Suarez Banned for 10 games

Ordinary man

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Thankfully suarez keeps showing the world what kind of a breed he is and puts further credibility to evra's claims. Hopefully we won't have to hear much about him when he's off playing in germany or where ever he's been angling to go

TheBunk1

messinkiapina wrote: »

Anyone who thinks 10 matches is justified clearly has a personal dislike for Liverpool FC or Luis Suarez. Any neutral who can be the least bit objective would say that 10 matches is a big over-reaction by the FA.

Is it unjustified though? He got 7 games in Holland, which seems reasonable to me for an aggravated incident. He then gets an 8 game ban for racism and is warned about future conduct by the FA.

He bites someone again and what are the FA meant to do? He's got 7 for a similar offence previously. Is biting someone in the PL less of an offence than biting someone in the Dutch league? No.

He has a previous serious charge from the FA and then repeats his idiotic behaviour again. There has to be some sort of progressive punishement.

Paul Tergat

rarnes1 wrote: »

It's excessive.

If it happened a player from anyone elses club they would think the same.

rarnes1 wrote: »

3 match ban for spitting.

So biting is 3 times worse from an FA point of view.

rarnes1 wrote: »

Lol, and the guy with the lowest morals in the league plays for Utd and bangs his brothers wife.

So get off that high horse.

Also, if you're so outraged by his behaviour why are you posting jokes about it all week.

Typical hypocritcal nonsense.

rarnes1 wrote: »

I've made my feelings on Suarez's stupidity clear. You can't defend biting another player.

However, it's natural to compare to other cases and see how inconsistant the FA are. Afaik, you're a Utd fan so you'll remember Rooney swearing ban. I'd imagine you thought that was unjust.

rarnes1 wrote: »

4 if you're England captain

rarnes1 wrote: »

I'm sure you were just as horrified when Defoe bit Masherano. The trauma of seeing these two incidents could leave a permanent scar.

You want to talk about Giggs, Defoe, Terry and Rooney as well as claiming that any other fans would feel the same if it was their player. That to me is trying to deflect

BorneTobyWilde

Technically a bite is clamping of teeth and removing a piece of what you clamp, or clamping teeth and piercing what you clamp
He done neither, a bite ? It was a love bite ,an act of affection in Uruguay
So misunderstood

smileyj1987

jive wrote: »

They can be transmitted through biting, amongst many other more likely candidates. They're rarely transmitted but I wouldn't want to be waiting on those test results because some twat bit me, would you?

They're have been no reported cases of it being transmitted that way . For that too happen it would need a hell of a lot of things to make it happen . Break the skin so that the person bleeds while you are bleeding from the mouth . That would be very very rare .
Also if he had Aids wouldn't the club know about it and wouldn't his career be over ?

PhlegmyMoses

CSF wrote: »

But eh, they're not allowed consider it. Regardless of if we think they should.

Is this confirmed? As in, have the FA stated that they aren;t allowed to take things like that into account?

Paul Tergat

Paul Tergat wrote: »

You want to talk about Giggs, Defoe, Terry and Rooney as well as claiming that any other fans would feel the same if it was their player. That to me is trying to deflect

Surely when talking about an incident it's natural to compare, talk about other incidents/punishments?

Otherwise, the thread would be very short.

citytillidie

TheBunk1 wrote: »

Is it unjustified though? He got 7 games in Holland, which seems reasonable to me for an aggravated incident. He then gets an 8 game ban for racism and is warned about future conduct by the FA.

He bites someone again and what are the FA meant to do? He's got 7 for a similar offence previously. Is biting someone in the PL less of an offence than biting someone in the Dutch league? No.

He has a previous serious charge from the FA and then repeats his idiotic behaviour again. There has to be some sort of progressive punishement.

Why keep bringing this up when every player when fined / banned by the FA are warned on it?

If there is progressive punishment in the FA should Steve Sidwell get more than 3 games for getting sent off after 12 mins in his first game back after a 3 game ban I mean he must not have learned his lesson either?

CSF

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Technically a bite is clamping of teeth and removing a piece of what you clamp, or clamping teeth and piercing what you clamp
He done neither, a bite ? It was a love bite ,an act of affection in Uruguay
So misunderstood

Did you invent that definition yourself?

Paul Tergat

rarnes1 wrote: »

Surely when talking about an incident it's natural to compare, talk about other incidents/punishments?

Otherwise, the thread would be very short.

The only possible precedence is Defoe

Paul Tergat

Paul Tergat wrote: »

The only possible precedence is Defoe

For biting yes.

For FA punishment no.

Cantona's Collars

Paul Tergat wrote: »

You want to talk about Giggs, Defoe, Terry and Rooney as well as claiming that any other fans would feel the same if it was their player. That to me is trying to deflect

At least we now know that Rarnes1 is really Bertie Ahern.

Suarez can appeal the added 7 games,knowing him and how he feels that he never does anything wrong he'll probably try but the club if they've any sense will tell him not to.

Paul Tergat

rarnes1 wrote: »

For biting yes.

For FA punishment no.

If they are wrong once are you happy for them to be consistently wrong?

darced

This post has been deleted.

Cantona's Collars

From twitter:

"Just Suarezed a round of toast - shouted at one piece for being too black and ate the other."

zerks

zerks wrote: »

At least we now know that Rarnes1 is really Bertie Ahern.

Suarez can appeal the added 7 games,knowing him and how he feels that he never does anything wrong he'll probably try but the club if they've any sense will tell him not to.

At least paul is trying to debate tbf

Paul Tergat

Paul Tergat wrote: »

If they are wrong once are you happy for them to be consistently wrong?

Why should they be wrong at all.

adox

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You're a gas man.

Cantona's Collars

rarnes1 wrote: »

At least paul is trying to debate tbf

Unlike your good self,yup you are Bertie alright.Bluster,avoiding the subject & deflection from any topic that might be too sensitive for you,the proof is there.

Ordinary man

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Only the ones who follow the foreign leagues will have to watch his diving, cheating and cries of victimisation then, and i for wouldn't be arsed. Maybe he could go to france, joey barton has got them ready to see his kind;)

Paul Tergat

rarnes1 wrote: »

Why should they be wrong at all.

I agree they shouldn't but just because they ****ed it up with defoe doesnt mean they then **** it up again with suarez

TheBunk1

citytillidie wrote: »

Why keep bringing this up when every player when fined / banned by the FA are warned on it?

If there is progressive punishment in the FA should Steve Sidwell get more than 3 games for getting sent off after 12 mins in his first game back after a 3 game ban I mean he must not have learned his lesson either?

Absolutely he should. Maybe he'd learn then. Punish idiocy.

Plus it's not quite the same comparing bad taclkes, like Sidwells, and biting someone and racism. Those offences are pretty much unprecedented, thankfully.

Tackles; tough, hard, dangerous, mistimed are inherently part of football. Racism and biting are disgusting and need a stronger, more definitive response imo

zerks

zerks wrote: »

Unlike your good self,yup you are Bertie alright.Bluster,avoiding the subject & deflection from any topic that might be too sensitive for you,the proof is there.

Good, you know what to do

PhlegmyMoses

Mentioning other incidents is kind of irrelevant. It deflects from what actually happened. Should Defoe have received a similar ban? Yes. Is the FA's determination to not re-ref a game when a ref hands out a card tying their hands for no good reason? Maybe. Have the FA shown incompetence on many occasions? Yes. Was Suarez deserving of a 10 game ban for what he did? Yes.

It doesn't really matter how many other decisions they ****ed up. This isn't one of them. Biting is a scummy thing to do and Suarez only has himself to blame. Everything else is just bluster.

BorneTobyWilde

Season is over for Liverpool
Fa know this,so its ten games
Six game ban for next season
Makes no logic
But suits them to do that
That is only reason its a ten game ban
Because our next 4 games mean nothing
And to give a 5 game ban
Would mean only missing one important game
So lets make it ten, because of time of year it is
And because of our position in table

Paul Tergat

Paul Tergat wrote: »

I agree they shouldn't but just because they ****ed it up with defoe doesnt mean they then **** it up again with suarez

It's subjective isn't it.

Some think he got too much, some think he got too little.

RasTa

One for everybody in the audience

Cantona's Collars

LFC have stated they are "shocked and surprised" by the ban,are they from a parallel universe,this was what everybody expected.Even the most myopic supporters were saying it'll exceed the 7 games he got in Holland yet his club are "surprised".

Paul Tergat

rarnes1 wrote: »

It's subjective isn't it.

Some think he got too much, some think he got too little.

what do you think is fair then for biting someone?

darced

This post has been deleted.

Paul Tergat

Paul Tergat wrote: »

what do you think is fair then for biting someone?

I would have said between 6-8 games, on the lower side of that.

I certainly wouldn't class it as worse as what Ben Thatcher did to Mendes and he got 8 games.

Paul Tergat

rarnes1 wrote: »

I would have said between 6-8 games, on the lower side of that.

I certainly wouldn't class it as worse as what Ben Thatcher did to Mendes and he got 8 games.

not sure how to make the point any clearer but they are just not the same type of incidents

Grayditch

God forgive me for saying this Father, but wouldn't it be better if he'd been killed.

darced

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yeah, no diving or cheating in the permiership! POTD

PhlegmyMoses

rarnes1 wrote: »

I would have said between 6-8 games, on the lower side of that.

I certainly wouldn't class it as worse as what Ben Thatcher did to Mendes and he got 8 games.

Thatcher should have had a higher ban. He deliberately smashed a player in the head with his elbow at high speed. He literally could have killed him.

Paul Tergat

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

was your point that less people will be talking about him if he goes to another league? you believe the reason for this is that its some kind of hate campaign towards liverpool/suarez or something? is it not logical that he will get way less coverage and headlines if he is playing abroad given the interest from this country into the PL over all other leagues?

Paul Tergat

Paul Tergat wrote: »

not sure how to make the point any clearer but they are just not the same type of incidents

Both are violent conduct.

One far more violent than the other

niallo27

I don't know how people can call him a disgusting man, call him a thug be completely outraged by what he did but then turn around and make a joke about it a few posts later.

niallo27

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't know how people can call him a disgusting man, call him a thug be completely outraged by what he did but then turn around and make a joke about it a few posts later.

Faux outrage. Some do it very well, many don't care.

Cantona's Collars

He joined Liverpool who were struggling in the league and for all his good play and goals they are still in the same position.Would the club really miss him that much if he was gone?

adox

zerks wrote: »

He joined Liverpool who were struggling in the league and for all his good play and goals they are still in the same position.Would the club really miss him that much if he was gone?

Yes. Hugely.

fullstop

Suarezistheman wrote: »

How many games would Suarez have got if he did what Fellani did? Not far off 10 as well Id say such would be the outcry in the media etc. It's ridiculous

You'd be fairly impartial with a username like that...

Al Capwned

People really need to stop comparing the Suarez incident to other incidents that resulted in bans for other players.
Just because he received a ten game ban doesn't mean it's twice as bad an incident as one that merits a 5 game suspension ffs.

Will I Amnt

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't know how people can call him a disgusting man, call him a thug be completely outraged by what he did but then turn around and make a joke about it a few posts later.

Never laugh at an inappropriate joke?

Funny is funny. I have no connection to either player. I can still find it a scummy act but I can also find a joke about it funny.

Cantona's Collars

adox wrote: »

Yes. Hugely.

Even with him,the team hasn't kicked on,perhaps cashing in & getting a player who isn't liable to do something off the wall every time he walks onto the pitch is a better move.

Will I Amnt

rarnes1 wrote: »

Faux outrage. Some do it very well, many don't care.

Brilliant. Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Cantona's Collars

cambo2008 wrote: »

Never laugh at an inappropriate joke?

Funny is funny. I have no connection to either player. I can still find it a scummy act but I can also find a joke about it funny.

Apparently we are not allowed to do such things here,we might fall off our high horses while laughing.

citytillidie

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't know how people can call him a disgusting man, call him a thug be completely outraged by what he did but then turn around and make a joke about it a few posts later.

rarnes1 wrote: »

Faux outrage. Some do it very well, many don't care.

From seeing other posts it just confirms some on the ignore list were right calls

Gorilla Rising

zerks wrote: »

He joined Liverpool who were struggling in the league and for all his good play and goals they are still in the same position.Would the club really miss him that much if he was gone?

They've regressed as far as being overly reliant on him. There doesn't seem to be many options when he has an off day.

Take him out of the equation and they'd be a lot worse off I reckon.

Of course, that could all change depending on who they bring in.

Cantona's Collars

The chairman of the Liverpool Supporters Club (Richard Pedder): "I don't think it's a shock, I think he deserves everything he gets.

"It's down to the club to tell him 'this is your last chance'. He won't leave the club [this summer]. They shouldn't have said anything and just accepted the ban.

"With them releasing a statement, it's going to go on and on again and we want it closed. We haven't had enough but we're concerned. Nobody is bigger than the club."