Topic: Uefa to hold hearing into Mamadou Sakho’s failed drug test for Liverpool

[TepidT2O]

I'm expecting a 4-6 month ban for Sakho.

Some case studies here show similar bans for worse offences.

http://www.thesportster.com/soccer/top-10-footballers-caught-doing-drugs/?view=all

This current c*nt of an organisation they call Uefa will probably hit him with a 12 month ban.

I'd say 4-6 months & a 10 year suspended hanging over him would be suffice.

The rules changed last January though, so it's really difficult to tell

[SamAteTheRedAcid]

Really hope it isn't a long ban, big fan of Mama.

Unfortunately, if it is a long ban, it could spell the end of him here. He's only himself to blame and he's let down the manager, the team, the fans, and most importantly himself.

Fucking hell I sound like a teacher

[lfc79]

How long is his current contract, he's been here about 2 1/2 years so a two year ban would almost be 5 years, would we need him to sign a new deal, how much would we pay him while banned.

Pretty hard to say without knowing all the facts or what kind of clauses footballer contracts have for this.

I would guess the club are entitled to terminate his contract for misconduct, did Chelsea not sue Mutu over their lost transfer fees as well?

[El Lobo]

Is there actually anything to say it'll be a minimum of 6 months or is that just speculation?

[tubby]

Fucking hell I sound like a teacher

Last thing he needs is to be told to do lines.

[Redman0151]

How long is his current contract, he's been here about 2 1/2 years so a two year ban would almost be 5 years, would we need him to sign a new deal, how much would we pay him while banned.

Pretty hard to say without knowing all the facts or what kind of clauses footballer contracts have for this.

I would guess the club are entitled to terminate his contract for misconduct, did Chelsea not sue Mutu over their lost transfer fees as well?

He signed a new contract last September, he probably has 4 years left on it

[rocco]

Where would we stand if he got 2 years ?

[Chakan]

Where would we stand if he got 2 years ?

Needing to buy another center back. Whether he'd be suspended without pay or have his contract terminated is another question ...

[Jake]

Hope its as low as possible.

But yeah, I wonder if the club would sue him, like Chelsea did with Mutu, for the wasted transfer fee etc... £17m is a lot to throw away (insert standard Benteke comment here)

[Gnurglan]

Wada take a very dim view and I'd be delighted with six months. Can't remember who said it but one of the podcasts said wada standard/lenient is two years. [emoji17]

Two years would be typical. That's what you face if you're caught in other sports (skiing, athletics,...). We can only hope that Sakho gets less.

[TepidT2O]

Really hope it isn't a long ban, big fan of Mama.

Unfortunately, if it is a long ban, it could spell the end of him here. He's only himself to blame and he's let down the manager, the team, the fans, and most importantly himself.

Fucking hell I sound like a teacher

I think we will be very lucky if it's six months.....

More likely two years and maybe more...

Still, we don't know the ins and outs of the story.....but when players have been warned about these issues, ignorance is no longer much of a defence

[Nessy76]

Two years is the standard for doping. That means someone taking nandrolone or something. Common sense suggests that lesser offences should carry lighter punishment, but you can't rely on UEFA to make sense at the best of times.

We'll know soon enough.

[Crosby Nick]

Last thing he needs is to be told to do lines.

Haha!

[HumanRed]

But yeah, I wonder if the club would sue him, like Chelsea did with Mutu, for the wasted transfer fee etc... £17m is a lot to throw away

I hope it doesn't come to something like this. Sakho genuinely seems like a lovely guy who has a great rapport with fans. I really don't want to see it ending with so much bad blood.

Personally think Klopp and LFC are too classy to go down that route.

[cptrios]

More likely two years and maybe more...

That feels like an incredibly pessimistic view to me. I agree that six months is a "lucky" figure; two years would be desperately unfair, but I can see UEFA doing it if they're taking the "show everyone we mean business" route. More, though? That'd be downright vicious unless they've got him on something much worse than what we've heard.

[kcbworth]

I hope it doesn't come to something like this. Sakho genuinely seems like a lovely guy who has a great rapport with fans. I really don't want to see it ending with so much bad blood.

Personally think Klopp and LFC are too classy to go down that route.

Suing typically doesn't occur due to "bad blood" but more due to sheer financial necessity. It really will depend on who is better insured in this kind of situation... Sakho or the club.

[SP]

Mutu they wanted rid of. The club and Sakho could negotiate a settlement. Suspension of the contract for the duration of the ban would seem a sensible compromise. Sakho retains his well paid contract. The club retains the remaining contract time and does not write off the contract fee. Between the extremes of paying him full whack and ripping up the contract there is a middle ground that could be agreed. From the outside there does not appear to be any breakdown between the club and Sakho, beyond the initial incredulity that the silly twat did that.

[De La Goal]

The current dope-testing regime in English football is pretty lax. The FA carried out almost 2300 tests in 2014-15.

That may sound impressive - but take into account that the PFA has around 4000 members. Athletes in many other sports would have a far greater chance of being tested in any given year. Perhaps it's telling that Sakho got caught out by a UEFA control.

[Salger]

Rumours started to appear on twitter that the club may sack Sakho. I know that twitter + rumours usually equals bullshit but I hope it doesn't come to that.

[Chakan]

Rumours started to appear on twitter that the club may sack Sakho. I know that twitter + rumours usually equals bullshit but I hope it doesn't come to that.

They don't even know what the punishment is yet.

[N0rnIr0nRed]

Sak'ed in the morning....

 

[clinical]

Why actually sack him? He is still worth money would be a stupid decision.

He just should not be paid for the length of his ban.

[4pool]

Uefa have not held their hearing on it yet or made any type of decision on length of ban so anyone claiming he is sacked is a fucking spoofer.

This.

ITK's....Ignorance-That's-Krap.

[CornerFlag]

Not a chance he's getting sacked without knowing his possible UEFA punishment.  Full of crap that Indigo lad.

[Redman0151]

Why are people posting Twitter shite on here? People will never learn

[CornerFlag]

Why are people posting Twitter shite on here? People will never learn

People want today's news yesterday, pain in the arse when it's an ITK.  Handy for more official sources like the club themselves or the Tony Barretts who post on there though.

[Lone Star Red]

This.

ITK's....Ignorance-That's-Krap.

IdiotsTits&Knobheads.

[4pool]

It could be possible, should Mama get a lengthy ban, the club could cancel his contract--so as not to pay him during the ban for breach of contract- but still hold the players rights. Then when the ban is over Mama would be under a new contract.

[Ziltoid]

I'm reckoning 6-9 months ban with another 18-24month suspended or somesuch

[McMahon]

Its simple he broke the rules he was cheating, if LFC pay his wages while he is banned they are off their heads.

[freddwarf]

6 month ban would be fair enough, anymore than that would be harsh. Not as if it was a performance enhancing substance. Possibly go to 9 months any more is making an exception.

[Ziltoid]

6 month ban would be fair enough, anymore than that would be harsh. Not as if it was a performance enhancing substance. Possibly go to 9 months any more is making an exception.

Depends if the substance can be used to mask a performance enhancing drug

[freddwarf]

Its simple he broke the rules he was cheating, if LFC pay his wages while he is banned they are off their heads.

Well would that apply if he was banned for 8/9 weeks/ games like Suarez. Depend on his contract, must state he must represent the club responsible at all times. Any use of banned substance could be a breech of contract.

But UEFA can't, in all fairness, destroy his career over it.

[freddwarf]

Depends if the substance can be used to mask a performance enhancing drug

took something that was borderline, slimming pill more or less. Silly but not really cheating in the truer sense.

Not saying they should just slap him on the wrist but they must take into account the struggles pro players have with their diet. Starve themselves, not in the way a jockey might but still they must have a real struggle at times.

[SamAteTheRedAcid]

took something that was borderline, slimming pill more or less. Silly but not really cheating in the truer sense.

Not saying they should just slap him on the wrist but they must take into account the struggles pro players have with their diet. Starve themselves, not in the way a jockey might but still they must have a real struggle at times.

The cruel irony of being able to eat out at the most expensive restaurants, yet not being allowed to demolish three burgers and a few pints...well, apart from Rooney, he has seemed to get away with it...

[freddwarf]

The cruel irony of being able to eat out at the most expensive restaurants, yet not being allowed to demolish three burgers and a few pints...well, apart from Rooney, he has seemed to get away with it...

They are all athletes now or they are supposed to be. Some can eat and never put an once on. The long fellow had to starve himself while Carson would eat whatever was in front of him.

Obviously not everyone is the same and some really struggle no doubt.

[Titi Camara]

Why actually sack him? He is still worth money would be a stupid decision.

He just should not be paid for the length of his ban.

2 years @ £75k per week = circa £8m

It's a fairly big investment in a player regardless of whether you are looking to bring in back into the team or sell him once his ban expires.

Also carries with it a fairly large reputational risk as we'd no doubt be branded a club supporting "cheaters" or something equally daft.

[HighSix]

6 month ban would be fair enough, anymore than that would be harsh. Not as if it was a performance enhancing substance. Possibly go to 9 months any more is making an exception.

Gives him an advantage though over another player struggling with weight not using banned supplements.

[Titi Camara]

The irony is....

UEFA, as corrupt an organisation as you're likely to find, will not be able to allow common sense to prevail and give him a "time-served" ban but instead have to enforce the letter of the law so that they give the appearance of a body with integrity. They would not for one moment go out on a limb for something that doesn't reward them financially or otherwise.

These things should be looked at by an impartial body given only the facts (mitigating or otherwise) and not the players. They could then make decisions without the fan fare that goes with it.

[Titi Camara]

Gives him an advantage though over another player struggling with weight not using banned supplements.

Charlie?