KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum PFA chairman comments

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17728281

Question - is the PFA chairman representing his fellow players, including andy carroll fairly here?

A reason is offered as to why ashley young fell over - that he is 'quick and slight', yet no mention is made of andy carroll being a less coordinated, larger player with less control over him limbs.

It just seems strange to me that someone in this sort of position of authority to represent his fellow players fairly and evenly would defend a player who is nimble, and able to avoid tackles whilst pointing the finger at a player who is by nature a fairly static target man.

Should Carroll be entitled to expect more from his representative? I dont remember there being a statement released after the newcastle game.

Interested to know what you think.

Its endemic in the game now Man Utd do it so do Liverpool and all clubs and manufacuring free kick's falling over when anyone touches you. Its ruining the game and needs to be stopped.

Stanley, I agree entirely. But my question was, is the PFA chairman representing this liverpool player fairly?

its an english man u player so sky do a whole section on how its actually ok to dive..

suarez gets tuts tuts, young gets a pat on the back.

Forget about Clark Carlisle,he could have used several incidents of dives but chose to use Carrolls to defend Ashley Young,I think I know why he did it but I wont bother saying.

are you thinking that this is another senior figure in the game pulling the strings for man united and painting liverpool in a negative light?

No,I think he has is bitter over the whole Suarez affair and couldn't resist having a dig at LFC.

Load of bollox.


It takes a lot less contact to fall over when you're looking for it, as Young was because he knew he was offside to start with. As the OP says, being light and nimble allows you to avoid or reduce the impact of contact. Just being bigger doesn't mean you're more difficult to topple.

The key there is that he didn't see the incident. That automatically disqualifies him from making comment, quite frankly, and someone in a position of relative power should know better than to make polarizing commentary that defends a player whose manager even said went down too easily.

interesting point, and i guess this could be the case. he was on question time commenting on the whole suarez affair i think, but cant remember what his stance was.

to me, this is another example amongst many of the club being represented unfairly in the media. Afterall, if Carlisle does have an axe to grind with the club re the suarez affair, it is likely his thinking on the issue was shaped by the media coverage, which the club feel was totally unfair.

it has been rumoured that FSG intend to overhaul our PR operations following this season and it will be interesting to see the approach we take. it feels like a no win situation at the moment; if we complain we are bitter and paranoid, yet if we say nothing, more and more things are written, and decisions taken which seem to harm the club. perhaps our best approach to this general issue is that which shankly took to referees - you cant win so dont argue.

i just cant help but think a lot of (not the only) reason for united's sustained success is because their manager scares and bullys people in high positions, whether it be the media, the fa or whoever. can we overcome that by being the nice guys, or do we have to make a fuss? can we actually win? i think this is one of FSG's biggest issues to contend with, because i think it is costing us points every season and taking the wind out of the sails of the club.

thats a very good point. it makes me wonder if he mentioned carroll, or was actually specifically asked about carroll.