FanchesterCity

I thought that too at first.... go for 8, then reduce to 6, or possibly 4, BUT they've also stated they can extend the ban if an appeal fails. If they reduce the ban, how can they possibly justify doing so? Surely only 'in light of new evidence' can they diminish the punishment. Assuming Liverpool have no such new evidence, then I can only see them appealing on the grounds of Suarez's honesty and cultural naivety, both of which are points already taken into account.

I agree with that, but Liverpool could have said "he's made a cultural mistake and learned a lesson, and it's something we, the club, need to learn from by making sure all new players are briefed in the 'do's and dont's of English football. I usually have a lot of time for LFC (don't say a word), but this is badly advised.

Either the FA or Liverpool FC are going to look incredibly stupid when the actual judgment and evidence comes to light. Either it's flimsy evidence, in which case, SHOCKING that they can be so draconian, or of course, there's proper evidence (which I suspect there is, directly from Suarez's testimony). Half of me applauds Suarez for being honest (if indeed that is the case), but if the judgment turns out to be fair, and he did confess to words that are simply unacceptable, then Liverpool should be ashamed. Much easier to say "the judgment is fair. Suarez isn't racist, he just used terms that can't be used in our culture, and he's learned a harsh lesson, as have the club - that we need to make it clear to ALL new players at the club". Totally agree about the 'instructed' to wear the shirts. Someone's ordered them to be made, and had them delivered at short notice etc. Clearly organised by the club. Wonder what would have happened if a player said no? Emotional blackmail really.

I do appreciate asking a bunch of Everton lads to comment on Liverpool might be a red rag (pardon the pun) to a bull.... but: Do you think it's right that Liverpool (or indeed Chelsea, or any other club) simply stand by their man regardless of what he's done / been accused of? On the one hand, it all looks very commendable and team spirit like, but on the other hand, sometimes a club has to say "we can't condone this one, we'll ban him for 4 games ourselves on TOP of what he gets from the FA" (or similar). Who really knows what happened between the parties involved (Terry, Evra, Ferdinand, Suarez) but IF they are found guilty, surely a club has to stand by that decision and act based on the findings? Now, some of you MIGHT go so far as to suggest that if a club truly believes the judgment is wrong, then they SHOULD stick up for the player (and I have sympathy for this view), but if that's the case... shouldn't the club be making serious formal protests against the FA rather than overtly supporting the player. It seems far more sensible, to me, to say "We find it appalling that a man be found guilty of racism when we believe him to be entirely innocent and that being the case, we intend to lodge serious formal complaints over the investigation and its findings"... and NOT to say "He's been found guilty, but we'll show our unity with / for the lad". I think Liverpool have tried to do something good, but been ill advised with the Suarez support stunt. Comments?

But we are happy to say "the short", or "the tall" or "the stocky" or 'the blonde" or "the ginger". If someone's black and it HELPS to easily point him out, then say it... "the black lad". It's the most obvious thing about him! Unless he's 7ft in which case, there's a case for his height being the most obvious thing. However, if it's a team of half black and half white (no not Newcastle!)... then certainly, you wonder why 'the black lad' would be the obvious way to identify someone. There's a very strong case for saying the most insidious form of racism of all, is pretending people don't have colour, or religion, or creed etc.

On any given day, Everton can beat ANY team, but they can just as easily slip up against Blackburn Rovers. That's probably true for many teams in the Premier League, so you can only really take it one game at a time. Can't deny that the fixture list looks fairly attractive for Everton, but that's where so much danger creeps in, adding up points in your head and putting yourselves in contention for something. We all do it, but it rarely turns out at we expect! We end up celebrating 'great' wins against the top teams, then cursing how we let Wigan come back into the game etc.

He's only used to term because so many folks are worried about how to phrase ANYTHING remotely connected with race. There was a time when 'black' was a term frowned up, and so 'coloured' was used (and to to included skin of any shade!) Coloured / dark skinned / non-white etc... just political correctness gone barmy. Racism needs to be stamped out - absolutely, but not at the cost of innocent men (like Hansen using a reasonable term that just 'might' those determined to get upset for the sake of it).

Just the sort of results you need. Actually making the sure the home bankers turn out that way! Nothing up with 1-0's... a win is a win, and closing the gap on your neighbours ;-)

The fact is, as soon as Everton have a player that the top teams believe has talent, they'll be putting a bid in for them. It's flattering in one sense, since they'll want a couple of your players, but in the other sense, it's all very sad. They knew all too well the predicament Everton are in, and they'll exploit that. How long Everton can hold out for is anybody's guess, and it will be a tough call for any player to choose between staying at Everton and a move to a (theoretically) more promising future elsewhere. Admirable if players choose to stay, but forgivable if they don't. I just HOPE if Everton can't buy, they can cling on to the talent they have.

I agree. But, it was the PL that brought all this to a head.... Before the PL, the elite teams at the time (including Everton) were threatening a breakaway and wanting to grab the ITV money for right to their games, and screw the rest (more or less). Clubs were (and still are) shockingly run, and the lure of money had them all salivating. They took the money, and there's no denying, aspects of the game have improved as a result - better grounds / facilities, safer stadiums, better players and football.... BUT, it's come at a price. The gulf between the 'haves' and 'have nots' is wider than ever, and the feeling of affinity between club and fan is virtually lost, esp with the influx of footballers who are by their very nature, highly paid commodities (mercenaries in some eyes). There's a lot of fans who will point to Chelsea and City and say "bunch of mercenaries" - which I agree with, but the implication is that their own players on a mere 50K a week are somehow emotionally attached to the club and paragons of moral virtue. There might be a handful of such players around, but they are few and far between. We've created a monster I'm afraid, and now we don't like how it's behaving... I long for the days when United might have a good team for a couple of years, then City, or Arsenal, or Everton etc... much more of a mix. But 20 year dominance? Liverpool had a good decade, and United best part of 20 years.... that can't be right, surely. Even with a great manager and club, SURELY the law of averages says another decent team will better them regularly. Sadly, those days are gone. It's crap!

No offence taken, I find it simply sad that clubs feel (and with some justification) that it's necessary to do in order to compete. It's not right. Sadly nobody seems to be saying "how come since the PL started we've only had a handful of teams win it, and even less in recent years?" Ends up like Spain and the SPL, naff! The only potential issue with a 'sensible pragmatic owner' is this - Can the fans really accept them?. I say this looking at Aston Villa as an example. The guy came in, spent a fair amount, and it got them fighting in the top 6 for a couple of years, then inevitably, the form dropped off, manager fell out, and now they're mid table... the fans are feeling naffed off, and want a new manager, more money and better results. Not a dig at Everton fans now... but a sensible new owner would be welcomed, I'm sure.... but how long before the criticism started about 'putting his hand in his pocket' etc? Everton fans deep down - and correct me if I'm wrong - will always really believe they should be in the top 6, and anything less is below par. They can take it for a while, but not for too long.

What if.... What if any new owner didn't invest a great deal of money, but DID kick the club into shape behind the scenes? Of course, I'm making the assumption that Everton's not in the best of shape behind the scenes (there's no absolute proof of that, but the books are hardly indicative of it being top notch either). That alone could lift the fortunes of the club - maybe not to the extremes of the high spenders, but enough to get Everton in a position that better reflects the size of the club! I think that alone would be a step in the right direction for the club, and there's no overwhelming need for a sugar daddy type figure.

Mike Ashley's far from a mad man. Perhaps not the world's greatest PR man, granted, but he's actually kicking a badly run club into shape (off the pitch) Trouble is, when someone does that, all the old die hards at a club who've sat on their arse for 20 years don't like it, and whip up a lot of bad feeling.

it's a rant!!!! I could go on for hours ;-)

Prices are awful, it's not JUST the tickets, not sure about Everton, but at City it's typically 10 quid to park! (I manage for 5 quid). Then there's the extortionate food prices etc. I know on the one hand the clubs need money, but we know that the majority of the revenue is not coming from gates etc, so why rip off the fans? And lets not forget shirt prices. Make NO mistake, they are a total rip off, and ALL clubs do it. The clubs have enough power to tell Umbro et al where to go and charge a reasonable price, but they don't, they choose to follow suit and shaft us. 40 quid for a shirt that's mass produced in serious volumes! Anybody who thinks 'my club is a lovely family club looking after the fans' is delusional, they're all rip off merchants. I'm not sure what can be done about the shiftworkers, someone will always be working a shift that doesn't fit in well with the schedule... BUT, they could at least stick to a schedule as closely as possible making it easier for folks to plan and sort their shifts (if possible) in line with the schedule. At the end if the day, fans want to win... if a team is winning attendances go up, and when they're serving up dross, they go down. Forget the 'Villa fans aren't loyal' crap. Villa fans = City fans = Everton fans.... just fans. I know many fans point the finger at other fans (of other clubs) and mock the empty seats, but in reality ALL clubs suffer the same issues. We've hyped up some parts of football (PL and CL) and devalued others (FA and League cup). Since only a few get to play in the PL and CL, the majority of other teams have to play in the devalued FA and League cups, where the attendances are down, and the big boys take the piss 'mocking' the little trophies. The media do it too.

Erm, erm... When the Sky was done, Everton were one of the 'Elite teams' wanting to do a deal with ITV that favoured the elite. I don't think there's a club in the land that is particularly noble. It's a myth. Of course, sometimes you'll get a totally outrageous chairman and board, or a reasonable one, but much of that is pot luck, but when push comes to shove, and money is wafted under the noses of any club, there's no room for nobility. Totally agree on the 'the fire needs putting out'. But the Premier League teams have sat in the warmth for a while now, now it's getting too hot they don't like it. They've brought this on themselves really. They've hyped up the PL and CL to the point where it's an advertising monster it's outgrown 'football'. It's now a business platform for sponsors to use, and the sponsors are calling the shots - dictating fixtures, kick-off times, who does interviews and who doesn't, and when they have to happen etc etc. I'd love it to stop, but I'm not show HOW it can be, half the clubs would literally collapse if the sponsors pulled out.

Nobody would ever be afraid of saying they were blue just to avoid alienating the reds (or vice versa). If anything, not declaring will alienate both! I think most truly partisan fans declare their allegiance. It's just what you do when you're a properly interested party. I have mates who'll say "I don't mind Everton etc" but those are non football fans who just favour Everton (or Liverpool for that matter). There's never any 'don't mind' with a genuine fan... they let you know clearly which side they are on! I do agree that it would do no harm for him to promote Everton a bit in the States ;-) Bit of publicity can't do any harm!

I think with Bill it's a real moral dilemma... He seems to be 100% Everton at heart and genuinely wants the best for the club (pretty much all you'd want in a chairman), but... There's little evidence to suggest he's overseen sensible financial management of the club, and plenty to suggest it's been poorly managed. Maybe the 'ideal' would be a money man, and Ken as the public face. Sadly, I think any money men will want total control and ship Ken out (or offer him a sideline position that is little more than a nice seat at the match). I can see the argument that some might give that BK's managed the finances well, but clearly NOT spending.... but as a top 6 club, and not spending, you'd really be expecting Everton to be financially secure. There's a lot of talk in football at the moment suggesting the 'investment' era is over... that it's had it's day, there's no real money in it, and it's gone out of fashion... with the exception of Asian businesses who might be interested. It's hard to know for sure, but they don't seem to be queuing up like they used to be. I think some are thinking the Premier League bubble MIGHT burst, or at least take a dip.

The notion that ANY financial investor is 'hands off' is madness. That may be the perception they want to put out, OR they will have others doing their dirty work for them, but they aren't tossing money into a business for fun. They will do all they can to make sure their investment is handled precisely the way they say it should. I can see an argument for not interfering with team selection of course... that makes perfect sense (as long as the performances are good enough), the moment that stops happening, any investor worth their salt will interfere! It's asking too much to get an investor AND for them to be paragons of virtue too. It's a gamble. You might get a good one, you might get a Gilette and Hicks. You'll never really know until they come in. I do wonder sometimes what the investor is thinking.... i.e. Everton fans might say they don't need MUCH to compete... just a bit of money for Moyes to improve the team, and a few improvements at the ground maybe, but not Billions!... but is the investor looking at more and thinking "I want a club that can get into CL and get all the publicity, and that's going to cost me 3-500 million!"

Attendances of Everton and Villa (for comparison) - they too went right down in the 80s (as did all clubs). I chose Villa as a reasonable comparison (might annoy some, but I think it's loosely valid) http://european-football-statistics.co.uk/attnclub/ever.htm http://european-football-statistics.co.uk/attnclub/astv.htm

I do stand corrected! not quite four million - but stil, it was considered bad!

Some people seem to believe that the mority of clubs are run by credible businessmen who've clearly done well in life, and therefore are unlikely to make mistakes.... however, the real truth is, MOST clubs are a shambles behind the scenes. Clubs historically have never really had to operate as major corporations, but since the advent of Sky, they've had a windfall that's put them in the 'mid to large' corporation size as a business (but NOT in acumen). Of course I can't speak for Everton, I'm not privvy to the inner workings, but I am privvy to two other clubs... one minor, one large, and both have quite horrific stories to tell. Just lots of nice staff with a love for the club totally out of their depth as a business. Just as a small example, at Newcastle, there were contractors doing work their getting paid 3 times more than the 'going rate' for such work, AND picking and choosing times and dates to get 'overtime' rates that suited them etc. Mike Ashley's team cracked down on that and saved a small fortune. It's just typical of 'giving the contract to a mate' etc... and all sorts of deals and schemes going on. Similar goings on at other clubs. Everton have most of the key ingredients of a top club: Good fan base History Half decent team Prem League status Good TV money It just needs a proper team (business team) to get it back on track. 'Cos I can't see any other reason for it to be in the state it's in.You're NOT bloody Portsmouth punching above your weight here, and you're not spending willy nilly. It's doesn't take rocket science to deduce someone's making a mess of it somewhere....

In the early 80s, unemployment was over 4 millions, and sky high in Merseyside... we had riots on the streets et cetera. People really didn't have the money and bigger issues on their minds. It's heading the same way again. Let's face it... ticket prices are disgusting as it is (in my opinion). It doesn't seem too bad for a single bloke, but for a family? it's bordering on extortionate. Oh, and lets not forget the hooliganism at that time. It was getting quite serious to say the least..... all factors contributing to poor attendances

I'm not sure Atletico are greater than Everton - although possibly doing better in recent years. Maybe, just maybe, Moyes sees himself like Ferguson and wants to be around for 25 years with amazing success etc. It's not looking likely to happen though. I think an Arsenal or United would tempt him, but I can't see Atletico catching him.

It wouldn't be so bad if Moyes could reinvest the money from outgoing players back into the squad - but I suspect (don't know) that the banks probably prevent it.