, or at least not having to sell domestically. I also agree with LRV that Suarez didn’t really want to come to Arsenal. At least not enough to take on Liverpool legally, despite Liverpool being in breach of contract.

  33. Also, while contracts are not allowed to be discussed, are we sure the same confidential status applies to release clauses? I’m not. Especially as quite a few players and clubs seem to see no reason to get outraged by the release clause and its amount being known? The only reason to put a release clause in there is to ensure that you get that amount of money without having to negotiate. Ie, it indicates that you are happy to let the player leave for that much.

  34. @Tommie Gunner, read my post. I didn’t say Kronke had won nothing, I asked what he had won as I didn’t know. I don’t mind you having a go but perhaps you should read my post properly.

  35. Wenger’s told a few porkies in his time like when he said we can not be considered a big club if we sell our best players, hr then goes and sells

    He’s also paradoxically openly admitted to lying to the press to avoid answering difficult questions

  36. If you didn’t know Rupert, why add the snide line about ‘specialist at failure’? Nice fallback to claim you were only asking, and yes, that was what you said. What you were implying was that Kroenke’s teams have won nothing. It’s also interesting that you would know how many world series the Red Sox have won under Henry’s ownership (would you also happen to know how many managerial and GM changes took place in those victories, what was the record in the years they didn’t win etc?) but know nothing about Kroenke’s teams.

    In any case, it is ridiculous to assume that that is the sole measure of a good owner. I only follow the NBA, and the Denver Nuggets have improved a lot since Kroenke took over, although they haven’t reached the top of the tree and are not going to make the playoffs this year. What I think Kroenke provides (based on the Nuggets and Arsenal) is a stable basis for a club to grow organically. Arsenal are in a much better position than Denver in that regard, and that position, is also down to Kroenke’s influence and the commercial deals that the club has done. Sure, if you want an owner who pays off the club’s debts and uses his personal funds to buy top players, Kroenke won’t fit the bill,and it’s a lottery whether you end up with Abramovich, Henry, Glazers, or Vincent Tan. But in being the owner, he’s doing a more than decent job. Oh and btw, Kroenke fired George Karl from the Nuggets when he felt that was the right thing to do. In status, Karl is similar to Wenger (maybe slightly below, but there and thereabouts) He will fire Wenger if he feels the club needs it. He’s not knee jerk. That isn’t the same thing as being unambitious to win.

  37. I agree with LRV.

    In their haste to troll the Troll(s) did not read the post, or are incapable of reading the post, how else did they miss the reference to the ‘vapour transfers’ (third paragraph down, approximatley words No.40 & 41). I agree with those who think that Suarez could easily have published a self-combusting letter upon a made up website addressed to “You Guys” if he wanted to move.

    As others have repeated with reference to the repetitive sociopathic tendencies (as can be read above!): DNFTheT

  38. @Shard

    I meant to comment earlier – it’s really nice to see you back!

  39. @Shard, I happened to look up the Red Sox trophy list on the internet after I was wrongly told they won one World Series. As I said I had no idea what Kronke’s teams do but having seen so many negative comments about his ownership of teams I suspected he was rather disinterested in success and concerned only in the bare minimum to ensure he doesn’t lose money.

    Thank you for your opinion on his team Denver. I have absolutely no interest in US sports. And I do wonder just how interested Kronke is in English sports other than to make sure he doesn’t lose too much money. Of course he might be as determined as we all are to see Arsenal win things; I have no idea but I guess the next few years will give us some insight into that.

    I do find it worrying though that a club with such a healthy bank balance maybe watching a team financially inferior and with a supposedly inferior manager leave them in their wake, that club being Liverpool. It is really negligent to have one striker who is capable of playing up front, seeing as nobody else bar a rookie seems to be able to fill that place, and that one striker we do have is inferior to not one Liverpool striker but two.

    It also beggars belief that we get an injured Swede for back up and the very player he is meant to replace may return from injury before him. If Spurs did that we’d be laughing at them.

    Anyway I’ll be back when we win a trophy.

  40. bjtgooner

    Thanks..I’ve been trying to cut down the time spent in front of the computer, but also, I just seem to keep needing to take a break from Untold and the negativity that does the rounds here (You know what I mean). I visited the site a few weeks ago, and was going to comment, but it didn’t seem worth it because the dissenters don’t really seem to care about a discussion. Hopefully though, I won’t let the negativity keep me from seeing the positives on the site, just like with Arsenal 🙂

  41. Altho I agree with the main point that the author makes,it is also very very difficult to argue with Rupert’s point that our owner is justyfying his reputation as an asset stripper who cares little for success but only about profit.

  42. Liverpool leave us in our wake? Really? Because they have a ball hog of a striker who is scoring freely this season (against all but the top sides), when they aren’t playing in the CL, and they beat us 5-1, they are suddenly better than us as a club? Please. We still beat them twice this season, and we are by no means the finished article. Like I said, organic growth, not simply throwing a 100m pounds about like the Spuds, who were supposedly the team who had left us in their wake last season.

  43. @southWales
    £40.000.001 Think about it ?
    People put much emphasis on that one pound extra and it was made a lot by media.

    The fact is our men thought they had done enough job to know about the release clause of Suarez. Their understanding was that the 40 mil is the release clause and they add that pound to make Liverpool oblige to sell the player in question legally.

    If it is to be believed what Henry is saying now it means Arsene and his transfer team were wasting valuable time and money following rubbish documents.
    First thing first mate you deal with authenticity of matters first not the other way around.

    In my opinion is a mistake and should be held accountable like everyone else who does a mistake.
    Please don’t jump to a conclusion that based on this fact Arsene or anybody else has to resign. Certainly me I am not advocating that.

    But yes it is his and his team mate responsibility for the fuss at first.

  44. Hello Shard. Good to see you back : ). I’ve been a bit disillusioned too recently – far far too many trolls on the site. Here’s hoping we finish the season well and if things go really well.. with a trophy too. Even if not, it’s clear that we’ve improved this season IMO.

  45. @ Alex
    You seemed to be implying that Arsenal had seen the Suarez contract at the time that the PFA got involved. I am sure that this is the last thing that Liverpool wanted, otherwise why get the PFA involved when they could just show the contract to Arsenal.
    It is more probable that Arsenal had been led to believe that there was a release clause, (you can take your pick as to who this could have been).
    Anyway I don’t want to get into a to and fro on this point.
    However, I will add that this is a very strange thing to have a pop at Arsenal about. Liverpool are the ones who seem to have reneged on a written agreement helped by their management lying about facts. Rodgers even said that Arsenal lacked class concerning their bid. That must also be seen in a different light now.

  46. @callum

    I suppose you are referring to such things as saying he did not see certain instances on the pitch. That is because Wenger believes in protecting his players, rather than coming out to the media and criticising them, so you have to weigh that against telling a small lie. Really small in comparison to Mr Henry’s whopper, and the showmanship that accompanied it.

    And the other one is not actually a lie, you just have to think about it.

  47. The FA have a responsibility to uphold British business ethics. My word is my bond. If there is a lie and the PFA have not been diligent, there is a case to be answered.

    The player concerned has been bought and the matter has been put up as an undergarment to tease honesty.

  48. Hi Arvind. Thanks.. I agree with you about us having improved obviously. I will be disappointed if we don’t win a trophy this season, especially the league. But I will not be distraught. How many were predicting us to win the title this season? The ones complaining loudest now, were probably the ones also dismissing the team’s chances completely anyway. Such is life. But I am still very very annoyed about the 3 points Taylor stole from us to gift to Villa (which were subsequently gifted to Chelsea the following weekend), not to mention the Mike Dean show against Chelsea. We can still set it right, tough though it may be. But come what may, even despite the poor showing versus Stoke, I am proud of the team and the club this season.

  49. No, really, I think everybody is missing the point.

    This is really not about Arsenal at all. Arsenal could do absolutely nothing when Liverpool decided not to honor a contractual obligation they had vis-a-vis Suarez [actually, theoreticaly Arsenal can sue Liverpool for the “what are they smoking” comments which turned out to be false, but proving that it actually caused harm will be very difficult].

    Anyway, Arsenal are not the issue here. The issue here is the status of contractual obligations in English football. If Henry is right, and contracts in English football are no more than a recommendation, then everybody should be made aware of that. If the PFA, who is responsible on advising players regarding their contractual rights, failed to properly advise Suarez regarding his rights, then there is an urgent need to find out whether it was a professional mistake – or is it a matter of policy.

    The implications are very interesting, and might be especially very interesting for Liverpool. If Liverpool owner believes and acts under the assumption that contracts are meaningless, then he and Liverpool might be estopped from contending that a player and/or another club breached a contract towards them. The only problem is that Henry did not make that statement in court, so it might not be strong enough to serve as an estoppel.

    BTW – in the first instance that Suarez feels that he wants to leave, he can do whatever the F**k he wants.

  50. TommieGun

    I think you are correct as to the implications as far as the PFA is concerned. Technically, Liverpool, any damage to their reputation among agents and players aside, are in the clear, since Suarez as the ‘injured’ party, has accepted their stance. But the PFA seemingly supported Liverpool’s stance, despite it being an untruth it would now appear. That should put the PFA and its role under the scanner.

  51. Rupert,
    Your shitbag list could well start closer to home – somewhere in Oxfordshire perhaps, and then fast toward more southern climes.

  52. This whole saga smacks of parties only publishing what they want to be in the public domain as opposed to what is the whole truth
    First its important to note that on top of the club(Liverpool) having knowledge of what is in a players contract the player , his agent and most important of all as all contacts are lodged with The FA they will also be aware of what is in the written contract.

    Without doubt agents are talking all the while to other clubs so without question Arsenal will have been alerted to what the player and or his agents thought was in the contract and I suspect what had been agreed verbally .
    From my understanding of such matters it is The FA that would rule what was in the contract. So I can only assume that the fact that a player goes to the PFA for help would suggest to me that the FA had passed an opinion. In effect Suarez went to his union for help.
    The comments coming out of Liverpool are probably vague and quite possibly it is seen as good press to make comment at this point in time along the lines that we weren’t going to sell when in all probability they weren’t obliged to do anything other than enter into negotiations.
    On top of this Arsenal were in an impossible position for had they continued or insisted there was a release clause Liverpool could well have had a case that Arsenal had been guilty of breeching the rules that forbid a player or anyone acting on behalf of the player to talk unauthorised to speak or engage with another club, better known as tapping up.

  53. Mike T

    Liverpool went public with it. Why? To accuse Arsenal of tapping up? They never actually said that. They were in fact saying that Arsenal didn’t meet Suarez’s value which is ‘at least as much as Cavani’ and that Arsenal were being disrespectful with the 1 pound, all the while refusing that a buyout clause existed. It was only later (probably when they realised that they were neither going to get more money out of Arsenal, nor were Real Madrid going to bid) that they modified their stance to ‘We’re not going to sell at any price’.

    I would guess in the meantime they were assessing how far Suarez was willing to push them for breach of contract (which they knew they were committing) and pushing their influence at the PFA to back their stance.

    On buyout clauses and tapping up. Have you ever heard of a club having paid more than his buyout clause for the player? How can that never have occurred unless a bidding club has the right to know about a player’s clause? And what exactly is tapping up? Let’s say Moyes as Everton manager, knew of Fellaini’s buyout clause, and as ManU manager, activated it. Would ManU then be guilty of tapping up since they are not supposed to know the details of Fellaini’s contract? It’s a grey area, and we all know that ‘taping up’ exists, whether through players or managers or agents. The fact remains that Liverpool now say that they reneged on a contractual agreement with a player.

  54. Would Henry now pass the ‘Fit and Proper Person’ criteria demanded by the FA of a football club owner given he is a self confessed liar and breaker of a contract which he freely entered into?

  55. I would rather have John Henry as the owner than the pathetic wig wearing Kroenke. At least Henry also cares about progress on the pitch.
    Kroenke epitomises mediocrity. His teams in USA are a disgrace that cannot win f*ck all. They are there just to milk the fans. It’s all about profit.
    That’s not to say Wenger is blameless. He is a corporate manager, all about financial goals fitting in his ‘vision’. Perfect for Kroenke, terrible for the fans.
    The problem is Wenger couldn’t adapt to the changes in modern football and he started to hide behind this ‘financial wall excuse’. Pretending Arsenal were Fulham or West Ham. Changing the mindset of the club from competing for major honours to settling for ‘4th place trophy’. Then, the complacency affected the players. If the manager doesn’t care about real trophies, why should the players?
    As much as I despise Kroenke, I don’t think he was responsible for the signing of the crock swedish player( It was a joke to sign a crock as cover for injured players) or for playing Sanogo against Bayern or having someone so average as Giroud to lead the line. This mismanagement was courtesy of Monsieur Wenger, the failure specialist.
    Poor tactics, lack of motivation and terrible selection, all down to Wenger.
    Wenger is like a bad smell hanging about.

  56. @ Mick – I don’t believe that breach of contract can and should be judged from a MORAL point of view. It’s “ok” to breach contractual obligations, the same way it’s “ok” to break promises – it’s all down to circumstances.

    There are many examples which support the foregoing. I’ll give you one: the state makes a deal with a child molester, so he will not serve any jail time in return for revealing a ring of child molesters. I think we could all agree that MORALITY compels the state to disregard its contractual obligations and throw the bastard in jail (the implications would be, that in the future, criminals will not trust the state, but it’s not a moral argument).

    Furthermore, a breach of contract, in itself, is not where the focus should be, but rather the damage that was caused as a result of the breach. So, if we agreed that I shall buy your house for 1 million $, and in the meantime real estate prices went down, and you breached your obligation to sell – there is nothing for me to sue you for, since no harm was done to me.

    I really wish someone can publish Henry’s full speech. I don’t think he’s a stupid person, and up until now this seems like a very stupid comment he made.

  57. @TommieGun
    I understand your point and would tend to agree.
    Just a thought, we are focusing on Henry, and as owner of the good ship Liverpool rightly so, but what about Brendan Rodgers role in this as colluder in chief, does this render his reputation as a manager to be respected and trusted in tatters?

  58. In terms of what the PFA had to say about LFC and Suarez, one should bear in mind the threat to the job of PFA’s chairman, following revelations about his gambling debts.

    Is it possible said chairman would say or go along with ‘anything’ in order to keep his job, be able to either continue gambling or pay off his debts or both, and maintain the narrative?

    Part of the narrative, as I see it, is that Arsenal mustn’t be allowed any sporting “fairness”. This is played out in all aspects, from blanket disdainful media coverage of Arsene Wenger, Arsenal and their players, not to mention the reporting in general.

    One small example is the gleeful revelation, recently, that 100 Arsenal players had been red carded since Wenger became manager! Not an ounce of perspective given, like how many of these red cards were wrongly awarded (Giroud at Fulham?), or how many 100’s of cards Arsenal’s opponents should’ve been given over the years, or retrospective bans.

    There’s a complete imbalance re the awarding of free kicks for and against Arsenal FC, but when Liverpool or Villa or whomever are systemically advantaged by the refs when playing against Arsenal, which meedja outlets point that out?

    Newc 4-4 Arsenal: MOTD – The Premier Leagues greatest ever game. (A game of constant ghost fouls resulting in penalties against Arsenal, and real ones, including Barton on Diaby, and Nolan rabbit- punching WS1).

    How many red cards would ManU have had over the years if they hadn’t been favoured? For example, Vidic’s assault on Giroud a few weeks ago, or Ferdinands kung fu kick on Sagna a couple of seasons back. There are so many incidents – it’s unreal. And it goes on week after week, year after year, and all the crap applies in Europe, too.

  59. Shard

    First lets deal with tapping up.

    The rules do not allow a player , under contract, save in certain circumstances, to approach another club that extends to anyone acting on their behalf such as agents, family etc.
    You mention David Moyes I would expect that Everton would have tried to have or indeed did have some sort of arrangement in place tied to the compensation package whereby either Man Utd couldn’t sign any of Everton’s players for x months or something.But there is nothing in the FA rules that would have restricted Moyes from using his inside knowledge.
    Liverpool haven’t accused Arsenal in public, of tapping up, possibly they haven’t but behind closed doors we only know what we are told. Be under no illusions tapping up is something all clubs have or do engage in.
    Once Suarez signed a new contract he now knows 100% what is or isn’t in his contract and the reason why Liverpool have gone public is they are both sending a message out to their supporters and also they are rubbing Arsenals nose in it in the sound knowledge that Arsenal cant go public

  60. Shard, Arvin and many others,

    Shard, I too am glad to see you’re back. And I understand the need to take a break. I enjoy the feedback from you and others on here, as well, obviously, the articles.

    It seems to me that UA editors are a bit too liberal in allowing the likes of Cook and sperez to post, given that their “contributions” are the epitome of negativity. Is there not enough negativity spouted about our club and manager already? Why should I have to go to another site so as not to top up on AAA views I could read in the papers?

    Imagine folk who read articles on here for the first few times. Folk who are glad to see things written by SUPPORTERS. Yer AAA seemingly sit around waiting for any article to which they can spread their vile gloom. Sometimes I simply read only the article and don’t bother with the comments, despite the negavistas occupying a tiny percentage of the comments.

    I appreciate Shard, Arvind, bob and all the Untolders who eloquently put the AAA in their place, however, sometimes, I just can’t be arrssed. I’ve read no comments following the Stoke game, just the articles, and even then – not at the time they were published.

    I’d prefer to choose not to skip past the bollocks posters – but I’ve learned in my life that I needn’t invite Abusers to continually spread their (?) over me.

    COY (real) G

  61. “One small example is the gleeful revelation, recently, that 100 Arsenal players had been red carded since Wenger became manager”
    Timing being everything, perhaps the gleeful revelation is timed to cover up (as it signals) a red card crusade (all AFC/no non-AFC) to drive the heathen out of their recaptured Jerusalem.

  62. Hardly surprising liverpool acted this, that club has no class whatsoever. And to think we were the ones labelled as having no class at the time. Not only do they owe Arsenal an apology, but they also owe the player an apology as he was adamant that he had been lied to. Now the truth is out. Shame to the PFA, I never trusted that Gordon-or-whatever-his-name-is anyway, and nothing will change after this.

    Can I just add that its best to avoid responding to certain commenters on here. They are f**king trolls(trolls are sadists and psychopaths according to recent studies), as can be seen by their always taking the opposite side, even taking the side of liars. They are thoroughly enjoying themselves at your mercy while you ‘try and reason with them’. Just skip the posts, that’s what i do.

  63. One thing I noted about the game yesterday is that, watching it, I did not feel the desperation for Arsenal to win that I would have in seasons past. I was fairly philosophical about it. The players did not look particularly interested, so why should I? By the time of the Stoke goal, I just felt a sense of resignation. I was prepared to hold off the feeling that a springtime collapse was inevitable, even if I had seen it more than once in recent campaigns when Arsenal have been well and truly in the mix as February turns to March. But after yesterday’s game, there seems a sense of the inevitable now. The team seem to have run out of juice. Yes, they were unfortunate with some questionable refereeing, but that should not have prevented them being able to come up with football to outwit a Stoke team based on physicality and desire, at least if they had the stuff of champions.

  64. @Al


    Your first paragraph I agree 100% with, well nearly!
    In this Arsenal I think did exactly what they were led to believe was what was required and when the bid failed I applaud(yes I did say that) them for not getting involved further

  65. Tom
    But surely our bid DID trigger the release clause. I have copied the below from the BBC website;

    “”Arsenal offered £40m and one pound for him and triggered his buy-out clause,” said Henry.
    “Since apparently these contracts don’t seem to hold, we took the position we’re just not selling.””

    Do you honestly think Arsenal would have been stupid not to consider the implications of bidding £1 on top of £40m? I’m sure they have people who advise them in these kinds of things and knew full well that by making that offer they had done enough to trigger the clause. I guess the only thing that stopped Arsenal was they couldn’t get access to the contract to inspect it, and the fact the chief of the players representative union had come out saying there was no buyout clause meant we couldn’t argue our case any further without the possibility of being accused of tapping the player up. I wouldn’t read much into Henry’s what are they smoking comment, especially after he’s admitting he lied.

  66. Wenger’s a liar their’s no denying it.
    At every juncture he’s been duplicitous to keep the wolves at bay and appease his followers.

  67. Aah Mike T, we finally get to agree(well nearly anyway) 🙂

    Well, your post came while I was typing my second one, and in you will see I echoed what you say here that we were right not to take it any further….

  68. So now who’s going to believe JWH when he’s saying that he’s telling the truth?

  69. Who cares if Henry lied, if Wenger really wanted Suarez he would of tabled a £65m bid for him.
    As it is, it turned out to be camouflage with no real intent just an empty gesture to appease his detractors

  70. Winning the title is about meeting challenges at the key times. March onwards is pretty key. Even in last season’s excellent run-in, Arsenal failed to defeat either Manchester United or Everton at home. It seems that when push comes to shove, Arsene Wenger cannot send a team out to win the difficult matches. That they can win enough of the easier ones has retained their annual qualification for the Champions League, but there is something of a glass ceiling about the club’s achievements these days, away from the financial reporting. Change is needed, a fresh approach, if silverware is regarded as important in the club’s ambitions. However, if Arsenal can win their next four league matches, I will happily eat my words.Here is a recent form guide for the top four teams, with the number of points taken from the last 6 games played: Chelsea – 14 Liverpool – 16 Arsenal – 8 Manchester City – 13It would not be true to say I have lost faith in Arsenal’s title challenge, because I never truly believed. However, up until yesterday, I was at least prepared to be converted, and would listen to an argument that it could be done is spite of my own reservations – that the squad was not deep enough in certain areas and that the manager did not have the tactical nous to win key matches against the principal rivals.

  71. callum,

    This is not a viable answer to what I asked (in fact it’s not an answer at all, it’s a question, which doesn’t really make for rational discussion). The fact of the matter is, Henry lost credibility, and this will only hamper him in further negotiations with any party.

    As for Arsenal tabling £65m, the name Higuain should tell you something.

  72. The ‘What are they smoking?’ comment was unprofessional, classless and an obvious slur which Liverpool knew ahead of time would be lapped up and magnified by the media.

    I too am wondering why this has come out now!

  73. bob


    And there is the eloquence I referred to above.
    Billfrommanhatten, for me, has it too. (My grammar aside).
    Even the parenthesis insertion makes little sense. Bah!

  74. Hilarious, the very thing everyone failed to mention in any of the comments. Yes, Suarez is having a great season but he is only playing his heart out for transfer!!!

    Believe me come the end of this season he is gone.

  75. Florian

    There was already something dodgy about the way Henry took over Liverpool from the previous owners and the bank.

    Just like the previous owners, didn’t Henry talk about a new stadium? I don’t know or care, tbh. Liverpool is Liverpool. I’m glad I’m not from there. I’m glad I’m not a fan.

    The PFA chief comes from the North West. Modern football was set up to benefit the NW. Liverpool benefitted from NW-itis, years ago. ManU benefit from same. Now that Manu can’t do anything trowfy-wise this season, it would be remiss of the FA to not clear the decks for Liverpools rise to gory (deliberate spelling).

    Even the BBC has moved to the North West. I think most of the refs are from the North West. They’re certainly from the North.

    The trolls have Norf in their DNA!

  76. @Florian

    Not only is Henry a liar, but he is so morally bankrupt he gloating in his deception.

    Agree with you about some of the negative specimens who delight in appearing when things are not going well. Their purpose is to weaken our resolve. My view is we do not give in to their propaganda, we stand firm and keep supporting the team and manager. When results do not go well that is when the team/manager need supporting the most.

    The negative trolls who delight in trying to spread unhappiness on this site, (like Henry on the Suarez story), illustrate more transparently than they realize, their defective character and unprincipled immorality.

  77. Like i said £65m would have gotten our man.
    The fact we missed the boat explains why Liverpool are above us now.

  78. Sorry off topic but Adams has been charged by the FA for violent conduct. It is good news as any punishment for that thug is more than warranted. The unjust thing is that retrospective action does us, the team sinned against, no good at all but could potentially aid our close rivals if he is banned depending on the fixtures.

  79. Well said bjtgooner I love this part especially ‘The negative trolls who delight in trying to spread unhappiness on this site, (like Henry on the Suarez story), illustrate more transparently than they realize, their defective character and unprincipled immorality.

  80. rantetta,

    Given his track record, Henry’s plans about the new stadium were only vaporware to keep the fans quiet. The way they’re going about it demonstrates their total disregard for anything that lives up there. Even the rats are probably finding it tough to survive with such a character.

    Slightly off-topic, I hated Liverpool since they dumped out Dinamo Bucharest (my favorite team from Romania) from the ECL semifinals in 1984. From my perspective, serves them right to be where they are now:)


    Thanks for the support, this blog has tought me a few lessons about dealing with such inflamatory characters, and about expressing my opinions in a rational and factual way. One more reason to stick around – and promote Untold any time I get a chance.

  81. Whoops

    I forgot to say, Sky are showing all Arsenals league matches this month.
    Don’t think this is a favour. It’s a tool to **** up Arsenal – by moving KO dates and times. First up its Everton – a midday KO, having further worked on the formula to take Arsenal out, as happened at Anfield. (Thy will be kicked).

    Will Arsenal games be timed to give the team a chance prior to or following CL and FA cup matches? Could it be time to give matches to Mike Dean, A Taylor, P Dowd and L Probert? Ooh, and Atkinson for the Chelsea match? Nah, they couldn’t be so blatant!

    Sure, the matches are all biggies, inc. Chelsea and ManC (of the North West), so it’d make sense to have them televised, but they got in there before BT. Bet Sky were desperate. (BetSky?).

    Speaking of betting, you’ll be aware of Stokes owner heading up Bet365, right? Do you think this English owner and his team would be allowed to drop a division?

    Fit & proper persons my arrrsssssseeeee!

  82. @Florian

    “Even the rats are probably finding it tough to survive with such a character.”

    I hope they don’t come our way ….. we have enough!! Still waiting for the European cannibal rats to thin ours out!

  83. Just read that we just signed on a well-regarded super-scout Ian Broomfield (recently of QPR) and beat Spuds to the punch for his services. It is supposed to signal a proactive summer transfer window.

  84. bjt,

    I’m pretty positive they won’t. They want to be buried at Anfield;)

  85. @callum if there was a buy out clause of 40 mio why would you bid 65 mio that would be nuts.knowing there was a clause of 40 mio that is why we bid it.
    If the PFA chairman was honest then we would have got our man but for whatever reason he sided with Liverpool and not with the player he is supposed to represent. What does that tell you ?

  86. I don’t want Suarez Al- I’m not going to pretend to be an expert but I don’t think he would fit into the team.

  87. It would be nuts not to bid £65m for Suarez, the guy is different gravy.
    Believe me at £65m Liverpool would have buckled an caved in.

  88. GooneressNo1
    Agre. Think the writer just wants to make a bit of noise but realistically suarez to Arsenal will never happen.

  89. This petition Al could also be a dastardly plan to create the impression that all Arsenal fans everywhere are so very desperate for Suarez to join.

  90. Possible, never thought it that way but yeah…wish I’d the option to delete it.

  91. I can recall leg breaking tackles not getting as much as a yellow, soft penalties, mysterious sendings off, unjustified touchline bans but never a player much less players charged with violent conduct against Arsenal players.

    I read somewhere that the FA was meeting to debate charging players who take off their shirt (presumably after their goal celebration).

  92. Here is a recent form guide for the top four teams, with the number of points taken from the last 6 games played: Chelsea – 14 Liverpool – 16 Arsenal – 8 Manchester City – 13It would not be true to say I have lost faith in Arsenal’s title challenge, because I never truly believed. However, up until yesterday, I was at least prepared to be converted, and would listen to an argument that it could be done is spite of my own reservations – that the squad was not deep enough in certain areas and that the manager did not have the tactical nous to win key matches against the principal rivals.Maybe there are some optimists still out there. As I said at the outset of this piece, on paper, Arsenal are still very much in it. However, form is key, and that of the Gunners has gone to pot. They need a run-in even better than last season’s, where they took 26 points from their last 10 matches. Unfortunately, the opposition they must face to do that is much stiffer. Win every game and they would have 89 points. There is still plenty to play for, but I just can’t see where the inspiration is going to come from after the malaise I witnessed yesterday, because there is an all-too familiar feeling about this time of the year.The team look weary and that is exactly how this Gooner feels today.

  93. Vapour trail….maybe, but we clearly knew about this clause, maybe had no real interest in buying Suarez, but were quite happy to expose it to,the world , weakening a rival, allowing real mad to get Suarez, and we get ozil plus benzema….except Liverpool did not bite. Maybe just a crazy conspiracy theory of course.
    Still think Suarez will end up at real, but maybe benzema at Liverpool now, if as likely they qualify for the CL.
    If we wanted Suarez, the time was when we could outbid Liverpool before he joined them. Still , the big boys can only buy so many, and there will be some attractive targets this summer. See we have bought in a new scout guy to help out, a scout that used to work for arry, so he may know a bit about buying players!

  94. All that happened rantetta, then there was this
    Kicking….that’s what is called bringing the game into disrepute. Whelan, nzonzi and Hughes should be joining Adam on a charge.
    I wished for flamini in this game, but I am thankful we did not get him, he would have protected our boys and got an eight match ban in doing so.
    But the sad thing is, wenger wants to play the game in a way that the teams and the refs from northern industrial cities want to resist, we are branded southern softies to be taken out. The teams refs and media are compliant, defending the English way, the reason why I hope we are embarrassed in Brazil.Eventually, things will change but until them maybe we need to get a bit smarter with dealing,with the likes of Stoke. In such games, we need to mix the physical with the technical, and use pace much better that we did at the weekend. Theo and Ramsey are such losses.

  95. BTW, Kroenke was a minority (40%) of the St. Louis Rams (NFL) when they won the championship.

  96. “…in a filmed panel discussion seen by Press Association Sport, Henry said Liverpool stood a chance of winning the Premier League title this season, and suggested keeping Suarez had been key to that prospect.

    “‘Luis Suarez is the top scorer in the English Premier League which is arguably the top soccer league in the world,’ Henry said.

    “‘And he had a buy-out clause – I don’t know what degree I should go into this – but he had a buy-out clause of £40million – more than 60 million (US) dollars. So Arsenal, one of our prime rivals this year … they offered £40million and one pound for him and triggered his buy-out clause.

    “‘But what we’ve found over the years is that contracts don’t seem to mean a lot in England – actually not in England, in world football. It doesn’t matter how long a player’s contract is, he can decide he’s leaving.

    “‘We sold Fernando Torres for £50million. We didn’t want to sell but we were forced to.

    “‘For the first time (with Suarez) we took the position that we weren’t selling.

    “‘Since apparently these contracts don’t seem to hold, we took the position we’re just not selling…'”

  97. Quotes About Lying.

    “If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything.”
    ― Mark Twain

    “I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you.”
    ― Friedrich Nietzsche

    “The reason I talk to myself is because I’m the only one whose answers I accept.”
    ― George Carlin

    “It is better to offer no excuse than a bad one.”
    ― George Washington

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *