Those who say they don't have an issue seem to me to be 'fine' about it... because of the player. A defender. Not a goal scorer. No striker. No Suarez.
Suarez - of his own free choice - got himself banned from 10 competitive Liverpool games for the most despicable behaviour in biting Ivanovic. Yet, he was heralded continually throughout his career, even to the point of another ridiculously disgraceful self chosen behaviour of biting Chiellini and receiving a 4 month ban! At that point, fans still backed him and looked to his return.
Here we have Sahko, who was wrongly banned by UEFA and did no actual professional wrong, who then in the pre-season committed 3 minor "lack of respect" incidents: 1. Late for plane 2. Missed a training session 3. Late to a meal
On top of that, you could argue that his interuption of a Klopp interview was also a "lack of respect" incident, although practically, it is no biggie to do that, and it's been done before time and again by players in various situations. It was an attempt at humour, though went badly wrong with Klopp's massive disapproval.
On the basis of these 3 or 4 incidents, we have fans who are 'content' for the player to never play for Liverpool again. Really? What is actually worse, biting players and bringing great dishonour to our club, or being late / lazy in a pre-season?
Sure, Suarez is an incredible talent and massively important to our goal scoring... but Sahko is likewise massively important to our defence, and arguably could have saved our season in January/February.
So go on, tell me again just why it is that fans backed Suarez, but are content for Sahko to get klopped? Aren't we lucky that Klopp was not manager during Suarez's time. His Liverpool career would have been very brief!!