Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2013

T-K-O

Told ya all 8-10 anyone suggesting less was dreaming.

We are pissing against the wind with fa. Accept and forget about it

Iang87

10 games. ****ing disgrace

messinkiapina

Stupidly long ban imo. Not saying he didn't deserve a ban, but that is totally unreasonable. There are far more dangerous things happen on a football pitch that get a 3 match ban, or sometimes no punishment at all. Trust the FA to make a terrible decision though.

Kess73

Anyone hear who the former football player is that is on the three person commission today?

murpho999

super_furry wrote: »

Have to appeal that, it's a ****ing joke. Six would have been fair, seven harsh, ten is an insult.

Might be better to just serve it.

Lose an appeal, he could get a longer ban and media circus could be damaging.

That_Guy

10 games. Marvellous.

flanzer

Blatent racism from the FA. If he was an England international, it would be half that

Pj!

10 games sounds very harsh.

Devilman40k

Whats worse is if he appeals it'll be at least 12 possibly more...

Wont be seeing Suarez in red before October next season, FSG might actually start looking at his value now

Luckycharms_74

dafuq. Donkeys in the FA

That_Guy

flanzer wrote: »

Blatent racism from the FA.

Oh please. :rolleyes:

Nuri Sahin

As Rarnes said earlier, prepare yourself for 10 games. I already had myself, so I'm not surprised. Something that surprises me is that that most journalists in my Twitter timeline are saying it's more than they expected and that it's harsh, latter of which I agree with. But anyway.

Dubliner28

his reputation precedes him i think. Given what happened last year with his racial abuse and his previous bitting, looks like FA making an example out of him.

Blatter

So I'm guessing 5 league games next season and a league cup game along with the 4 this season.

First impressions are that it's OTT.

monkey9

The FA can f*ck right off with that nonsense.

mike65

There will be no appeal. You can bet your horse on that.

IamtheWalrus

Got off lightly given he's done it before. What other industry does that type of thing happen? People like Carragher saying 'he only bit him'. Christ almighty. Other players need protected from this type of act. It's a game of football.

Liverpool haven't sacked him because he's their best player. Had he been a reserve player, he'd be gone.

super_furry

If I was Ayre I'd withdraw all co-operation with the FA now. Never any chance he was going to get a fair hearing.

.jacksparrow.

Silly silly fella, already starting the season with that hanging over Rodgers, feel sorry for him more than anything.

SlickRic

he deserved a punishment. 100%.

he deserved more than 3, as it was violent conduct.

i'd have accepted a little more than 3.

i'd have actually accepted between 6 and 8 due to the fact a bite is fúcking scummy.

10 is completely fúcking mental.

googled eyes

10 GAME BAN !!!!!
10 games is overly harsh

super_furry

That_Guy wrote: »

Oh please. :rolleyes:

True, it's xenophobia rather than racism.

Captain Morgan Freeman

flanzer wrote: »

Blatent racism from the FA. If he was an England international, it would be half that

We should charge the FA with racism. Imagine the scenes "you can ban us, we're banning you!!

ShiverinEskimo

Lucky to only get 10 games given the offence.

googled eyes

Kess73 wrote: »

Anyone hear who the former football player is that is on the three person commission today?

Who is it ? Will it drive us mad ?

Or are you just asking ?

Benimar

Totally OTT. I don't think Liverpool have any option but to appeal.

Thought it would be 6 max, especially as Suarez made it clear that he would appeal if he got more than 3. If it was 6 the club may have made him take it, but not when its 10.

Be very interesting to see what happens the next time a ref misses a headbutt or a spit (as scummy as biting).

noodler

It doesn't start now?

mike65

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

Got off lightly given he's done it before. What other industry does that type of thing happen? People like Carragher saying 'he only bit him'. Christ almighty. Other players need protected from this type of act. It's a game of football.

Liverpool haven't sacked him because he's their best player. Had he been a reserve player, he'd be gone.

Undoubtedly true, Carra himself said as much when he noted the difference between the handling of two players who let themselves down at the 2009 Hillsborough service. One got binned, the other (more talented player) disciplined.

Benimar

noodler wrote: »

It doesn't start now?

No, because he has the right to appeal

Knex*

SlickRic wrote: »

he deserved a punishment. 100%.

he deserved more than 3, as it was violent conduct.

i'd have accepted a little more than 3.

i'd have actually accepted between 6 and 8 due to the fact a bite is fúcking scummy.

10 is completely fúcking mental.

My exact sentiments.

What makes if frustrating is the FA's lack of consistency. The Defoe incident a few years back, the likes of the violent conduct by Fellaini and Mcmanaman already this season.

Only Fellaini received punishment from those three, and Suarez' punishment is over THREE times that. Mental really.

Five is fair in my eyes but not really a whole pile Liverpool can do. FA is a kangaroo court, an appeal will get nowhere.

Devilman40k

Benimar wrote: »

Totally OTT. I don't think Liverpool have any option but to appeal.

Thought it would be 6 max, especially as Suarez made it clear that he would appeal if he got more than 3. If it was 6 the club may have made him take it, but not when its 10.

Be very interesting to see what happens the next time a ref misses a headbutt or a spit (as scummy as biting).

if they appeal there'll be another 2-5 games added.. they'd be mad to unless they actually plan selling him in the summer

SlickRic

oh, and don't now be surprised if that's Suarez gone from England.

noodler

Benimar wrote: »

No, because he has the right to appeal

Jesus Christ.

ShiverinEskimo

Benimar wrote: »

a spit (as scummy as biting).

How do you figure that? Instead of just saliva you get the added bonus of broken skin and infection. It's absolutely disgusting!

noodler

SlickRic wrote: »

oh, and don't now be surprised if that's Suarez gone from England.

Who is going to pay the 40m we'd want?

RodgersLFC

In fairness, Suarez was stupid with what he did, but what did Fellaini get for headbutting Shawcross that time? This is completely OTT.

CSF

mike65 wrote: »

Undoubtedly true, Carra himself said as much when he noted the difference between the handling of two players who let themselves down at the 2009 Hillsborough service. One got binned, the other (more talented player) disciplined.

Who was the other one? Itandje and?

.jacksparrow.

Pool fans should be angry at him for putting himself and the club in this situation, messes up next seasons plans badly.

Lovely Bloke

Next season is over before it's even begun!

super_furry

Honestly, I'd take it as far as the Court of Arbitration for sport. The red card the offense deserved is a three game ban, a doubling of it would have been harsh but fair.

Many compared his bite to that of spitting on a fellow player and while I think it's less offensive that being spat on, the FA have proved in the past that they only believe a three game ban is warranted for spitting on someone.

Benimar

noodler wrote: »

Jesus Christ.

Whats wrong with a right to appeal. Even mass murderers are afforded that right, or is what Suarez did so bad that he should be treated worse??

Knex*

Someone on Sky Sports News gave his estimation on how they got to 10 games. 3 for violent conduct, double it for the exceptional circumstance, and then add 4 for his previous conduct with Evra.

The adding four when he already served 8 for that issue is the bit I've a problem with. Completely unrelated.

ThunbergsAreGo

Id rather be bitten than stamped on.

Over the top but what did we expect its Suarez, and he did do wrong

RodgersLFC

The club and player are "shocked and disappointed" according to LFC.tv. Expect this to rumble on for the next while.

ShiverinEskimo

super_furry wrote: »

Honestly, I'd take it as far as the Court of Arbitration for sport.

Honestly, get a grip.

kop77

...

LFC managing director Ian Ayre said: "Both the club and player are shocked and disappointed at the severity of today's Independent Regulatory Commission decision.

"We await the written reasons tomorrow before making any further comment."

Devilman40k

Knex. wrote: »

Someone on Sky Sports News gave his estimation on how they got to 10 games. 3 for violent conduct, double it for the exceptional circumstance, and then add 4 for his previous conduct with Evra.

The adding four when he already served 8 for that issue is the bit I've a problem with. Completely unrelated.

Not really , he was warned twice last year about his future conduct, he ignored the warning he gets punished

Sappy404

So basically it appears the FA can arbitrarily ban a player for as long as they want if they feel the need, regardless of precedent for other violent offences.

mike65

CSF wrote: »

Who was the other one? Itandje and?

Damien Plessis if you remember him.

noodler

Benimar wrote: »

Whats wrong with a right to appeal. Even mass murderers are afforded that right, or is what Suarez did so bad that he should be treated worse??

You have erroneously assumed my "Jesus Christ" was directed at the right of appeal whereas it is actually directed at the fact he will now miss more games next season as a result.