Liverpool v Chelsea 4:00pm

Xavi6

opr wrote: »

Whatever violent conduct is commensurable with in the situation. How many games did Van Persie get for that elbow on Cabaye earlier in the season which was retrospectively reviewed? I'd say similar punishment is warranted.

Opr

I'd see it as extenuating circumstances and not comparable to a run of the mill elbow. Having said that, Ben Thatcher didn't get the usual punishment for his one on Mendez so violent conduct isn't black and white.

If a player should only get three games for violent conduct though I imagine you disagree with the Dutch FA for giving Suarez seven games the last time he did it?

monkey9

Eli Manning wrote: »

What do you think is reasonable for a biting incident in football?

Three games for a red card offence.

Xavi6

monkey9 wrote: »

Three games for a red card offence.

Oh dear

marco_polo

Most disappointing for me is that it was barely an hour and a half after the minutes applause for Anne Williams.

I absolutely love watching Suarez play football, but honestly this was not behaviour befitting of the Liverpool shirt today.

Hank Scorpio

If he was frustrated and seen red you'd expect 100% of people to throw a punch or kick out, whos instinct is it to go and BITE someone? Dogs bite people, its just disgusting what he did and imo its not comparable to punches/kicks being thrown in those examples posted above

monkey9

Xavi6 wrote: »

Oh dear

Well he should have been sent off and got a three game ban. FA have said in the Defoe biting incident that it didn't warrant special treatment like the Thatcher incident so were happy enough to let Defoe's punishment of a yellow card stand.

I don't see why Suarez would warrant a six month ban for a completely similar incident.

opr

Xavi6 wrote: »

I'd see it as extenuating circumstances and not comparable to a run of the mill elbow. Having said that, Ben Thatcher didn't get the usual punishment for his one on Mendez so violent conduct isn't black and white.

If a player should only get three games for violent conduct though I imagine you disagree with the Dutch FA for giving Suarez seven games the last time he did it?

I think if the club were smart they would announce that they have internally disciplined him and banned him for the rest of the season. Give him a good break before pre-season. Gives time for this to all blow over taking him out of the eye of the storm while that's happening. It looks like we've been extremely hard on the incident internally. It would seem like wins all round.

I don't really take the point that the punishment should bleed into more games just because they aren't meaningful. The ban following the Evra thing we lost him at a crucial time so it's just the way the cookie crumbles.

I find it hard to get my head around why it even crosses his mind to try biting someone. That said from a logical perspective. What's worse? Someone coming in with a tackle that could break someones leg, elbowing someone in the face or someone biting an arm? It's a completely scummy thing to have done but I think people are going way over the top. The later is just weird and as such carries certain stigmas in peoples minds of some line between right and wrong ways to go about injuring someone like a man which I don't quite understand.

Opr

Xavi6

opr wrote: »

I think if the club were smart they would announce that they have internally disciplined him and banned him for the rest of the season. Give him a good break before pre-season. Gives time for this to all blow over taking him out of the eye of the storm while that's happening. It looks like we've been extremely hard on the incident internally. It would seem like wins all round.

I don't really take the point that the punishment should bleed into more games just because they aren't meaningful. The ban following the Evra thing we lost him at a crucial time so it's just the way the cookie crumbles.

I find it hard to get my head around why it even crosses his mind to try biting someone. That said from a logical perspective. What's worse? Someone coming in with a tackle that could break someones leg, elbowing someone in the face or someone biting an arm? It's a completely scummy thing to have done but I think people are going way over the top. The later is just weird and as such carries certain stigmas in peoples minds of some line between right and wrong ways to go about injuring someone like a man which I don't quite understand.

Opr

See this is the sort of reasonable post that adds to debate rather than defensive one liners, fair play

Incidentally, don't Pool have a new PR person starting tomorrow? Good luck with that! :pac:

Oscorp

opr wrote: »

The later is just weird and as such carries certain stigmas in peoples minds of some line between right and wrong ways to go about injuring someone like a man which I don't quite understand.

Very well put. Perhaps we're all so acclimatized to witnessing intentional elbows and stamps that the bizzareness of a bite seems so much worse, when in reality, most of us if given the option would prefer to be the victim of what Suarez did to Ivanovic rather than say be on the end of a Robert Huth stamp to the chest, like Luis was earlier this season.

As for the right punishment, I think Liverpool should ban him for the rest of the season largely because of the fact he's reoffending. Six months seems a little extreme to me.

RasTa

K-9 wrote: »

When I made my point I suspected posters like Rasta would reply, so I'll leave it there, your opinion is so easily predictable, nobody will learn anything from you, I already knew the non thinking script in your posts, loved the National Front reference.

People will always bring comparisons into it, soccer would be very quiet if people didn't bring up comparisons.

Learn anything from me? Wtf are you on about, do you come to boards.ie of all places to learn something from strangers? You knew I would reply? As I said, dig up.

Optimalprimerib

If this was ballotelli that did this the reaction of others would be completely different. The fact that he plays for Liverpool is why there is such an outrage. Most in here are wums imo. It was a brainfart by suarez.

Aguero's tackle last week was much worse but this incident will be given the same coverage as the Boston bombing.

Hank Scorpio

Jesus christ, if any player playing for a "high profile" club did what Suarez did today the reaction would be the same if they had a record like Suarez has. If he kicked someone like Aguero did yes they'd be a negative reaction but he BIT him and hes BITTEN people before. He carries around so much baggage and after a great season out of the spotlight he's gone and done it again. There wasnt as big a reaction to the aguero incident as aguero was never in trouble before and a bite isn't comparable to a stamp

You'd swear he was an alter boy. "The fact he plays for liverpool" has nothing to do with it in regards to most peoples reactions

AdMMM

Take out that incident and Luis Suarez was easily man of the match. That first time ball into Sturridge was sublime and he was pulling the strings throughout the entire game.

However, the incident did happen and Suarez deserves everything he gets. If Liverpool are trying to prove to the world that they're a team of value and ethics, Suarez has played his last game for the club. Simple as.

For those that believe that biting someone is only a minor incident, I have to disagree. I'd put biting someone right down there with spitting at someone - one of the lowest things you can do as a human being.

ThunbergsAreGo

Timmyctc wrote: »

We're talking about what happens on the pitch here. If Giggs did that on the pitch I'm sure it would be talked about a bit more.

I agree having sex with his brothers wife and forcing her to havea n abortion ON the pitch would have tongues wagging!

Cyrus

nuxxx wrote: »

Jesus christ, if any player playing for a "high profile" club did what Suarez did today the reaction would be the same if they had a record like Suarez has. If he kicked someone like Aguero did yes they'd be a negative reaction but he BIT him and hes BITTEN people before. He carries around so much baggage and after a great season out of the spotlight he's gone and done it again. There wasnt as big a reaction to the aguero incident as aguero was never in trouble before and a bite isn't comparable to a stamp

You'd swear he was an alter boy. "The fact he plays for liverpool" has nothing to do with it in regards to most peoples reactions

Don't let the fact that agueros tackle could have ended a career cloud your judgement

Biting is disgusting but what he did wasn't as potentially harmful as about 5 different lunges that went unpunished over the past 2 weeks

JimsAlterEgo

There are 2 things on the pitch that are a no-no, Spitting & Biting. They cross the line.
Given his previous record in the PL and the fact its his 2nd offense of biting he can expect a severe punishment, would expect 10+ games.

I also reckon Rodgers will recommend selling him, if not the owners will probably want rid anyway especially if they were as unhappy about the evra situation as we were led to believe.

Will I Amnt

super_furry wrote: »

Making statements like "you could rape someone gently" in a conversation about a footballer nipping at another footballer suggests its you that should be staying out of these kinds of threads.

I made a comment to make a point that everything doesn't boil down to physical damage. It was also a tongue in cheek attempt at dark humour but don't let that get in the way. No need to reply either, you're clearly not worth arguing with.

super_furry

A tongue in cheek joke about a "gentle rape" in a topic about squabbling footballers? Right....that's a perfectly normal angle to take.

The_Kew_Tour

I love the "But every club has one"line. But ahhhh they don't.

It's a pity we are not talking about what Suarez is good at. His pass for first goal was simply delicious.

Nailz

super_furry wrote: »

A tongue in cheek joke about a "gentle rape" in a topic about squabbling footballers? Right....that's a perfectly normal angle to take.

It was an unequivocal non-serious example of how damage/force is unrelated to intent. Your making something out of nothing.

amiable

jive wrote: »

Why? Is there a reason for that or are you just making that up? I don't see what logical reason they would have for not taking an individuals priors into account regardless of where the prior incidents occurred.

According to Mark Palios the former head of The FA they cannot take in to account what happened in another league so no I am not making that up. Thanks in advance for your apologies

amiable

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

There are 2 things on the pitch that are a no-no, Spitting & Biting. They cross the line.
Given his previous record in the PL and the fact its his 2nd offense of biting he can expect a severe punishment, would expect 10+ games.

I also reckon Rodgers will recommend selling him, if not the owners will probably want rid anyway especially if they were as unhappy about the evra situation as we were led to believe.

I'd personally prefer to get spat at or bitten like Ivanovic was yesterday over a headbutt to the face or get landed with a haymaker.

What are you basing Rodgers wanting rid of him on?
What are you basing how unhappy Liverpool were with Suarez after the Evra incident on?

Mushy

Cyrus wrote: »

Don't let the fact that agueros tackle could have ended a career cloud your judgement

Biting is disgusting but what he did wasn't as potentially harmful as about 5 different lunges that went unpunished over the past 2 weeks

Actually biting can be potentially very harmful, and could also have a very damning effect on someones life. But he didn't appear to break the skin, so the actual harm in this one is fairly negated. I hope thats what all the outrage is for.

Its annoying though! I was no big fan of Suarez, always appearing in headlines for wrong reasons. Was finally doing nothing stupid, and you could see just how good he is. And now he has just gone back to what he used to do.

Anyone

nuxxx wrote: »

Jesus christ, if any player playing for a "high profile" club did what Suarez did today the reaction would be the same if they had a record like Suarez has. If he kicked someone like Aguero did yes they'd be a negative reaction but he BIT him and hes BITTEN people before. He carries around so much baggage and after a great season out of the spotlight he's gone and done it again. There wasnt as big a reaction to the aguero incident as aguero was never in trouble before and a bite isn't comparable to a stamp

You'd swear he was an alter boy. "The fact he plays for liverpool" has nothing to do with it in regards to most peoples reactions

Wasnt a peep about Defoe when he did it,actually Defoes has got more coverage now than when it happened. And, I cant remember it ever being talked about here or in popular media when Suarez did it at Ajax. Dont get me wrong, its been talked about loads since he joined Liverpool.

Edit: I am not justifying what he did, he should get a hefty ban and what he did was stupid and dangerous. However, some peoples posts here and elsewhere it would suggest he killed someone.

CSF

I'm honestly very surprised that this still going and his behaviour isn't being unanimously and unequivocally condemned.

amiable

CSF wrote: »

I'm honestly very surprised that this still going and his behaviour isn't being unanimously and unequivocally condemned.

I haven't seen many condoning it to be fair

.jacksparrow.

Anyone wrote: »

Wasnt a peep about Defoe when he did it,actually Defoes has got more coverage now than when it happened. And, I cant remember it ever being talked about here or in popular media when Suarez did it at Ajax. Dont get me wrong, its been talked about loads since he joined Liverpool.

Edit: Dont get me wrong,I am not justifying what he did, he should get a hefty ban and what he did was stupid and dangerous. However, some peoples posts here and elsewhere it would suggest he killed someone.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not sticking up for his behaviour, don't get me wrong.

CSF

amiable wrote: »

I haven't seen many condoning it to be fair

No but theres a middleground, between condoning and outright condemning, and I've seen far more fans in that middleground than I would have expected.

JimsAlterEgo

amiable wrote: »

I'd personally prefer to get spat at or bitten like Ivanovic was yesterday over a headbutt to the face or get landed with a haymaker.

Spitting or biting is lowlife stuff

What are you basing Rodgers wanting rid of him on?

nothing its my opinion

What are you basing how unhappy Liverpool were with Suarez after the Evra incident on?

it was one of the factors owners got rid of , widely reported at the time they weer unhappy with Suarez as well.

amiable

CSF wrote: »

No but theres a middleground, between condoning and outright condemning, and I've seen far more fans in that middleground than I would have expected.

I have seen most condemning it and saying he should be punished.
I think some are surprised that Liverpool fans(in general) don't want rid of him.
Players have recovered from worse incidents than this. Granted he's caused trouble at Liverpool before but I still believe other players have recovered from worse controversies.

Red Crow

amiable wrote: »

I have seen most condemning it and saying he should be punished.
I think some are surprised that Liverpool fans(in general) don't want rid of him.
Players have recovered from worse incidents than this. Granted he's caused trouble at Liverpool before but I still believe other players have recovered from worse controversies.

What worse controversies are these?

average_runner

Liverpool should react before the FA do, make the club look good. Ban him for the rest of the season.

I do believe the FA will back him at least for the remainer of the season if not more. Maybe 7 games.

amiable

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

Spitting or biting is lowlife stuff

nothing its my opinion

it was one of the factors owners got rid of , widely reported at the time they weer unhappy with Suarez as well.

What are you basing your opinion on?
It was widely reported in the rags perhaps? Must be true then.

amiable

average_runner wrote: »

Liverpool should react before the FA do, make the club look good. Ban him for the rest of the season.

I do believe the FA will back him at least for the remainer of the season if not more. Maybe 7 games.

The Liverpool statement last night seems to be encouraging the FA to punish him and they'll accept it

LuckyLloyd

CSF wrote: »

I'm honestly very surprised that this still going and his behaviour isn't being unanimously and unequivocally condemned.

It's unmanly behaviour and should be detested on that basis. But, to be fair, football has long opened the door to accepting other types of unmanly behaviour on a game by game basis - i.e. diving.

People defend the sanitisation of football and argue that the likes of rolling around on the ground feigning injury is 'all part of the game' but, in some respects, this is a symptom of that attitude. The equivalent of Luis Suarez in 1983 wouldn't have dreamed of biting a fellow professional. In part because he'd know he'd be a marked man and be likely to ship some heavy cleansing challenges if he did (not to mention get a proper smack or two for doing it in the first place).

What Suarez did yesterday was childish, unmanly and uncouth. He deserves a ban through the end of the season - probably five games or so is the sweet spot on this one.

However, ideally football would be engaged in eradicating all forms of unmanly behaviour from the game because none of it sets a good example to kids and teenagers.

super_furry

Eli Manning wrote: »

What worse controversies are these?

Eric Cantona attacking a supporter.
Tony Adams being sent to jail.
Roy Keane on Alf-Inge Haaland.
Lee Bowyer stamping on Gerardo's face.
Nigel De Jong's kung-fu kick on Xabi Alonso.

average_runner

amiable wrote: »

The Liverpool statement last night seems to be encouraging the FA to punish him and they'll accept it

Good, they have a new head of PR now, so maybe this is will be handle better than the last one.

CSF

amiable wrote: »

I have seen most condemning it and saying he should be punished.
I think some are surprised that Liverpool fans(in general) don't want rid of him.
Players have recovered from worse incidents than this. Granted he's caused trouble at Liverpool before but I still believe other players have recovered from worse controversies.

I don't think Liverpool should get rid of him, they'd be lost. But I've seen too much of this 'standard 3 match ban' 'I'd prefer to get bitten than fouled' rubbish that doesn't seem to be taking the issue as seriously as it should be.

wandatowell

super_furry wrote: »

Eric Cantona attacking a supporter.
Tony Adams being sent to jail.
Roy Keane on Alf-Inge Haaland.
Lee Bowyer stamping on Gerardo's face.
Nigel De Jong's kung-fu kick on Xabi Alonso.

You forgot the attack on the world trade center

average_runner

CSF wrote: »

I don't think Liverpool should get rid of him, they'd be lost. But I've seen too much of this 'standard 3 match ban' 'I'd prefer to get bitten than fouled' rubbish that doesn't seem to be taking the issue as seriously as it should be.

It will be taken very seriously, especially after his reaction to the ref when the ref said it be in his report.

He get 7 games or more. He has history and even though that cant be used against him, it will still influence the decision.

AdamD

One-off incidents can be called moments of madness. This is the second time hes been caught biting somebody on the pitch, for his sake they should probably check that out. If your instinct is to bite somebody when you're frustrated then you're probably a bit ****ed in the head.

Have to laugh at people comparing this to a bad tackle, tackles are a natural part of the game that happen, even punches and elbows are more natural reactions to frustration. Biting is just ****ed up. Comparing him to Cantona doesn't do much good other than show that hes not the only nutcase to have played the sport.

monkey9

wandatowell wrote: »

You forgot the attack on the world trade center

I think that's out of the FA's jurisdiction though.

Essien

AdamD wrote: »

One-off incidents can be called moments of madness. This is the second time hes been caught biting somebody on the pitch, for his sake they should probably check that out. If your instinct is to bite somebody when you're frustrated then you're probably a bit ****ed in the head.

Have to laugh at people comparing this to a bad tackle, tackles are a natural part of the game that happen, even punches and elbows are more natural reactions to frustration. Biting is just ****ed up. Comparing him to Cantona doesn't do much good other than show that hes not the only nutcase to have played the sport.

Sums it up perfectly for me.

You'd have to be concerned about the mentality of a professional who resorts to biting more than once. Hell I'd be concerned if a 3 year old did it.

amiable

CSF wrote: »

I don't think Liverpool should get rid of him, they'd be lost. But I've seen too much of this 'standard 3 match ban' 'I'd prefer to get bitten than fouled' rubbish that doesn't seem to be taking the issue as seriously as it should be.

I must admit I haven't seen much of that. I don't know how long he should be punished for but I would imagine approx 8 games.

amiable

AdamD wrote: »

One-off incidents can be called moments of madness. This is the second time hes been caught biting somebody on the pitch, for his sake they should probably check that out. If your instinct is to bite somebody when you're frustrated then you're probably a bit ****ed in the head.

Have to laugh at people comparing this to a bad tackle, tackles are a natural part of the game that happen, even punches and elbows are more natural reactions to frustration. Biting is just ****ed up. Comparing him to Cantona doesn't do much good other than show that hes not the only nutcase to have played the sport.

As pointed out earlier the FA can't take the other incident in Holland in to account.
This from a former head of the FA Mark Palios.

Will I Amnt

Knex. wrote: »

Right, first match thread so we see how it goes.

Well Knex, what ya think?

CSF

amiable wrote: »

I must admit I haven't seen much of that. I don't know how long he should be punished for but I would imagine approx 8 games.

Agreed.

Essien

amiable wrote: »

As pointed out earlier the FA can't take the other incident in Holland in to account.
This from a former head of the FA Mark Palios.

Does that mean the rest of us can't take it into account?

super_furry

Essien wrote: »

Does that mean the rest of us can't take it into account?

Not at all. You can ban him for as long as you want.

amiable

super_furry wrote: »

Not at all. You can ban him for as long as you want.

I wish I could thank this twice