I'm aware of Clattenburg's history, however I think you have missed my point. With the fallout from the racism row, I said that Clattenburg would be stupid to say anything remotely racist. Just because he sent the above email (which of course is idiotic in itself), doesn't necessary mean he has racial tendencies.

I understand that you are obviously wearing your Chelsea specs and want the referee to be punished by the full extent of the law, but let's wait until the facts come out first before stringing him up. It all rests on his officials, no-one else.

You said that he wouldn't be stupid enough to make a racial comment after the JT/Suarez incidents. Which means that you're the one who is judging the incident before any facts are being offered.

I am sitting back and waiting for a decent picture to emerge before making any judgements. I was just pointing out that Clattenburg has displayed massive stupidity before by possibly making a veiled threat by email.

Well, I actually said "I don't *think* he would be stupid enough Chief, but if that's been misconstrued into thinking that I'm judging the incident, well I'm not one to jump into the deep end and speculate on what happened so apologies if it has come across that way.



And there is no denying his stupidity in the past. Like I've said before, if he has said what he has been accused of, then he will need to deal with the consequences. Good to hear that you are halting on any judgements. As a supporter of the team that made the complaint, I would have assumed that you would have already been his judge, jury and executioner.

People I've spoken to, forums that I've been on, people on social media sites. I'm going off what I have seen. If you have not seen any of this, then fair enough.

Where did you get that ridiculous notion from?

Gerrard bemoaning Everton's ''long ball'' tactics just because Liverpool now spread it from the back is one clue.

What an amazing game at the Magejski tonight. 7-5 to Arsenal. 4-0 down and looking terrible, a couple of substitutions later and Arsenal rampage back to 4-4 with a goal after added time at the end of the second half. They go 5-4 up in extra time, but with 4 to go, Reading equalise. Arsenal then score two more to take the win. Sensational game, almost a football-basketball cross exhibition match. Neither midfield had any defensive discipline, so once an attack was broken up at one end, another sweeping move started. End to end stuff for 120 minutes. Eisfeld, who I saw destroy Everton's kids the other week, was sensational, he looks a fantastic prospect. Walcott was fantastic as well, as were both Chamakh and Giroud. McGreary and Roberts were great for Reading.

As an aside, is anyone finding it really difficult to get on this thread of late? It takes an age to load and fails most times.

That lad looked a player, I'd never heard of him before, but he looks like he'll be a really good player in a year or two if he gets decent game time, which you'd imagine he would at Arsenal. Thought Walcott was really good tonight, Arsene should give him a run of games through the middle because he can cause teams real problems with his pace and he's a good finisher too.

I'm finding the thread really difficult to get onto as well, it takes ages to load or quote posts. Maybe because it's so long it takes so long to load?

yes, horrendously slow and hit and miss getting on the site generally

I don't disagree that it's possible that Rodgers could have done as well as Laudrup, I just think it was a bit silly to seemingly make out like it's to be expected that Swansea would step on and improve when history and also the majority of the present shows that very few teams manage to do it even when they do survive the first season.

I still personally believe that if Liverpool finish in the top 8 Rodgers will have done a very good job in the circumstances, particularly if his striking options aren't vastly improved in January.

You are talking about a club that has spent £67.7m on it's top 3 strikers. That's about £15m more than Manchester United spent on their top 3.

Saying finishing in the top 8 if they don't strengthen is quite odd considering the amounts they've wasted.

Why is the amount they've spent relevant? Just because they've spent a lot of money doesn't mean that they've spent it wisely and guarantee that the player's they brought in are better than those who cost less at other clubs. You mention Man Utd, look at their strikers last year - the most expensive could barely get a game.

Also, whilst they might have spent that much on their 3 top strikers, they only have 2 of them at the club, and neither are exactly prolific. Dalglish spent a lot of money poorly and Rodgers has been hampered by that by both inheriting a poor squad and having the purse-strings tightened as a consequence, it's not at all odd to say that he will have done a good job to get them in the top 8. Do you think they have a squad good enough to do better than 7th/8th?