Been having a think about this and we need to start acting like Champions if we one day want to become Champions. So what would Liverpool do?

Nothing short of #JusticeForMisha tee’s before every game and a Black Armband just because until his ban is lifted seems fitting.

Spot on - as much as it pains me to acknowledge, liverpool get an easy ride in many things, because the media are either so enamoured by, or so scared of, their fans.

"Be more like Liverpool" is not a stance I could ever get behind.

12 hours ago, The Boehly Babes said:

Been having a think about this and we need to start acting like Champions if we one day want to become Champions. So what would Liverpool do?

Nothing short of #JusticeForMisha tee’s before every game and a Black Armband just because until his ban is lifted seems fitting.

What would Bruce Grobelaar do? Can't we blame Chelsea fans somehow... Wait no, we'll have to blame the Liverpool fans to make this work.

Sorting my fantasy team out today... Nearly dropped him into my side, still in the game with unknown return date hanging over his profile...

53 appearances = £1,320754 per game so far. hmmm

This ownerships Adrian Mutu. Glad we got this one out of the way already.

Is there any news at all on this? No idea what’s going on.

1 hour ago, SimonH said:

Is there any news at all on this? No idea what’s going on.

Faces up to 4 year ban but strange that we still haven't heard anything, seeing as it was last November this all started.

15 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Faces up to 4 year ban but strange that we still haven't heard anything, seeing as it was last November this all started.

Saw a quote on George Benson recently indicating Chelsea could sue if guilty.

10 minutes ago, Andy North said:

Saw a quote on George Benson recently indicating Chelsea could sue if guilty.

i assume its the same as what we did with Mutu, pretty sure we never saw a penny of it and he still owes us millions.

37 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

i assume its the same as what we did with Mutu, pretty sure we never saw a penny of it and he still owes us millions.

At this point in time of course Mudryk hasn’t had any charges against him decided

Based on history I very much doubt that the IC will arrive at any other conclusion other than case proven. That however is only part of the matter

There aren’t that many examples of the FA making charges under the anti doping regulations.in effect there are two types of anti doping 1) Recreational 2) Performance Enhancing .Mudryks charge clearly will be under 2).

The first thing I thought was relevant is that they deal with these case, one charges have been laid, very quickly they all seems to have been concluded within 2 moths of charges. The relevant charge date was 18/6/25. You would hope to know further info by the start of the season, or very close to it.

The question then is one of sanction. There has been total denial in terms of having any knowledge as to how a banned substance appeared in both samples. Much will depend on what the case or explanation of circumstances as to how the banned substance got into his system.

Looking through a couple of cases a lot will depend on his previous samples and possibly medical evidence. I think it’s inevitable he will get a ban . It might be a long one of course but just by reading these older cases, one of which the FA uncovered two syringes full of growth hormone, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the ban falls between 9 and 18 months. The start dat3 in at least one of the other cases was the date the first positive test was taken.

Re the Mutu case I suspect the two cases are widely different in that one was recreational and the club it is claimed knew about the players behaviour, had spoken to him about it and no matter how they tried the player still proved positive. Whereas with Mudryk there does seem to be a significant element of doubt how the substance found its way into his system.

Edited August 1, 2025Aug 1 by terraloon

The clubs initial stance was very supportive of Mudryk and I assume they have been paying his wages in the meantime. If found guilty I suspect that could change.

They should have stopped paying his wages the moment he got banned. If he’s not available for selection he shouldn’t be paid.

If found not guilty take it up with the regulator that banned you.

9 hours ago, SimonH said:

Is there any news at all on this? No idea what’s going on.

It's crazy how often this just seems to go completely off the radar for months. Like we get a tiny update then months of nothing, not even a whisper from the media, and usually they can't shut up.

A player for one of the biggest names in European football gets a drug ban and we barely hear anything. All I can say is that I hope he's not getting paid during this ban.

I suspect that legally the club can't claim breach of contract until he's found guilty.

I'm not a fan of his game: he's very much a one-trick pony to me and offers little other than pace.
I don't think we will miss him at all.

7 hours ago, acaeus said:

I suspect that legally the club can't claim breach of contract until he's found guilty.

I'm not a fan of his game: he's very much a one-trick pony to me and offers little other than pace.
I don't think we will miss him at all.

I think you are right re not paying him.

I would think it’s 99% the case will be proven but the key point or question will be how the substance found its way into his system

My guess is that his defence will be , and it sounds simple, he has no idea how it got into his system.The main problem will be that the onus is on him to explain its presence.

Well Dr I was doing the vacuuming naked when I knocked over the fruit bowl, stepped on an apple and did the splits…… that’s how it got in there I swear!

11 minutes ago, C3blue said:

Well Dr I was doing the vacuuming naked when I knocked over the fruit bowl, stepped on an apple and did the splits…… that’s how it got in there I swear!

Sounds plausible!

On 02/08/2025 at 00:12, terraloon said:

I think you are right re not paying him.

I would think it’s 99% the case will be proven but the key point or question will be how the substance found its way into his system

My guess is that his defence will be , and it sounds simple, he has no idea how it got into his system.The main problem will be that the onus is on him to explain its presence.

Indeed. And it rarely works because it's mainly the player's responsibility to avoid any banned substances—no matter the reason—and only partly the club's, like the medical staff if they are somwhat involved (not the case here).

What is happening with the Mudryk drug saga is incredible. Why is this taking so long to resolve one way or the other?

I can't remember any similar circumstances in any sport.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/chelsea-mudryk-ban-suspended-driving-speeding-court-b1245315.html

Smart fella

On 08/08/2025 at 07:48, just said:

What is happening with the Mudryk drug saga is incredible. Why is this taking so long to resolve one way or the other?

I can't remember any similar circumstances in any sport.

He's probably dragging his own feet over it. Maybe he has some forms to fill in and return, but won't do it as he's probably very happy to live the high life in West London and not have to do any work at all to pay for it. Suits me anyway. I'll be more than happy to never see him wear our kit again. He was absolutely sh*t at his very best.

This lad loves his speed!

2 minutes ago, Snedger said:

He's probably dragging his own feet over it. Maybe he has some forms to fill in and return, but won't do it as he's probably very happy to live the high life in West London and not have to do any work at all to pay for it. Suits me anyway. I'll be more than happy to never see him wear our kit again. He was absolutely sh*t at his very best.

Once the charge was laid then he had 14 days to respond. That time has passed.

Process is now that there will be exchange of papers my guess would be that Mydryk won’t be denying the test results but it will from his point of view be all about how he hasn’t knowingly taken a banned substance and mitigation

The time line from charge to IC is usually for these type of cases between 2&4 months so my guess we will hear about it any time now and if I were a betting man I would guess a ban between 1&2 years

He's taken a wrong turn.

Unlike Johann Cryuff who had a funny turn.