30 Dec 2014

'2 or 3 times a week': Carra makes shock accusation about £10m ex-Red. Unprofessional?

Earlier today, the FA hit ex-Red Jonjo Shelvey with a violent conduct charge for seemingly lashing out at LFC midfielder Emre Can, and although Shelvey denies any malicious intent, Liverpool legend Jamie Carragher suggests that the the Swansea midfielder has form for this type of behaviour.

After the game, £10m-rated Shelvey claimed that the incident was accidental. He tweeted:

"Just wanna say didn't intentionally elbow Emre Can was just trying to get my arm across to get round him and it's come off as I'm trying to"



At first glance, it looks deliberate, but to be fair, Shelvey would have to be exceedingly stupid to blatantly assault an opposition player right in front of the referee, especially after being publicly warned by his manager only days before.

Reacting to the challenge, Carra told Sky Sports:

"It’s absolute madness. You'd see this two or three times a week in training [when Shelvey was at Liverpool]. He has bags of ability, Shelvey, but unfortunately he can do stuff like that too"

This'll probably be a minority view, but I feel that Carra is out of order here. He's thrown Shelvey under the bus in a completely classless manner, and I sincerely doubt that his crass generalisation about the midfielder's behaviour is true.

Why does Carra feel the need to malign Shelvey in this manner? What happens on the training ground should stay on the training ground, and instead of analysing the issue in an objective manner, Carra has needlessly fanned the flames of tabloid controversy.

I'd even go so far as to suggest that Carra's comment is slanderous. In UK law, defamation is defined as follows:

"A statement that injures the reputation of another person, and "tends to lower him in the estimation of right-thinking members of society"

Intention is irrelevant. I don't for one second believe that Carra's intention is to defame, but the fact is he contends that Shelvey used to try and elbow his own team-mates (i.e. engage in violent conduct) 'two or three times a week in training', which, to me, seems highly improbable, and is likely to be a gross exaggeration.

Given Sky Sports' gargantuan audience, it's an extremely careless thing to say, and If I was Shelvey, I'd be angered by that accusation. As such, Carra would do well to clarify his statement, and refrain from making such rash public comments in the future.

Author:



73 comments:

  1. Why would Carra state that he would do that 2 or 3 times in training if it wasn't true - what has he to gain from saying that? Why would he put himself into a legal situation as you claim he may have done Jamie if it weren't true. Not the first time you hold an opinion, that in my opinion, would put you in the minority of Liverpool fans.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't know if he intended it or not but Shelvey is a stupid player. Far too instinctual and his instincts are usually wrong. We know he fouls all the time and his own manager has criticised him for it before they even played us.

    So Jaimie I forget do we take people at their word or not? Seem to change your mind often. Perhaps Cara is being literal.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JK does not know what defamation means apparently even though he has put the definition on his article. If that was the case then All so call pundits and commentators will be sued for defamation. It's on defamation if the allege statement is not true!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Your own thread title from yesterday: "Shelvey cynically smashes Can in the face with his elbow. Red card offence?" Think you further added "a blatant assault on Can" Pot kettle perhaps.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm pretty sure Carra knew what happened during practice better than a blogger. It ain't defamation if it's true.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Were you at the training ground when both Carra and Shelvey were at Liverpool Jaimie? It may be an exaggeration or it may be factual, however even if Shelvey did it 2 or 3 times a month, this can't be considered slander. I know you stated that in your opinion you are suggesting it's slander, but based on seeing Shelvey play, he has a habit of making rash challenges and letting his emotions get the better of him as well as being extremely competitive, I would have to lean towards Carra's statement, even if it's a half truth, that there is some truth behind it. Carra has more to lose than to gain by saying this and Carra isn't stupid. Guess none of us will truly know as none of us were at Melwood during this time, but I suggest there is some truth to what Carra says.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jonjo Shelvey loses his head all the time on the pitch. A poor mentality and poor reaction to pressure is his defining characteristic as a player. Carragher hasn't said "Shelvey used to try and injure people" he says "he can do stuff like that". He's clearly talking about the way he loses his head and in a fairly general sense.

    Shelvey's own manager criticised his rashness and poor discipline before the Liverpool game.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Possibly Shelvey is only moving his right hand away from the aproaching ball, which a second later hits his chest.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Whoa, easy does it barrister. Who cares about defamation, slander etc. The point is, Shelvey did do it on purpose and did reckless things when he was with us and has continued that behavior at Swans. I just don't understand trying to make it a controversy when it was so clear to see even Stevie Wonder called in to NBC sports about it, not just Carra............

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think everyone else has pretty much covered it

    ReplyDelete
  11. Carra is the one who trains with that fucking stupid baldy not u. So i belive carra over u. U just a blogger

    ReplyDelete
  12. Not to mention Carra just said incidents like this happened all the time. He never said they were on purpose, just that Shelvey has these types of lapses of judgement frequently. I would infer that Shelvey is exceedingly reckless and instinctual, to the point of frequent fault, not that he's dangerous, but that's just me.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think Carra's comments are too vague to be particularly helpful in this instance and he's running his mouth a bit. I don't think he censors himself very much and it's a small problem, sometimes. Giving out behind the scenes information that is barely a couple of years old is, in my view, a bit unprofessional, and he's not showing very much integrity. The club wouldn't appreciate him giving out details about what happened at Melwood and neither will Shelvey. I think he's marginally out of line but then he's being paid for his views and his knowledge so it's not a total surprise. It's just that if Carra made these statements while playing for Liverpool he'd be skinned, probably fined by the club and deservedly so. Now that he's retired he seems to think it's all an open book. It seems a bit inconsistent.


    That's just how I see it in terms of the Liverpool club ethos and how players are supposed to behave these days. In everyday terms it's not a big deal. I doubt he's lying, Shelvey being a hot-head is public knowledge, Carra is just giving some specific context. He has no reason to make this stuff up so I take him on his word: Shelvey has always had a habit of doing silly things on the training field and on the pitch that are simply unnecessary.

    ReplyDelete
  14. A good journalist/blogger would have conducted some sort of research into the law he is accusing a man of breaching before writing such an article. I would advise you to read Section 2 of the Act entitled Truth before you embarrass yourself even further. Making a comment based on empirical knowledge as 'Carra' did is perfectly legal. Conversely, you have openly questioned 'Carra's' professional integrity in a public forum with absolutely no substance on which to build your accusation other than your own personal opinion. This could easily be seen as an abuse of your position (read Section 5 entitled Operators of a Website).
    It is entirely plausible that 'Carra' could bring a defamation complaint to you based on your headline to this blog. You have identified him and deliberately suggested he is guilty of defamation.


    In my opinion this was a deliberately sensationalised headline to provoke interest in your blog. Cheap and nasty, I may even raise the complaint myself!

    ReplyDelete
  15. People question why we let him leave and wasn't given more of a chance. This could could be the exact reason, maybe coaches saw a temperament issue and felt he wasn't ready cause he would be getting the team into trouble. Which is exactly what has happened directly after he was publicly warned, which usually only happens from a coach AFTER he is was spoken to in private and the coach feels as though it's fallen upon deaf ears.

    Jamie Carragher has done nothing wrong in my opinion. With just the glimpses we see as fans he tends to have outbursts, tackles, and all around bad decisions a couple times a game. You have to think in private, where practice is just as intense if not more especially for guys sitting on the bench on game day this is probably fairly accurate statement.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thanks. This is awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Defamation? Really?

    ReplyDelete
  18. What's deliciously ironic about this is the fact that without proof that Carra is exaggerating, and by playing up what he said, your article is actually libelous and actionable (by definition defamation in a written form).

    ReplyDelete
  19. Carra doesn't contend that Shelvey used his elbow 2 or 3 times a week, he contended that Shelvey did something stupid 2 or 3 times a week

    ReplyDelete
  20. Yeah, I noticed that too. People are only publicly telling the truth when it suits JK's agenda. One week it's, 'Why would Rodgers lie about the transfer committee process?' 'Why would that ex-FSG lawyer lie on twitter?' But then this week, apparently Carra's comments are not true. Carra's comment about Shelvey is just as credible as what the ex-lawyer said; and more credible than what Rodgers says at press conferences.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Shelvey's always been a dumb-f*** of a player. For every great thing he did in the red shirt, he did 3 absolutely stupid things; violent or performance related. He's a highly risky player to have, and he's not good enough to outweigh that risk.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Henderson on Rodgers

    “For me, he’s one of the top managers in the world."



    I wonder what made him say that?

    ReplyDelete
  23. I bet you would say the same if you were asked about Rodgers?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Perhaps you should read Carragher's comment properly before posting inaccurate statements? Carra stated:

    "You'd see this two or three times a week in training"

    'This' clearly refers to lashing out at his own team-mates, and that is a perfectly fair interpretation. Carra did NOT say 'you'd see things LIKE THIS 2 or 3 times a week'.

    ReplyDelete
  25. No, that is not what Carragher said. You are trying to rationalise because he is an LFC legend.

    * He called Shelvey's behaviour 'absolutely madness', then stated 'you'd see this 2 or 3 times a week in training'. There's no clarification here - an objective, non-biased read would conclude that Carragher is saying that Shelvey would lash out at his *own team-mates* 2-3 times a week, which (IMO) seems unlikely.

    If Carra meant something else, he should've been clearer, especially given the fact Sky Sports has such a huge audience.

    ReplyDelete
  26. What are you on about? No one is denying what Shelvey did; my point is that Carragher has unprofessionally claimed that Shelvey used to lash out at his own team-mates '2-3 times a week', which perpetuates the myth that he is an irredeemably reckless player, to the extent that he can't even control himself against his own team-mates.

    I seriously doubt that Shelvey engaged in violent conduct '2-3 times a week' during all his years at LFC.

    ReplyDelete
  27. That may be what Carragher means, but that is not the way it comes across. My point is that he should be more careful about what he says in the public domain. The literal reading of Carragher's comment is that Shelvey engaged in violent conduct 2-3 times a week during his LFC career.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Journo asks Hendo about Rodgers. Hendo has improved as a player under Rodgers, and almost won a league with him last season. Of course he is going to say something like that. You're just looking for anything to bash Rodgers with.

    ReplyDelete
  29. No I am not. To claim that Rodgers is one of the top managers in the world is one hell of an overexaggeration.

    ReplyDelete
  30. If you, Jay or anyone else persists in twisting my words any further, I will simply delete your posts without notice.

    You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and if you're going to paraphrase, then do it fairly.

    * I did NOT say that Carragher's comments are 'not true'. I said that I doubt his 'crass generalisation' is true, i.e. the idea that Shelvey would engage in violent conduct '2-3 times a week' throughout his 3-year LFC career.

    * I also clarified this later in the article by stating that the 2-3 times a week thing is "highly improbable, and is likely to be a gross exaggeration'.


    The veracity of someone's public comment depends on context, and it's on a case-by-case basis. To just blanket believe or disbelieve every public statement is a ridiculously inflexible approach to take.

    ReplyDelete
  31. That ex FSG lawyer on twitter is a fake account. Same as the one we had with Duncan Jenkins.

    ReplyDelete
  32. My statement is not inaccurate. It's your false interpretation of what Carra said that is. And don't get me started on all that defamation stuff.
    You take things too literally sometimes. Just use some common sense: when he says 'you'd see this', it doesn't have to strictly mean lashing out at team mates. He's talking in a general sense- 'this' refers to Shelvey's tendency to do something absolutely stupid, as demonstrated with Emre Can- and therefore could be referring to also other things, like rash challenges and little broo-har-hars with his team mates.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Wowsers - do I really need to explain this? People don't generally make defamatory statements deliberately; they don't sit down, consider their thoughts, and then say 'yep, I'm going to say something defamatory', especially on live TV.

    And what is your point re my 'opinion'? I have views that differ from most other LFC fans - big deal. And I couldn't care less if I hold views that put me in the 'minority' of fans. I'd rather be in the minority with a individual POV, than a lemming who just follows the crowd and regurgitates the group view du jour.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Mike Bernard the 'ex FSG employee' is a fake.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Yes, you are. You have a lot of form with bashing Rodgers when it's even remotely possbile, and it's quite obvious that there is a big underlying anti-Rodgers element in your post. You were looking to generate some discussion about how Rodgers really isn't that good, and yada yada yada.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Yes, so let's see you type

    “For me, he’s one of the top managers in the world."



    He ain't.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I think you were making too much of the story. Carra's comments point to a guy who makes dumb and reckless mistakes on a regular basis in his opinion. That is a long long walk from defamation or slander. That's my only point. Jonjo did do a lot look immature things when with us and has apparently driven gary Monk bonkers with the same behavior pattern. probably miles closer to the truth than defamation or slander............

    ReplyDelete
  38. Your statement is inaccurate, and my interpretation is not false. Like so many others, you can't see past the end of your rose-tinted red spectacles. You're seeing Carragher's comments as a Liverpool fan, not an objective observer.

    Common sense has nothing to do with it - Carragher may mean something else, but that's irrelevant. A fair interpretation - whether you like it or not - is that Shelvey engaged in violent conduct against his own team-mates '2-3 times a week'.


    In my view, Carragher shouldn't be saying stuff like that about his former team-mates. Plus, given his status, and Sky's massive world-wide audience, he has a duty to moderate what he says, and in this case, he didn't.

    You and others don't like my interpretation because Carragher is an LFC legend. It's as simple as that.

    If, say, Iago Aspas or Victor Moses said the same thing, they'd be crucified by LFC fans. It's typical double standards.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Bloody hell man, not the point.

    ReplyDelete
  40. watch out! Jamie will turn you in for defamation you slanderous twit!!!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Oh, so now I'm 'seeing it as a Liverpool fan'. Here's your problem Jaimie: most of the time, everyone who disagrees with you is just a biased old fan with no valid opinion, because you're just that 100% objective observer that's obviously always right. It's not as 'simple as f***ing that', nor are there any double standards. If you keep saying shit like that, you will lose a lot of your readership.

    ReplyDelete
  42. In front of *millions* of worldwide viewers, Carragher stated that Shelvey engaged in violent conduct '2-3 times a week in training' whilst at LFC.

    If that statement is not 100% true (which I doubt it is) it will make lots of people think negatively about Shelvey. That is the essence of defamation.

    I don't doubt Shelvey did rash things in training, but to intimate that he engaged in violent conduct '2-3 times a week'? Give me a break.


    If I was Shelvey, I would call Carragher on his comments, and demand that he apologise for (what is probably) a gross exaggeration.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I think you meant Libelous not slanderous.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Bloody hell man. Most people interpret arguments while standing up straight through the naked eye. You meanwhile hang upside down from a bar while viewing through reading glasses that don't have your correct prescription. You have this world class ability to muddy the waters through saying irrelevant things...

    ReplyDelete
  45. Henderson hasn't played under any top manager yet. So his opinion doesn't carry much weightage (yet).

    ReplyDelete
  46. Bottom line is Shelvey has talent but does knuckleheaded things on a frequent basis in games and probably in practice.....I am certain carra and Monk would share a brew or two on that as a fact.........

    ReplyDelete
  47. Yes, you doubted it was true, yet, you didn't have a lot of doubt about the truthfulness of comments from that supposed ex-FSG lawyer, nor what Rodgers says in certain press conferences. That's my point.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I shall consult my legal dictionary and get back to you...........

    ReplyDelete
  49. He still manages at one of the top 10 clubs in the world he cant be that bad.

    ReplyDelete
  50. So in life, I take it that you have a blanket rule for everyone you meet. If they say something to you, it's either true or untrue, without exception, right? Or, do you consider what people tell you on a case-by-case basis?

    This is a total non-point. I - like most people - take things on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes, I'll believe what Rodgers says; other times, I won't, and that applies to everyone. It depends on the context/history etc.

    ReplyDelete
  51. And exactly why did you delete me comment? What I said was 100% true, but please, don't sue me for defamation.

    ReplyDelete
  52. That's the way it comes across to 90% of people, so maybe you're actually wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  53. You believe things based on your own agenda. I'm not saying at all that you have some kind of blanket rule.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Coaches saw a temperament issue? lol. Same people coached Suarez and bought Balotelli.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Nothing wrong disagreeing with Henderson saying Rodgers is one of the top managers in the world is there?

    ReplyDelete
  56. It can only be slanderous if it is untrue and I thought you were against such violence and cheating
    . If it is to be stamped out like many other undesirable aspects of the game then people, especially ex players, need to speak out.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Quite right I listened to the comment and interpreted the way you have and that is how i think most people would have taken the comment. But then most people don'have articles to write ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  58. No, there is not. It's just a hugely insignificant topic that can't generate any discussion, unless you're looking for another Rodgers-bashing.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Stuart beat me to it, but yeah, it's not slanderous unless untrue.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Never does it state violent conduct. Your twisting the statement, while carragher is referring to a violent incident, he more than likely is pointing to the poor decision making. Completely different.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Rubbish, more like he did it 2 or 3 times a day in training because that is exactly the type of player he, more reckless and aggressive style of play more than a violent person.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Your about to be deleted. Just like the guy that clearly stated his misinterpreting/lack of knowledge of the law.

    ReplyDelete
  63. True. Suarez was brought in prior to Rodgers, and I believe after the last incident FSG told him he had to sell if a certain number came in because he was damaging the brand far more than growing it. That is just a theory though.

    Balotelli is interesting. I feel a lot of his past incidents were blown out of proportion. A lot of the things he did would be considered normal and classified as initiation or hazing in student athletes for colleges in America, or rookies in top leagues. Which would be the same age as most of Balotelli's past incidents. I think it was immaturity, and most of it took place off the field. You saw balotelli just this year restrain himself several times which shows growth. But Shelvey never seems to learn, and according to Carragher was common even to teammates.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Slander:

    "A is liable for saying anything to C about B which would be apt to make the average citizen think worse of the latter"

    As I've argued, it's possible that the 'average citizen' (i.e. someone unburdened by LFC bias) could interpret Carragher's comment exactly as I have.

    The person allegedly being slandered is not required to prove that the statement was false, but the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove the truth of the statement.

    In my view, there is no way Carragher can prove that Shelvey engaged in violent conduct '2-3 times a week' in training (over three years).

    It's a totally irresponsible and unprofessional statement (IMO), and if Shelvey wanted to, he could easily bring a defamation claim.

    * Carragher made his comment in front of an audience of millions.

    * He made an emphatic statement capable of making the 'average citizen' think less of Shelvey (i.e. he makes it sound like Shelvey is constantly reckless, with zero disregard for his own team-mates)

    * Carra made no attempt to clarify/moderate his position.

    Your comment about position on violence in the game is utterly irrelevant. I haven't defended Shelvey's action - I even posted an article condemning him, and arguing he should've been sent off.

    Carragher's comment is a totally separate issue.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Once again: stop twisting my words. I didn't say I don't believe what Carragher said; I stated that his generalisation is probably a gross exaggeration.

    And re the twitter account - how do you know it's fake? Where is your proof? Some random LFC fan says it's fake and you just lap it up? Show me proof that it's fake.

    I don't believe it's fake. I emailed his alleged current place of work, and they said that they're not allowed to discuss 'current employees', which suggests he's telling the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Yes, because majority view is always right.

    Maybe I should just be fickle and change my view because the majority think differently? No, I'll leave that to you, as that seems to be a policy you support.

    And once again: I couldn't care less if 99.9% of people think I'm wrong. I have my opinion, you and others have yours.

    I have a solid foundation for my view, and I've explained in detail why I think the way I do on this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  67. If you think it's gross exaggeration then that indicates you don't believe the words he said.


    Maybe it isn't fake Jaimie, but it does come across as a little dodgy

    ReplyDelete
  68. With respect, saying something is a gross exaggeration is not the same as saying something is untrue.

    I don't doubt that Shelvey made rash challenges etc in training, but '2-3 times a week'? I could be wrong, but that seems like an exaggeration to me.

    ReplyDelete
  69. I actually watched the whole thing, and it was my first time seeing Carra as -journalist-. It was so obvious that he was told to use his hands as much possible while explaining things, that he was told how much of a Liverpool fan can he be, how to emphasize things he say.. It is TV, it is normal, they are all told those stuff. Another thing he has probably been told is to use the knowledge he gained as a player. Regardless of it being slander or not Carra probably won't get sued and average citizen will give him another point as journalist because he just let them in the Liverpool dressing room.
    And there shouldn't even be a discussion is that wrong or not.


    As for the slander or not- Carra stated that his behaviour is the reason why he ain't a Liverpool player. That can even weaken Jonjo's position in a negotiation about his salary(Swansea or elsewhere), so of course it is a slander.
    And do I believe what Carra said is true? Who doesn't....

    ReplyDelete
  70. You're not allowed to attack others. Ban yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Good point about the salary thing. I didn't think of that. If Shelvey has a reputation as a reckless hot-head who continuously lashes out at his own team-mates, then that could be detrimental to his career.

    ReplyDelete