FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Suarez
Suarez
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Liverpool striker Luis Suarez has accepted a charge of violent conduct from the Football Association for biting Chelsea's Branislav Ivanovic and the case will be heard on Wednesday. However, the Uruguay international does not think he should be banned for longer than three games.
Hopefully the FA will punish home badly enough that he engages his pea sized brain in future. Season long ban would be nice |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Liverpool striker Luis Suarez has accepted a charge of violent conduct from the Football Association for biting Chelsea's Branislav Ivanovic and the case will be heard on Wednesday. However, the Uruguay international does not think he should be banned for longer than three games.
Hopefully the FA will punish home badly enough that he engages his pea sized brain in future. Season long ban would be nice"
I agree Ben |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Well I disagree. I suspect he'll get a 5 or 6 game ban, though personally I don't think he should get more than 3 games.
As for a season long ban, well as your a Gentleman Ben, I'll just take that as humour. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Well I disagree. I suspect he'll get a 5 or 6 game ban, though personally I don't think he should get more than 3 games.
As for a season long ban, well as your a Gentleman Ben, I'll just take that as humour."
I rarely find myself agreeing with scousers but five should suffice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Should be banned for life! any other occupation you'd be sacked for gross miscontuct and more than likely charged with assult with intent! why should he be any different just because he can kick a bag of air around a field????
Billy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Should be banned for life! any other occupation you'd be sacked for gross miscontuct and more than likely charged with assult with intent! why should he be any different just because he can kick a bag of air around a field????
Billy"
Because for some strange reason football is different. If you applied that principal, Jose Mourinho should have been banned for life for trying to gouge out the eye of the Barcelona coach, now manager a few years ago. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Should be banned for life! any other occupation you'd be sacked for gross miscontuct and more than likely charged with assult with intent! why should he be any different just because he can kick a bag of air around a field????
Billy"
But if I kicked a ball around at work and slide tackled my customers I'd be sacked. The two aren't really comparable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Should be banned for life! any other occupation you'd be sacked for gross miscontuct and more than likely charged with assult with intent! why should he be any different just because he can kick a bag of air around a field????
Billy
Because for some strange reason football is different. If you applied that principal, Jose Mourinho should have been banned for life for trying to gouge out the eye of the Barcelona coach, now manager a few years ago."
 agreed
Just cause any of them can kick a bag of air does not make them any different from your average joe bloggs!! thats my point! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Should be banned for life! any other occupation you'd be sacked for gross miscontuct and more than likely charged with assult with intent! why should he be any different just because he can kick a bag of air around a field????
Billy"
you may indeed be sacked for gross misconduct for what he did from a particular employer..
however 'you' as the sacked individual would be free to carry on your trade..
thought common sense would indicate that.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Well I disagree. I suspect he'll get a 5 or 6 game ban, though personally I don't think he should get more than 3 games.
As for a season long ban, well as your a Gentleman Ben, I'll just take that as humour."
I was not trying to be humorous. This sort of behaviour needs stamping out. Making an example of this malicious cretin sends a message to other players that it is unacceptable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
They won't basically sack him, because he's worth millions to the club. If they terminted his contract, he'd just up and leave for free ... and then, no doubt, get a new contract with another club somewhere else.
If they want to get rid, they'll prob have to do it in the summer when they can cash in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
What he did and will be punished for whilst totally unacceptable and wrong did not have the potential to have someone stretchered off with a career ending injury..
no one has been hospitalised and having to walk on crutches..
he did'nt use his elbow as someone else did in the same game..
as usual with some on here its lets jump on the band wagon and be all 'outraged'..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"i dont think a three match ban is enough.. he is a animal, FA needs to set an example with him.. either that, he order him to wear a muzzle for any future games."
agree that 3 matches is not enough.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"i dont think a three match ban is enough.. he is a animal, FA needs to set an example with him.. either that, he order him to wear a muzzle for any future games."
It would present a nice sponsorship deal for PetsAtHome  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"a few seasons ago jermaine defoe bit mascherano, i dont recall the same fuss or screaming for a life ban or sacking then
can it be as its suarez its go into overreaction time?"
I wasn't on here then, so can't comment |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
So lets put things this way who thinks that btiting is an acceptable part of football?
I personally do not think biting is acceptable in any sport, over the years we have seen boxers and rugby players harshly punished for it should footballers be treated the same? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So lets put things this way who thinks that btiting is an acceptable part of football?
I personally do not think biting is acceptable in any sport, over the years we have seen boxers and rugby players harshly punished for it should footballers be treated the same? "
Yeah, get him to bite Mike Tyson's arm |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rumalexMan
over a year ago
Birmingham |
"a few seasons ago jermaine defoe bit mascherano, i dont recall the same fuss or screaming for a life ban or sacking then
can it be as its suarez its go into overreaction time?
I wasn't on here then, so can't comment"
u weren't but the FA and the media were, they never made such a big fuss about it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"So lets put things this way who thinks that btiting is an acceptable part of football?
I personally do not think biting is acceptable in any sport, over the years we have seen boxers and rugby players harshly punished for it should footballers be treated the same?
Yeah, get him to bite Mike Tyson's arm"
lol. Reckon he'd have rabbit teeth afterwards? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"well if a dog bites once that is bad enough
if it bites a second time it gets a jag and put to sleep
we say put him down he is an animal !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Have any other players done the same thing again ?? NO ! Have they accepted they were wrong and behaved in a better way on the pitch YES.
Has Suarez ?? a resounding NO therefore he shouldbe made an example of and a very lengthy ban enforced.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think the fa will ban him until the end of the season, that way it looks a lengthy can but only affects him and the club a little everyone will be happy then, I know Liverpool have fined him but I think any wages he would get while suspended should go to charity, what is a ban to a player really? It's nothing it just means a paid holiday for them |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ustMyselfWoman
over a year ago
At the end of a cracked Rainbow |
"i dont think a three match ban is enough.. he is a animal, FA needs to set an example with him.. either that, he order him to wear a muzzle for any future games."
couldn't agree more!! And as this is the second time he has done this what's next??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Defoe was english so the FA decided his was a playful bite and he wasnt given any punishment Luis Suarez is prime target for them they have previous
"
So the FA are racist? What bollox  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Defoe was english so the FA decided his was a playful bite and he wasnt given any punishment Luis Suarez is prime target for them they have previous
So the FA are racist? What bollox "
Well they do have history treating English players differently (John Terry) to Uruguan players (Luis Suarez) when both were charged with exactly the same offence.
For that matter the press also report the situations differently and some journalists actually admitted that they report diving differently for UK players (Garath Bale booked 4 or 5 times for diving) and foreign players (Luis Suarez booked once for diving) but the press continue to make excuses for Bale but suggest that Suarez cheats.
I, along with thousands of LFC fans haven't tried to defend Suarez's actions against Ivanovich but we will fight back against the witchhunt of Suarez, while people blindly ignore other incidents and make out these people are saints. Mourinho attempting to gouge the eye out of another teams coaches, Chelsea player trying to kill off a referees career by falsely accusing him of racism, Aguello trying to break a players leg in a semi final by stamping on him, Huth trying to injure Suarez by stamping on his chest all of which was very serious foul play.
Suarez, while being one of the best players in the world, carries with him issues which surface occasionally for which he'll be punished. I don't object at all to the punishment to come his way, though I have stated before that I think 3 games for violent conduct is the right punishment, I think he'll probably get 5 or 6 games maximum.
The time I start to take morality lessons from Chelsea fans though is never likely to happen, especially considering their ongoing abuse of Rafa Benetiz, a man who halted the demise that Di Matteo was causing (he may have won the Euro Cup, but he was also responsible for Chelsea getting knocked out in the first stages this season) and also it seems of Yossi Benayoun that has now led the Chelsea to conduct it's own investigation into their own fans to determine the reasons. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Ive heard of teams taking chunks out of a team's defence but this is rudiculous! 
I think doubt he'll have a part to play for the rest of the season once the ban has been confirmed.
Liverpool should look on the bright side with Suarez though... Each time he does something stupid they can recoup some of his wages through the number of fines they have to dish him |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *quirrelMan
over a year ago
East Manchester |
Interviewing fans of the club about the incident got a mix of personal views.
One guy in my opinion got it dead right though, he said that football has got too commercial and money is the main motivation and too much emphasis is placed on winning at any cost, and, that incidents like this show the differing standards between it and other sports. If a tennis player had done the same thing to his opponent he would receive a far heavier punishment than is likely to be levied on suarez either in cash or match bans.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Can you imagine what would have happened to shit-head if he had bitten Roy Keane , Norman Hunter or Chopper Harris - he would probably be were he belongs - in intensive care. Why don't the footballers look after thenselves and do the little prat -- have him stretchered off but apologise afterwards and everything will be ok |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm a LFC supporter and the guy is talented footballer but his brainless attack on Chelsea defender shocked & discraced me and it's not the first time his done it, the club need to sell him to highest bidder asap cause his actions are not excusable and not what is required to play for LFC get rid no player is worth the problems he brings when he goes off on one ! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Its funny how all the comparisons to other players behaviour are being used !
Fact: Suarez bit another player
Fact: Its is not the first time
Fact: He has a record of violent, unruly behaviour ( hence the anger management classes )
That alone is proof that he does not belong on a football pitch regardless of his capability as a player.
Personally i think comparisons should stop being made and concetrate on the facts of what Suarez did not incidents that happened ages ago or using it as an excuse to have a pop at other supporters or teams.
Suarez deserves everything thats coming to him. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Can you imagine what would have happened to shit-head if he had bitten Roy Keane , Norman Hunter or Chopper Harris - he would probably be were he belongs - in intensive care. Why don't the footballers look after thenselves and do the little prat -- have him stretchered off but apologise afterwards and everything will be ok"
You sound troubled.
Avid Manchester United fan here, and whilst I don't like the player involved nor the team he plays for I wouldn't wish him any physical harm.
Mind you.....I have been educated |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
A Man. Utd fan not wanting to see him inkured -- do youremember the player Roy Keane "did" - think he played for Leeds , never played again . Nice lads at Man utd - and that was my point . Suarez obviously picks who he will tangle with |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm finding this thread highly amusing, the two most hated teams in the premiership slogging it out with each each other.
In the red corner we have Liverpool and their inexcusable defence and support of suraz in the racist incident with Evra. I honestly believe this turned a lot of people against them.
And in the blue corner Chelsea.
I don't really have to say anything other than John Terry , Ashley cole , Eden Hazard and Obi Mikels false accusation against Clattenburg. Also the Chelsea fans hardly hold the moral high ground. It was decided that the minutes silence for Anne Williams on Sunday would be a minutes applause because the Chelsea fans couldn't be trusted to remain silent.
I bet Man U are enjoying the time off. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Can you imagine what would have happened to shit-head if he had bitten Roy Keane , Norman Hunter or Chopper Harris - he would probably be were he belongs - in intensive care. Why don't the footballers look after thenselves and do the little prat -- have him stretchered off but apologise afterwards and everything will be ok
You sound troubled.
Avid Manchester United fan here, and whilst I don't like the player involved nor the team he plays for I wouldn't wish him any physical harm.
Mind you.....I have been educated "
Respect to you for that comment. Disliking another team is one thing, wishing the guy injury quite another. And using Roy Keane from the original quote as an example against Suarez is laughable. I always respected Keane as a player, a truely great player too but for the same reasons you state I never liked him nor the team he played for.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm finding this thread highly amusing, the two most hated teams in the premiership slogging it out with each each other.
In the red corner we have Liverpool and their inexcusable defence and support of suraz in the racist incident with Evra. I honestly believe this turned a lot of people against them.
And in the blue corner Chelsea.
I don't really have to say anything other than John Terry , Ashley cole , Eden Hazard and Obi Mikels false accusation against Clattenburg. Also the Chelsea fans hardly hold the moral high ground. It was decided that the minutes silence for Anne Williams on Sunday would be a minutes applause because the Chelsea fans couldn't be trusted to remain silent.
I bet Man U are enjoying the time off. "
Just a little correction Polk, as far as I understand it, it was anne Williams families request to have a minutes applause, I don't know the reason why though I doubt it had anything to do with Chelsea being the opponents on Sunday. at the time I thought it was to distinguish it from the minutes silence held at the previous home game for the 96. The moment was also for the dead and injured in the Boston Marathon as LFC are owned by a Boston based company.
I'm not sure which team you support Polk, but sit back and enjoy the entertainment as undoubtedly the focus will turn to your team one day soon. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
My team are never in the spotlight so I doubt that.
I stand corrected on the silence / applause issue. I was relying on Andy Jacobs the talk sport presenter for my information. He is a Chelsea fan and even he was relieved that it was applause because he didn't trust his own fans.
Sorry if I offended anyone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
before i start yes i am a Man Utd fan, one thing that people are missing is this disgrace of a human being is harming the name of one of the most respected and loved football clubs in the world, If he stays there he will do long term damage to the name of Liverpool FC and like Brendon said no one man is bigger then the club, so whatever the ban or fine for their own sake Liverpool need to sell him in the summer |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
In anyother walk of life this is assault the cops have filmed evidence plus admission why on earth have they not done anything. They do not need the victims permission.
Footballers seemingly above the law what message does this send to folk especially to kids who will get impression it is acceptable.
No wonder kids go off rails when assault is deemed minor |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"before i start yes i am a Man Utd fan, one thing that people are missing is this disgrace of a human being is harming the name of one of the most respected and loved football clubs in the world, If he stays there he will do long term damage to the name of Liverpool FC and like Brendon said no one man is bigger then the club, so whatever the ban or fine for their own sake Liverpool need to sell him in the summer "
Presumerably you took exactly the same stance over Eric Cantona, have never sung his name and were truely appalled that he ever played for your club again, plus your disappointed in Ferguson for not having done the decent thing and sold him after the shame he brought to your own club. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Sorry, but the longer his punishment, the more it acts as a deterrent to other problem players. Football is in dire need of a shake up when it comes to the issues of respect and on field conduct, and this is a unique opportunity to set an example.
The FA can quite happily ask the RFU how to get things done. Rugby as a sport is miles ahead in the respect department than football. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sorry, but the longer his punishment, the more it acts as a deterrent to other problem players. Football is in dire need of a shake up when it comes to the issues of respect and on field conduct, and this is a unique opportunity to set an example.
The FA can quite happily ask the RFU how to get things done. Rugby as a sport is miles ahead in the respect department than football."
I agree both codes of rugby lead the way with player discipline and respect. Soccer chiefs are too afraid to act. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Rugby ?
The sport where you gouge each others eyes.
Tip tackles.
Blood gate.
I could go on but suffice to say rugby has its fair share of thugs and cheats as well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"................
The FA can quite happily ask the RFU how to get things done. Rugby as a sport is miles ahead in the respect department than football."
That may be because there isn't the money in rugby that there is in football. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"................
The FA can quite happily ask the RFU how to get things done. Rugby as a sport is miles ahead in the respect department than football.
That may be because there isn't the money in rugby that there is in football."
Whats money got to do with it it is about respect and abiding by rules. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"................
The FA can quite happily ask the RFU how to get things done. Rugby as a sport is miles ahead in the respect department than football.
That may be because there isn't the money in rugby that there is in football.
Whats money got to do with it it is about respect and abiding by rules."
Football has become about winning at all costs. Success brings income. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Rugby ?
The sport where you gouge each others eyes.
Tip tackles.
Blood gate.
I could go on but suffice to say rugby has its fair share of thugs and cheats as well. "
The same sport where we accept the refs decision as final, don't talk back to him or her, and form tunnels at the end of every match to clap the other team off.
Yeah...so thuggish! I've played rugby for the best part of 14 years and the overall respect in both league and union puts that in football to shame.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Some just keep straying from the facts and finding reasons to hate chelsea players or the team.
Fact is Suarez did what he did and its deplorable, there is no defence, no argument , no belittling other players etc that will detract from this.
Like i said i deserves everything he gets. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I reckon he has got off lightly.
He got a 7 match ban the last time he got the nibbles in Holland so I expected maybe half a season this time."
I'd hate for you to be on a disciplinary panel that I had to appear before. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I reckon he has got off lightly.
He got a 7 match ban the last time he got the nibbles in Holland so I expected maybe half a season this time.
I'd hate for you to be on a disciplinary panel that I had to appear before. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Sadly LFC have chosen to be 'shocked and disappointed' at Suarez's ten match ban. It was always going to top the seven match ban imposed by Ajax, possibly because there is an alien and disturbing dimension to the act of biting an opponent that sets it apart from other footballing acts of violence.
Suarez, for all I know, may be a genuinely good guy of the field, but he needs help. He, and Liverpool would have been better served recognising the decision as a starting point in tackling and conquering his obvious issues.
Sadly again, Liverpool's reaction to the ban seems to be based more on the commercial consequences of the ban than the continuing behavioral welfare of the player.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sadly LFC have chosen to be 'shocked and disappointed' at Suarez's ten match ban. It was always going to top the seven match ban imposed by Ajax, possibly because there is an alien and disturbing dimension to the act of biting an opponent that sets it apart from other footballing acts of violence.
Suarez, for all I know, may be a genuinely good guy of the field, but he needs help. He, and Liverpool would have been better served recognising the decision as a starting point in tackling and conquering his obvious issues.
Sadly again, Liverpool's reaction to the ban seems to be based more on the commercial consequences of the ban than the continuing behavioral welfare of the player.
"
Nail on the head!
Well written. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Terry gets 4 games for racially abusing a player, Suraz gets 8.
Defoe gets no ban for biting a player , Suraz gets 10 games.
I am not defending Suraz , I don't particularly like him , but isn't that a little inconsistent ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Terry gets 4 games for racially abusing a player, Suraz gets 8.
Defoe gets no ban for biting a player , Suraz gets 10 games.
I am not defending Suraz , I don't particularly like him , but isn't that a little inconsistent ? "
I couldn't have put this better myself except for "I do like him" and while I also won't defend Suarez for his actions, I will defend my view that this punishment is inconsistent and as OTT as Suarez's bite. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So the question now, 'Will he stay or will he go?'"
There was always a big question about that this summer, irrespective of this ban.
The question remains, the club can't really want to let an assett who has scored 30 goals this season go despite his flaws, Suarez will want to play Champions League and has said he's happy at LFC, but everyone connected with LFC, especially fans would have been surprised if he did stay for next season baring in mind LFC are unlikely to be in Europe at all next year.
My bet is he will go, it's been the case all season, but with this ban it wouldn't surprise me now to see him with LFC all next season too with the decision delayed for 12 months depending on what LFC do next year. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"Can you imagine what would have happened to shit-head if he had bitten Roy Keane , Norman Hunter or Chopper Harris - he would probably be were he belongs - in intensive care. Why don't the footballers look after thenselves and do the little prat -- have him stretchered off but apologise afterwards and everything will be ok"
But wouldn't that be replacing one act of violence with another? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"Its funny how all the comparisons to other players behaviour are being used !
Fact: Suarez bit another player
Fact: Its is not the first time
Fact: He has a record of violent, unruly behaviour ( hence the anger management classes )
That alone is proof that he does not belong on a football pitch regardless of his capability as a player.
Personally i think comparisons should stop being made and concetrate on the facts of what Suarez did not incidents that happened ages ago or using it as an excuse to have a pop at other supporters or teams.
Suarez deserves everything thats coming to him. "
Is it a pop at other teams or a reminder of what other players have done and got away with?
To be honest I don't give a hoot what he or any other footballer gets for misconduct, but you have to treat all the same surely? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If he stays in Premier League, would the remaining 6 match ban still stand or would it fold after leaving LFC.
Surely a PL team wouldn't want a player who cannot play for 6 games"
I think the ban would be in place for all of Europe. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If he stays in Premier League, would the remaining 6 match ban still stand or would it fold after leaving LFC.
Surely a PL team wouldn't want a player who cannot play for 6 games
I think the ban would be in place for all of Europe. "
no, prob just in England.. that QPR player sent off in last game last season (mind blank of his name) went off to the continent to play
the game was domestic so ban only applies to games here (if they were still in Europe he could play those games) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If he stays in Premier League, would the remaining 6 match ban still stand or would it fold after leaving LFC.
Surely a PL team wouldn't want a player who cannot play for 6 games
I think the ban would be in place for all of Europe.
no, prob just in England.. that QPR player sent off in last game last season (mind blank of his name) went off to the continent to play
the game was domestic so ban only applies to games here (if they were still in Europe he could play those games) "
If you are referring to joey Barton he had to serve out his ban at his new club. The respective FA's honour the bans. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Terry gets 4 games for racially abusing a player, Suraz gets 8.
Defoe gets no ban for biting a player , Suraz gets 10 games.
I am not defending Suraz , I don't particularly like him , but isn't that a little inconsistent ? "
No question that the FA can be inconsistent, but do you think Terry would get four games if he was found guilty of racial abuse again?.really!..Suarez has been banned for biting before.. ban him for three games and if he bites again, then what?.Ten games gives him, and the club time to accept responsibility and hopefully move forward. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
should have been banned from any form of professional football for life!
Animals bite, its their natural instinct! It's Not something thats acceptable from so called human beings!
And that goes for all footballers past present and future before someone gets on my case about other players!
Billy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"should have been banned from any form of professional football for life!
Animals bite, its their natural instinct! It's Not something thats acceptable from so called human beings!
And that goes for all footballers past present and future before someone gets on my case about other players!
Billy"
There was an anger management thread yesterday , you may want to read that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Sadly LFC have chosen to be 'shocked and disappointed' at Suarez's ten match ban. It was always going to top the seven match ban imposed by Ajax, possibly because there is an alien and disturbing dimension to the act of biting an opponent that sets it apart from other footballing acts of violence.
Suarez, for all I know, may be a genuinely good guy of the field, but he needs help. He, and Liverpool would have been better served recognising the decision as a starting point in tackling and conquering his obvious issues.
Sadly again, Liverpool's reaction to the ban seems to be based more on the commercial consequences of the ban than the continuing behavioral welfare of the player.
Nail on the head!
Well written."
+1. Excellent post. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"should have been banned from any form of professional football for life!
Animals bite, its their natural instinct! It's Not something thats acceptable from so called human beings!
And that goes for all footballers past present and future before someone gets on my case about other players!
Billy
There was an anger management thread yesterday , you may want to read that. "
No you're ok thanks! i'll stick to my opinion to which i think i am reasonably entitled to just the same as anyone else on here is entitled to theirs!
Billy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ENGUYMan
over a year ago
Hull |
"Sadly LFC have chosen to be 'shocked and disappointed' at Suarez's ten match ban. It was always going to top the seven match ban imposed by Ajax, possibly because there is an alien and disturbing dimension to the act of biting an opponent that sets it apart from other footballing acts of violence.
Suarez, for all I know, may be a genuinely good guy of the field, but he needs help. He, and Liverpool would have been better served recognising the decision as a starting point in tackling and conquering his obvious issues.
Sadly again, Liverpool's reaction to the ban seems to be based more on the commercial consequences of the ban than the continuing behavioral welfare of the player.
"
Superbly written!
Maybe, just maybe, this might set a precedent and make players engage brain into gear before they embark on violence on the pitch.
As for Suarez, his club and for the numerous posters on here, stop spitting your dummies out in rage, apoplexy etc, move on and hopefully learn from it all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Sadly LFC have chosen to be 'shocked and disappointed' at Suarez's ten match ban. It was always going to top the seven match ban imposed by Ajax, possibly because there is an alien and disturbing dimension to the act of biting an opponent that sets it apart from other footballing acts of violence.
Suarez, for all I know, may be a genuinely good guy of the field, but he needs help. He, and Liverpool would have been better served recognising the decision as a starting point in tackling and conquering his obvious issues.
Sadly again, Liverpool's reaction to the ban seems to be based more on the commercial consequences of the ban than the continuing behavioral welfare of the player.
Superbly written!
Maybe, just maybe, this might set a precedent and make players engage brain into gear before they embark on violence on the pitch.
As for Suarez, his club and for the numerous posters on here, stop spitting your dummies out in rage, apoplexy etc, move on and hopefully learn from it all."
I promise to try my hardest, but difficult with a dirty scumbag like Suarez |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
Dogs which randomly bite people are put down. Thinking human beings, however, are 'excused' if they are somehow 'special' like footballers and excuses are made for them.
And, NO, I am NOT suggesting we put him down!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ENGUYMan
over a year ago
Hull |
"Sadly LFC have chosen to be 'shocked and disappointed' at Suarez's ten match ban. It was always going to top the seven match ban imposed by Ajax, possibly because there is an alien and disturbing dimension to the act of biting an opponent that sets it apart from other footballing acts of violence.
Suarez, for all I know, may be a genuinely good guy of the field, but he needs help. He, and Liverpool would have been better served recognising the decision as a starting point in tackling and conquering his obvious issues.
Sadly again, Liverpool's reaction to the ban seems to be based more on the commercial consequences of the ban than the continuing behavioral welfare of the player.
Superbly written!
Maybe, just maybe, this might set a precedent and make players engage brain into gear before they embark on violence on the pitch.
As for Suarez, his club and for the numerous posters on here, stop spitting your dummies out in rage, apoplexy etc, move on and hopefully learn from it all.
I promise to try my hardest, but difficult with a dirty scumbag like Suarez "
Ben, my comment wasn't aimed at yourself, but more towards those LFC Fans who seemed to think that just a small number of match bans would suffice and who like their Club management, can't see the wood for the trees that there is a wider issue here! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Nice reaction from Rogers. I think he should have kept his mouth shut, its making the club look worse. "
I'll have to disagree with you again. Brendan Rodgers shows humilty in what he has said. He correctly draws a comparison with the recorded similar offences committed by Jermaine Defoe of Tottenham, who simply got booked and Sean Hessey of Chester who in the same year got a 5 game ban. It simply shows the inability of the FA to have a consistancy in punishment and as Rodgers says, they are punishing the man, not the actual offence.
In addition Rodgers offers an alternative punishment which is both more sever but more fitting to the offence, that being a 12 game ban with 6 of those suspended.
Rodgers is LFC manager and is right to want to get the best solution for his player and for the club. The press bandwagon ofcourse wants to claim it makes the club look worse, rather than more accurately stating that the player, the manager, the club and the fans have all accepted that Suarez was wrong, and no one has tried to defend him, but the punishment should be appropriate for the crime and this punishment is disproportionate by some distance |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Rogers reaction is of a victim mentality, pointing out what has happened to others rather than dealing with it. Poor poor Suarez. Backing him with statements like he has is condoning on field violence |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Nice reaction from Rogers. I think he should have kept his mouth shut, its making the club look worse.
I'll have to disagree with you again. Brendan Rodgers shows humilty in what he has said. He correctly draws a comparison with the recorded similar offences committed by Jermaine Defoe of Tottenham, who simply got booked and Sean Hessey of Chester who in the same year got a 5 game ban. It simply shows the inability of the FA to have a consistancy in punishment and as Rodgers says, they are punishing the man, not the actual offence.
In addition Rodgers offers an alternative punishment which is both more sever but more fitting to the offence, that being a 12 game ban with 6 of those suspended.
Rodgers is LFC manager and is right to want to get the best solution for his player and for the club. The press bandwagon ofcourse wants to claim it makes the club look worse, rather than more accurately stating that the player, the manager, the club and the fans have all accepted that Suarez was wrong, and no one has tried to defend him, but the punishment should be appropriate for the crime and this punishment is disproportionate by some distance"
So disappointed in Rodgers, thought he would be the man to take Liverpool into the modern era, but here he is, a Liverpool manager once again defending the indefensible. FA inconsistencies are irrelevant, you argue passionately and with moderation, but please, please, look at the incident again. Suarez lunges to bite the Chelsea defender, it's a deeply disturbing act the likes of which is an extremely rare occurrence, and, and, he has done it before.
Rodgers has said the FA have punished the man not the crime. Brendan, the problem IS the man.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"regardless of whom the individual plays for, consistency in dealing with similar incidents is paramount..
or should be.."
Not read the whole thread and not up on football etc but......consistency yes however this is jot a one off occurrence for this player. It's at least the 3rd time be has been penalised for bringing the game into disrepute. It's obvious the standard bans aren't working and he thinks he is above the FA.
I think 10 matches is right. He had his chance to take the ban and learn from his mistakes when he bit someone before hut clearly that didn't work. What's they point of serving run of the mill bans on someone who clearly doesn't care. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"regardless of whom the individual plays for, consistency in dealing with similar incidents is paramount..
or should be.."
Where is the lack of consistency re Suarez?...When have the FA had to deal with a biting recidivist previously, there hasn't been a similar precedent! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"regardless of whom the individual plays for, consistency in dealing with similar incidents is paramount..
or should be..
Not read the whole thread and not up on football etc but......consistency yes however this is jot a one off occurrence for this player. It's at least the 3rd time be has been penalised for bringing the game into disrepute. It's obvious the standard bans aren't working and he thinks he is above the FA.
I think 10 matches is right. He had his chance to take the ban and learn from his mistakes when he bit someone before hut clearly that didn't work. What's they point of serving run of the mill bans on someone who clearly doesn't care. "
This has been my point all along, everyone concentrating on this one incident ( in itself badn enough ) but what about the history of his violent behaviour and previous bans ??
As much as i hate to compare but other players have been handed out 12 match bans for NON violent behaviour yet this animal gets 10 match for actually biting someone ( intentionally ) and has been banned before for it !!
Should of been a much lengthier ban. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Should of been a much lengthier ban.
Two weeks in the slammer then deported.  "
If you bit someone at work fairly sure you'd be fired and charges bought against you for gbh... Why is this any different? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Should of been a much lengthier ban.
Two weeks in the slammer then deported.
If you bit someone at work fairly sure you'd be fired and charges bought against you for gbh... Why is this any different?"
The FA are above the law you only need to look at the JT case to know that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *un_JuiceCouple
over a year ago
Nr Chester |
"Should of been a much lengthier ban.
Two weeks in the slammer then deported.
If you bit someone at work fairly sure you'd be fired and charges bought against you for gbh... Why is this any different?"
Because us mere mortals, the working ants have little value, are replaceable and easily.
Suarez may well be valued at 30,40 million squids. Liverpool will not consider selling their most prized asset. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"regardless of whom the individual plays for, consistency in dealing with similar incidents is paramount..
or should be..
Where is the lack of consistency re Suarez?...When have the FA had to deal with a biting recidivist previously, there hasn't been a similar precedent!"
what about the inconsistency shown as matey says with Defoe and the Chester player..?
dont get me wrong, he was out of order and his action was wrong have said so previously..
but he did not go in 'two footed' to possibly snap someones leg..
or to 'do someone' and end their career..
or to elbow someone in the face..
bit of a perspective perhaps..
the bloke needs professional help to address his issue's..
seems to be a bandwagon whenever its him at the moment..
has been other's before and will be other's in the future for folk to be 'outraged' about..
hey ho.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *lassic1Man
over a year ago
bellshill |
"I'm finding this thread highly amusing, the two most hated teams in the premiership slogging it out with each each other.
In the red corner we have Liverpool and their inexcusable defence and support of suraz in the racist incident with Evra. I honestly believe this turned a lot of people against them.
And in the blue corner Chelsea.
I don't really have to say anything other than John Terry , Ashley cole , Eden Hazard and Obi Mikels false accusation against Clattenburg. Also the Chelsea fans hardly hold the moral high ground. It was decided that the minutes silence for Anne Williams on Sunday would be a minutes applause because the Chelsea fans couldn't be trusted to remain silent.
I bet Man U are enjoying the time off. "
Must admit it always appalls me that a serious subject of a minutes silence for worthy causes is changed to applause because or brainless morons....we have the same thing up here in Scotland where even the solemnity of remeberance day cannot be adhered to.....so sad and reflecting a moronic ignorance.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Should of been a much lengthier ban.
Two weeks in the slammer then deported.
If you bit someone at work fairly sure you'd be fired and charges bought against you for gbh... Why is this any different?"
Because not many workers are worth £40m? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *opinovMan
over a year ago
Point Nemo, Cumbria |
"Should of been a much lengthier ban.
Two weeks in the slammer then deported.
If you bit someone at work fairly sure you'd be fired and charges bought against you for gbh... Why is this any different?"
Absolutely Evie - that's the point everyone in the FA seem to be missing.
Also, it's not just Suarez that's the trouble, it's the prevailing attitude that the richer and more famous you are the less the law applies to you - which is why, instead of being the "beautiful game", football has become infamous for it's untouchable pissed up drivers driving X5s, neo-fascist nut jobs and, now, man-eating racists.
So what's next on the field?... the fucking zombie apocalypse!. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Should of been a much lengthier ban.
Two weeks in the slammer then deported.
If you bit someone at work fairly sure you'd be fired and charges bought against you for gbh... Why is this any different?
Absolutely Evie - that's the point everyone in the FA seem to be missing.
Also, it's not just Suarez that's the trouble, it's the prevailing attitude that the richer and more famous you are the less the law applies to you - which is why, instead of being the "beautiful game", football has become infamous for it's untouchable pissed up drivers driving X5s, neo-fascist nut jobs and, now, man-eating racists.
So what's next on the field?... the fucking zombie apocalypse!. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The ban is based on his precious misconduct, not just for the second biting offence v Chelsea. . Correct me if I'm wrong, But his previous ban for biting was 7 games. Since when, rightly or wrongly he's found guilty of racism- I'm not accusing him of this just stating a fact re the guilty charge- .
Now how could the FA ban him for 7 or less games when he clearly has not modified his behaviour since the first charge.
It's his previous which must be considered. Damned fine player too, real shame with the bad press. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"regardless of whom the individual plays for, consistency in dealing with similar incidents is paramount..
or should be..
Where is the lack of consistency re Suarez?...When have the FA had to deal with a biting recidivist previously, there hasn't been a similar precedent!
what about the inconsistency shown as matey says with Defoe and the Chester player..?
dont get me wrong, he was out of order and his action was wrong have said so previously..
but he did not go in 'two footed' to possibly snap someones leg..
or to 'do someone' and end their career..
or to elbow someone in the face..
bit of a perspective perhaps..
the bloke needs professional help to address his issue's..
seems to be a bandwagon whenever its him at the moment..
has been other's before and will be other's in the future for folk to be 'outraged' about..
hey ho.."
As I said this is the SECOND time he has bitten a player... there is no precedent, so it's illogical to say it's inconsistent!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Should of been a much lengthier ban.
Two weeks in the slammer then deported.
If you bit someone at work fairly sure you'd be fired and charges bought against you for gbh... Why is this any different?
Because not many workers are worth £40m?"
And this is why I don't like professional football!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So what do you all want??? Get him hanged???? He got 10 games ban already
That is his business from now"
Hoe much hard ship is a 10 game ban for him? I bet he still gets paid and all that means is 10 games where he can arse around in his swanky pad and live the high life. It's bot really a punishment is it?
It's a bit like sending a kid to his room for being naughty where all his toys are kept |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Should of been a much lengthier ban.
Two weeks in the slammer then deported.
If you bit someone at work fairly sure you'd be fired and charges bought against you for gbh... Why is this any different?
Absolutely Evie - that's the point everyone in the FA seem to be missing.
Also, it's not just Suarez that's the trouble, it's the prevailing attitude that the richer and more famous you are the less the law applies to you - which is why, instead of being the "beautiful game", football has become infamous for it's untouchable pissed up drivers driving X5s, neo-fascist nut jobs and, now, man-eating racists.
So what's next on the field?... the fucking zombie apocalypse!. "
The one thing I do find sad with the game nowadays is that poor conduct is smoothed over by the managers and clubs. Can you imagine Cloughie putting up with a player behaving like they do now?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"regardless of whom the individual plays for, consistency in dealing with similar incidents is paramount..
or should be..
Where is the lack of consistency re Suarez?...When have the FA had to deal with a biting recidivist previously, there hasn't been a similar precedent!
what about the inconsistency shown as matey says with Defoe and the Chester player..?
dont get me wrong, he was out of order and his action was wrong have said so previously..
but he did not go in 'two footed' to possibly snap someones leg..
or to 'do someone' and end their career..
or to elbow someone in the face..
bit of a perspective perhaps..
the bloke needs professional help to address his issue's..
seems to be a bandwagon whenever its him at the moment..
has been other's before and will be other's in the future for folk to be 'outraged' about..
hey ho..
As I said this is the SECOND time he has bitten a player... there is no precedent, so it's illogical to say it's inconsistent!
"
whats illogical is that you either cant or dont wish to see the inconsistency between two other players who bit other's and the difference in how they were dealt with..
FYI the FA's remit in this case was what happened on Sat of last week..
the previous took place in Holland and was under their jurisdiction, apparently the FA were not allowed to consider it..
whether thats right or wrong.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"regardless of whom the individual plays for, consistency in dealing with similar incidents is paramount..
or should be..
Where is the lack of consistency re Suarez?...When have the FA had to deal with a biting recidivist previously, there hasn't been a similar precedent!
what about the inconsistency shown as matey says with Defoe and the Chester player..?
dont get me wrong, he was out of order and his action was wrong have said so previously..
but he did not go in 'two footed' to possibly snap someones leg..
or to 'do someone' and end their career..
or to elbow someone in the face..
bit of a perspective perhaps..
the bloke needs professional help to address his issue's..
seems to be a bandwagon whenever its him at the moment..
has been other's before and will be other's in the future for folk to be 'outraged' about..
hey ho..
As I said this is the SECOND time he has bitten a player... there is no precedent, so it's illogical to say it's inconsistent!
whats illogical is that you either cant or dont wish to see the inconsistency between two other players who bit other's and the difference in how they were dealt with..
FYI the FA's remit in this case was what happened on Sat of last week..
the previous took place in Holland and was under their jurisdiction, apparently the FA were not allowed to consider it..
whether thats right or wrong.."
FA's remit? obviously you are privvy to this information..this has gone to an Independent decision, Premiership clubs sign up to discretionary decisions made by the FA, and FYI it would be ludicrous for any objective inquiry to ignore previous bans..the FA doesn't operate in splendid isolation with the rest of the footballing community, nor should it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Remember when Rooney got sent off for kicking the Montenegro player and received a ban.
The same FA taking the moral high ground made a plea to FIFA to get it reduced. So England had a better chance in the world cup
Suarez deserved a lengthy ban which he has received.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its funny how all the comparisons to other players behaviour are being used !
Fact: Suarez bit another player
Fact: Its is not the first time
Fact: He has a record of violent, unruly behaviour ( hence the anger management classes )
That alone is proof that he does not belong on a football pitch regardless of his capability as a player.
Personally i think comparisons should stop being made and concetrate on the facts of what Suarez did not incidents that happened ages ago or using it as an excuse to have a pop at other supporters or teams.
Suarez deserves everything thats coming to him. "
Well said!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"..... Must admit it always appalls me that a serious subject of a minutes silence for worthy causes is changed to applause because or brainless morons....we have the same thing up here in Scotland where even the solemnity of remeberance day cannot be adhered to.....so sad and reflecting a moronic ignorance. "
Classic1, Just to correct you on this I refer you to a post I placed 2 days ago in this thread concerning this comment.
"Just a little correction Polk, as far as I understand it, it was Anne Williams families request to have a minutes applause, I don't know the reason why though I doubt it had anything to do with Chelsea being the opponents on Sunday. at the time I thought it was to distinguish it from the minutes silence held at the previous home game for the 96. The moment was also for the dead and injured in the Boston Marathon as LFC are owned by a Boston based company"
I was at Anfield last Sunday, the minutes applause was most appropriate and it allowed The Kop in particular, but other sections of the ground too, to sing out Anne Williams name in a fitting tribute to her. She was much loved and totally respected across Merseyside whether you are a Red or a Blue for how she led the battle for justice for her son, even when it seemed the whole world was against her.
Her funeral is on Monday and the streets I am sure will be lined with people paying their respects to a wonderful woman who over 24 years truely demonstrated the depth of A Mother's Love. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Liverpool FC and Suarez have accepted the 10 game ban for Suarez. Personally I'm disappointed in my clubs decision for the reasons I have stated elsewhere in the thread.
Anyway, there we go, Roll on next season when I hope Suarez will still be playing for LFC. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"
Anyway, there we go, Roll on next season when I hope Suarez will still be playing for LFC."
The general consensus seems to be that he will move on as he wants top level/European football.... which begs the question, why did he sign for a mid table club in the first place?
Funny old game eh Sainty |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Anyway, there we go, Roll on next season when I hope Suarez will still be playing for LFC.
The general consensus seems to be that he will move on as he wants top level/European football.... which begs the question, why did he sign for a mid table club in the first place?
Funny old game eh Sainty "
LOL Gentleman Ben, I send a handshake over to you while choosing not to rise to the bait, else we'll be turning FAB into a Footy site and noone will like that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We are all adults and have our opinions, lets move on...
He did what he did
Got what was deemed a worthy punishment by the powers that be.
Old news now
ITS FRIDAY Yahooo !!!
PS We had a nice win last night lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
