Should Liverpool have been kicked out of the Europa League?

[G B Young]

Listening to the car radio this afternoon I heard mention of a Liverpool player called Mamadou Sakho being banned for failing a drugs test, apparently after their Europa League win over Manchester United. I tend not to pay too much attention to English football these days and was only tuning in to see how Leicester were getting on today, so I must have missed this news when it happened.

Given the drugs furore around athletics and tennis at present, should this not be bigger news? And how come only the player and not the team get banned? In athletics, for instance, I'm sure I recall a whole Great Britain relay team getting stripped of medals because one of them tested positive for drugs.

Now, I gather that the Uefa ruling is that more than two players in a football team need to test positive for the whole team to be punished which strikes me as nonsense. Whether it's one player or all eleven, the team is handed an unfair advantage. Under this ruling the message is basically that it's OK for some of your team to be on drugs. Seems wrong to me.

[SJM]

No, the player should be banned and not the team.

[Michael]

Precedent has already been set as I recall. Teams are not punished for a single case.

[easty]

They should be kicked out.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

If the rules are that it is the player and not the team then that's what has to happen but rules can be changed. Would be a good rule to bring in though.

[Itsnoteasy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They should be kicked out.

If 2 players are caught from same team they get kicked out.

But yes they should be kicked out they have cheated & had an unfair advantage over other team.

Let's hope they don't make the final as their fans are animals abroad.

[Pete]

Bin them.

[hibby6270]

I'm sure Scouse Hibee will have a view on this.

Probably arguments both ways but I think there has been no expulsion yet because the positive drugs result on Sakho is still to be ratified. He could still be "innocent". Without his goal in last round against Dortmund, they wouldn't be in the semis, so there is still something to "sort out" if he is definitely guilty IMO.

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Precedent has already been set as I recall. Teams are not punished for a single case.

Except that Celtc got away with just that when Legia brought on a player who was ineligible due to an administrative oversight in the previous round. The guy played the last few minutes of a tie that was already won but his brief appearance cost Legia their place in the next round.

It's BS to ignore one positive drugs test, particularly when the player in question has had such an influence on the match.

[Hibs Class]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If 2 players are caught from same team they get kicked out.

But yes they should be kicked out they have cheated & had an unfair advantage over other team.

Let's hope they don't make the final as their fans are animals abroad.

You're only embarrassing yourself with posts like that.

[cabbageandribs1875]

nae need likes

[Thecat23]

Nope. I don't like pool but one player shouldn't ruin the chances of the rest getting a medal.

That's like saying if Hibs players were caught with doping should we be punted out the league?

Punish the player not the team.

[Sir David Gray]

I would ban them even without any drug taking incidents taking place, but that's another matter entirely.

[Sergey]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Except that Celtc got away with just that when Legia brought on a player who was ineligible due to an administrative oversight in the previous round. The guy played the last few minutes of a tie that was already won but his brief appearance cost Legia their place in the next round.

It's BS to ignore one positive drugs test, particularly when the player in question has had such an influence on the match.

It's yet to be confirmed, but Sakho's failed test is seemingly for a banned diuretic and he's waived the right to have the B test analysed, which is pretty much an admission of guilt.

The only real reason for Sakho to take a diuretic is to mask another drug, as it doesn't really act as a PED. We'll probably never know what that other drug is/was.

He should get a 2 year ban, but will probably plead guilty, cite some lame excuse and get off with 12 months.

[Scouse Hibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm sure Scouse Hibee will have a view on this.

Probably arguments both ways but I think there has been no expulsion yet because the positive drugs result on Sakho is still to be ratified. He could still be "innocent". Without his goal in last round against Dortmund, they wouldn't be in the semis, so there is still something to "sort out" if he is definitely guilty IMO.

Yes I do,my view is if the rules say we should be kicked out then fine.

[Scouse Hibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If 2 players are caught from same team they get kicked out.

But yes they should be kicked out they have cheated & had an unfair advantage over other team.

Let's hope they don't make the final as their fans are animals abroad.

Yes did you see how they behaved in Dortmund, outrageous.

[hibby6270]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes I do,my view is if the rules say we should be kicked out then fine.

Very honest and pragmatic reply. I salute you!!

[G B Young]

I've now done a bit more reading up on this and the same player went on to score a key goal to keep the tie alive against Dortmund in the next round. That for me is a case for the game being replayed or possibly even forfeited by Liverpool. As I said, I'm really surprised by how lenient the Uefa rules are on this sort of thing. If Liverpool were to go on and win this tournament it would carry a tainted feel about it.

[McD]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I've now done a bit more reading up on this and the same player went on to score a key goal to keep the tie alive against Dortmund in the next round. That for me is a case for the game being replayed or possibly even forfeited by Liverpool. As I said, I'm really surprised by how lenient the Uefa rules are on this sort of thing. If Liverpool were to go on and win this tournament it would carry a tainted feel about it.

Any more of a tainted feel than a player diving to win a penalty, and getting a key goal?

the rules say the player is to be punished in this situation, not the team.

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I've now done a bit more reading up on this and the same player went on to score a key goal to keep the tie alive against Dortmund in the next round. That for me is a case for the game being replayed or possibly even forfeited by Liverpool. As I said, I'm really surprised by how lenient the Uefa rules are on this sort of thing. If Liverpool were to go on and win this tournament it would carry a tainted feel about it.

The rules are inconsistent, given that Legia were kicked out for a brief and irrelevant appearance by one player.

[J-C]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The rules are inconsistent, given that Legia were kicked out for a brief and irrelevant appearance by one player.

Difference being the club knew he was ineligible yet still played him, Sakho did what he did without Liverpool's knowledge, different things.

[Hibernia&Alba]

No, IMO.

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Difference being the club knew he was ineligible yet still played him, Sakho did what he did without Liverpool's knowledge, different things.

They wouldn't have played him if they'd known he was ineligible. Legia thought that he had served his three game ban during the previous round and in the first leg. Then it turned out that they hadn't listed him for the previous round, so the two games there didn't count against the ban.

The Legia guy played for a few minutes at the end of a tie that was already finished, but Sakho has played a major role in Liverpool making it to the semis so in that respect it is different things.

All I want is consistency and that is not being applied when the effect of fielding a player who has cheated is ignored. Had the Legia result stood then it would be consistent not to punish Liverpool.

[Pete]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm sure Scouse Hibee will have a view on this.

Bin him an'a

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Difference being the club knew he was ineligible yet still played him, Sakho did what he did without Liverpool's knowledge, different things.

There is an argument, though, that Liverpool are responsible for the conduct of their players.

[LustForLeith]

As mentioned before after the amount of money they spent on Caroll and Benteke I don't think he's the only one who'd fail a drugs test

[Scouse Hibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They wouldn't have played him if they'd known he was ineligible. Legia thought that he had served his three game ban during the previous round and in the first leg. Then it turned out that they hadn't listed him for the previous round, so the two games there didn't count against the ban.

The Legia guy played for a few minutes at the end of a tie that was already finished, but Sakho has played a major role in Liverpool making it to the semis so in that respect it is different things.

All I want is consistency and that is not being applied when the effect of fielding a player who has cheated is ignored. Had the Legia result stood then it would be consistent not to punish Liverpool.

It's not being ignored there is a rule for this situation and it will be applied.You can't change the rule depending on the impact a particular player had on a game. What is so difficult to understand? If the rule is that Liverpool should be thrown out than that is what should happen. It isn't so we will continue and if we go on to win the cup it won't be tainted at all.

[Scouse Hibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There is an argument, though, that Liverpool are responsible for the conduct of their players.

They are and that is why they suspended him before anyobe else did.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They are and that is why they suspended him before anyobe else did.

I get that, but.... taking the responsibility to its ultimate, should clubs be testing their own players? Do they ? For self-protection, at least, they should be.

[Sir David Gray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I've now done a bit more reading up on this and the same player went on to score a key goal to keep the tie alive against Dortmund in the next round. That for me is a case for the game being replayed or possibly even forfeited by Liverpool. As I said, I'm really surprised by how lenient the Uefa rules are on this sort of thing. If Liverpool were to go on and win this tournament it would carry a tainted feel about it.

That's a great shout by the way, I hadn't thought about it like that.

Scouse, our bet's off pal!*

*Disclaimer - Only if Liverpool win the Europa League and Manchester Utd fail to win the FA Cup. If Liverpool fail to win the Europa League then the bet stands.