Italy 17 : 00 Uruguay - there can be only one! (RTE2/ITV4)

MacBizzle

Why is it worse than a headbutt!?!? Once you get past the fact it's a bit less common and more of a primitive behaviour than headbutting it's clear it's far less dangerous..

Not trying to defend him but it's really starting to annoy me.

Cienciano

MacBizzle wrote: »

Why is it worse than a headbutt!?!? Once you get past the fact it's a bit less common and more of a primitive behaviour than headbutting it's clear it's far less dangerous..

Not trying to defend him but it's really starting to annoy me.

It's not worse than a real headbutt. But a "soccer headbutt" isn't a real headbutt.
What Suarez did is way worse than a "soccer headbut"

amkin25

Crazy and all as he is,the red mist seems to descend on him when hes losing and inevitably will happen again,but there is a sort of a witch-hunt on suarez since the evra thing like 2 year bans and all is crazy in my opinion.

A bite is shocking and all but there is worse career ending dangerous tackles can happen that never get the same response.

But overall the big losers now are liverpool who will probably come under pressure again to sell him and his value has gone down somewhat.

Knex*

Yeah, Liverpool should cash in on Suarez immediately, and then give all the money to charity.

After that, Chelsea and City should cut all ties with their respective owners and their rumoured less than admirable past. Perhaps we should go through every team then and cut all players, staff, and shareholders with any dodgy dealings, be it in the Sport itself, in business, or even in their local pub's 45 card drive on a Wednesday night.

Only when this Judgement Day and cleansing of the Sport is done, can we all sit comfortable with our morals once more and watch the Sport we enjoy and the teams we love.

Here, here.

Will I Amnt

I wish people would stop comparing it to a career ending tackle :rolleyes:

Smithwicks Man

MacBizzle wrote: »

Why is it worse than a headbutt!?!? Once you get past the fact it's a bit less common and more of a primitive behaviour than headbutting it's clear it's far less dangerous..

Not trying to defend him but it's really starting to annoy me.

It's far more dangerous due to the possible transmission of disease. Now obviously I'm not saying that Suarez has any diseases or anything like that but that is the threat that such an act poses.

It's the same way that spitting on someone is far worse than punching someone in the stomach. They're both red cards but one is a much more reprehensible act.

Or at least I'd have thought that was the general view?

amkin25

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I wish people would stop comparing it to a career ending tackle :rolleyes:

Its relevant to the argument a dangerous deliberate tackle that breaks a leg can ruin a career,a bite on the shoulder can't possibly end a career.

Andy-Pandy

Two years s the maximum ban for biting. Its his third offence, I hope an example is made of him and he gets the full two years. Amazing talent but a scumbag of the highest order.

MacBizzle

Cienciano wrote: »

It's not worse than a real headbutt. But a "soccer headbutt" isn't a real headbutt.
What Suarez did is way worse than a "soccer headbut"

I know what you mean.

I think they should warrant the same punishment really. I'm a Liverpool fan though so there will obviously be some bias, naturally.

MacBizzle

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

It's far more dangerous due to the possible transmission of disease. Now obviously I'm not saying that Suarez has any diseases or anything like that but that is the threat that such an act poses.

It's the same way that spitting on someone is far worse than punching someone in the stomach. They're both red cards but one is a much more reprehensible act.

Or at least I'd have thought that was the general view?

A headbutt could cause brain damage if we're going to go down the "what if" route, which is kinda what I was getting at it.

Augmerson

amkin25 wrote: »

But overall the big losers now are liverpool who will probably come under pressure again to sell him and his value has gone down somewhat.

Liverpool are in the driving seat and always were. John Henry plays hardball. He did last season. If some La Liga club thinks they can lowball Liverpool because of his actions at the WC their wrong.

Suarez is among the best in the world and certainly the best in the EPL. Brendan Rodgers knows how good Suarez is. Liverpool certainly won't sell him because of any 'bad press'. No EPL side would. Ffs Eric Cantona assaulted a fan in the 90s, a completely reprehensible act, and Man U stuck with him because they knew how good he was.

Will I Amnt

amkin25 wrote: »

Its relevant to the argument a dangerous deliberate tackle that breaks a leg can ruin a career,a bite on the shoulder can't possibly end a career.

Ok so, if he pinned him to the ground and sexually assaulted him without injuring him, would that be as trivial an issue?

I am not saying he sexually assaulted him or equating a bite to sexual assault, just to put a halt to the inevitable response. It's purely hypothetical.

MacBizzle

amkin25 wrote: »

But overall the big losers now are liverpool who will probably come under pressure again to sell him and his value has gone down somewhat.

Why would the fact that his value has gone down make Liverpool sell? To be honest it think this is perfect for Liverpool, he's made himself considerably less attractive to the likes of Barca and Real after this.

Looks like Liverpool fans will be the only ones happy to keep him for the next year.

Cantona's Collars

Awwww,he injured his teeth.

amkin25

Augmerson wrote: »

Liverpool are in the driving seat and always were. John Henry plays hardball. He did last season. If some La Liga club thinks they can lowball Liverpool because of his actions at the WC their wrong.

Suarez is among the best in the world and certainly the best in the EPL. Brendan Rodgers knows how good Suarez is. Liverpool certainly won't sell him because of any 'bad press'. No EPL side would. Ffs Eric Cantona assaulted a fan in the 90s, a completely reprehensible act, and Man U stuck with him because they knew how good he was.

I hear what your saying but with the comments after scoring against England about having to suffer abuse from the media there,seemed like he was saying it was revenge for the crap he took from the evra thing.

So i got the feeling he either knew or had a good idea he was moving,so i think you can be sure after this too he wont wanna be playing for liverpool next season and the media are gonna be out for him worse than ever and out for liverpool,so he will have a price that they will have to just cut their losses at in my opinion.

Knex*

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Ok so, if he pinned him to the ground and sexually assaulted him without injuring him, would that be as trivial an issue?

I am not saying he sexually assaulted him or equating a bite to sexual assault, just to put a halt to the inevitable response. It's purely hypothetical.

I don't even know what's going on anymore.

Are you suggesting Suarez gave Chiellini a love bite? :pac:

Smithwicks Man

MacBizzle wrote: »

A headbutt could cause brain damage if we're going to go down the "what if" route, which is kinda what I was getting at it.

A proper headbutt could actually yeah so I see what you mean.

These things need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis imo.

A headbutt like Pepe's on Muller should not have the same ban as a headbutt that breaks a players nose for example.

But even on that basis, Suarez should receive a 10-15 game ban in my opinion, which is a pity because I would've enjoyed watching Uruguay against Colombia with Suarez playing.

I'm not anti-Suarez and the witch-hunts that the English Media go on are embarrassing to themselves but what Suarez did tonight was indefensible. He deserves a lengthy ban and when you consider it's his third offence for the same thing he deserves even more.

I mean it boggles the mind what he did and why he did it. They were fully in the tie with a winnable Last 16 game on the horizon and he threw it all away over nothing. And it's not even like he was reacting to something that happened like Valencia going mad at Sterling in the England v Ecuador friendly because of the bad tackle on him. The bite came out of nowhere :eek:

amkin25

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Ok so, if he pinned him to the ground and sexually assaulted him without injuring him, would that be as trivial an issue?

I am not saying he sexually assaulted him or equating a bite to sexual assault, just to put a halt to the inevitable response. It's purely hypothetical.

Yeah i know,i hear what ur saying it is a very scummy act for sure,and its shocking to be seen on tv so possibly should be made example of.

MacBizzle

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

A proper headbutt could actually yeah so I see what you mean.

These things need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis imo.

A headbutt like Pepe's on Muller should not have the same ban as a headbutt that breaks a players nose for example.

But even on that basis, Suarez should receive a 10-15 game ban in my opinion, which is a pity because I would've enjoyed watching Uruguay against Colombia with Suarez playing.

I'm not anti-Suarez and the witch-hunts that the English Media go on are embarrassing to themselves but what Suarez did tonight was indefensible. He deserves a lengthy ban and when you consider it's his third offence for the same thing he deserves even more.

I mean it boggles the mind what he did and why he did it. They were fully in the tie with a winnable Last 16 game on the horizon and he threw it all away over nothing. And it's not even like he was reacting to something that happened like Valencia going mad at Sterling in the England v Ecuador friendly because of the bad tackle on him. The bite came out of nowhere :eek:

10-15 games seems fair enough imo, this talk of 2 year club-and-country ban is just ridiculous.

Suarez clearly has mental health issues, it's without question at this stage.

Will I Amnt

Knex. wrote: »

I don't even know what's going on anymore.

Are you suggesting Suarez gave Chelini a love bite? :pac:

Nah, just trying unsuccessfully to shift people's focus away from the "sure it's only a scratch" view that comes into play yet again.
Biting is such a low thing to do, it provokes reaction on a different level.

MacBizzle

amkin25 wrote: »

I hear what your saying but with the comments after scoring against England about having to suffer abuse from the media there,seemed like he was saying it was revenge for the crap he took from the evra thing.

So i got the feeling he either knew or had a good idea he was moving,so i think you can be sure after this too he wont wanna be playing for liverpool next season and the media are gonna be out for him worse than ever and out for liverpool,so he will have a price that they will have to just cut their losses at in my opinion.

American owners cutting losses? Don't think so bud :pac:

The extra prize money they'd get with him in the team compared to without him in the team should justify keeping him, don't think they'll come near to winning the league/CL if we lose him.

Augmerson

amkin25 wrote: »

I hear what your saying but with the comments after scoring against England about having to suffer abuse from the media there,seemed like he was saying it was revenge for the crap he took from the evra thing.

So i got the feeling he either knew or had a good idea he was moving,so i think you can be sure after this too he wont wanna be playing for liverpool next season and the media are gonna be out for him worse than ever and out for liverpool,so he will have a price that they will have to just cut their losses at in my opinion.

Why would Liverpool cut their losses on the best player in the EPL? No management or ownership would do so.

Suarez has Champions League football next season with Liverpool. Why leave? A lot of clubs all they have to offer is money and faded memories. Liverpool offer a starting place, CL football and with the right investment another shot at the EPL title.

Smithwicks Man

MacBizzle wrote: »

10-15 games seems fair enough imo, this talk of 2 year club-and-country ban is just ridiculous.

Suarez clearly has mental health issues, it's without question at this stage.

By 10-15 games I mean games for Uruguay by the way.

It had nothing to do with Liverpool and I'm not even sure why people are suggesting a club-ban as I don't think it's possible to get banned for your club for an action carried out in an international.

Will I Amnt

Augmerson wrote: »

Why would Liverpool cut their losses on the best player in the EPL? No management or ownership would do so.

Suarez has Champions League football next season with Liverpool. Why leave? A lot of clubs all they have to offer is money and faded memories. Liverpool offer a starting place, CL football and with the right investment another shot at the EPL title.

There's another 31 clubs that will be able to offer Champions League football.

MacBizzle

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

By 10-15 games I mean games for Uruguay by the way.

It had nothing to do with Liverpool and I'm not even sure why people are suggesting a club-ban as I don't think it's possible to get banned for your club for an action carried out in an international.

Yeah that's what I meant to.

I reckon there'd be legal action if FIFA tried to ban him from club football.

amkin25

Augmerson wrote: »

Why would Liverpool cut their losses on the best player in the EPL? No management or ownership would do so.

Suarez has Champions League football next season with Liverpool. Why leave? A lot of clubs all they have to offer is money and faded memories. Liverpool offer a starting place, CL football and with the right investment another shot at the EPL title.

Not cutting ur losses as in giving him away but when u have a player that wants to move,plus the signs seemed to be pointing towards him being sold anyway before this happened.
So cutting their losses will be accepting a lower price,there will be some price lower that will acceptable for all parties.

MacBizzle

Will I Amnt wrote: »

There's another 31 clubs that will be able to offer Champions League football.

PSG, Monaco, Barca, and Real are the only ones who can afford him (am I missing one?), and he won't be going to Monaco realistically.

That leaves 3 teams, and Real's fans are already apprehensive about them spending a lot of money, not to mind spending so much on a volatile player.

That leaves PSG and Barca, and I think the bite could have seriously made them reconsider their interest.

If Liverpool should sell him because of the bite, why should any other team buy him?

COYVB

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

By 10-15 games I mean games for Uruguay by the way.

It had nothing to do with Liverpool and I'm not even sure why people are suggesting a club-ban as I don't think it's possible to get banned for your club for an action carried out in an international.

FIFA could, if they wanted, issue a global ban from all football, international or club. They won't, but they could.

At this stage he's bitten players 3 times. He's arguably a danger to have on the pitch because he clearly can't control himself. It's up to FIFA now to decide what to do.

A year long ban from all football with the prerequisite of anger management therapy before being allowed to play again honestly sounds reasonable at this stage.

The guy isn't all there and shouldn't really be allowed on a football pitch till he gets his head sorted

Augmerson

Will I Amnt wrote: »

There's another 31 clubs that will be able to offer Champions League football.

Realistically, there are not 31 clubs who can tempt Suarez away.

We are taking, at the absolute most, at 4. Maybe two clubs in Spain, one in France, one in Manchester (and they aren't Man U)

Those are the clubs in need and with the resources.

Augmerson

amkin25 wrote: »

Not cutting ur losses as in giving him away but when u have a player that wants to move,plus the signs seemed to be pointing towards him being sold anyway before this happened.
So cutting their losses will be accepting a lower price,there will be some price lower that will acceptable for all parties.

If Liverpool have to sell to "cut their losses" why would another team buy knowing his reputation? I guess everybody loves damaged goods?

Son Of A Vidic

MacBizzle wrote: »

Why is it worse than a headbutt!?!? Once you get past the fact it's a bit less common and more of a primitive behaviour than headbutting it's clear it's far less dangerous..

Sorry you are quite wrong there, it is not less dangerous. I'm putting on my medical hat here but I'll keep it brief. A human bite is potentially an incredible nasty source of infection. The human mouth is brimming with bacteria and nasty organisms, with Streptococci and Staphylococci being the most potent amongst them. The deeper the bite then the higher the risk of bacterial penetration, replication and infection. While HIV and Hepatitis C pose a very, very low risk, due to the medium of transmission (Salivia) and viral load being an issue. You will still receive the relevant medical treatment protocol. And that can be a very worrying/stressful time for a patient. Oh and just to be clear, there is no treatment for Hepatitis C. So while a headbutt might seem worse, I can assure you a human bite is potentially much worse and that's based on my professional experience.

Will I Amnt

Augmerson wrote: »

Realistically, there are not 31 clubs who can tempt Suarez away.

We are taking, at the absolute most, at 4. Maybe two clubs in Spain, one in France, one in Manchester (and they aren't Man U)

Those are the clubs in need and with the resources.

You asked "why leave" because Liverpool had Champions League football. All it takes is for Barca and Real to be interested.
They could even view him as a more attractive prospect if he doesn't have to piss off halfway across the world for international duty every so often.

K-9

It depends if there is a sell on clause or not though. Rumours it's 70 million for Real or Barca, 90 million everybody else. There's only a couple of clubs could manage that. Funny, some fans were questioning why it was so low yesterday!

amkin25

Augmerson wrote: »

If Liverpool have to sell to "cut their losses" why would another team buy knowing his reputation? I guess everybody loves damaged goods?

Personally i think Barca or teams abroad won't care much about these antics,and they would buy him in a heartbeat but they will know this is leverage to get him cheaper,given he is playing in England.

In England the media will be impossible for Liverpool and Suarez,specially given his comments after he knocked them out,i just don't see them letting it go now that they have ammunition from this last bite.

Augmerson

Will I Amnt wrote: »

You asked "why leave" because Liverpool had Champions League football. All it takes is for Barca and Real to be interested.
They could even view him as a more attractive prospect if he doesn't have to piss off halfway across the world for international duty every so often.

But you accept that there isn't 31 clubs who could be in for Suarez right?

Arsenal met the release clause for Suarez before the start of last season and Suarez was gunning for a move. John Henry stood firm and said no.

Based on how he performed last season, do you think Henry was right? If your team had a player as good as Suarez despite his faults would you want to sell? Of course not, you'd cream yourself at the prospect.

Jesus Wept

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

A proper headbutt could actually yeah so I see what you mean.

These things need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis imo.

A headbutt like Pepe's on Muller should not have the same ban as a headbutt that breaks a players nose for example.

But even on that basis, Suarez should receive a 10-15 game ban in my opinion, which is a pity because I would've enjoyed watching Uruguay against Colombia with Suarez playing.

I'm not anti-Suarez and the witch-hunts that the English Media go on are embarrassing to themselves but what Suarez did tonight was indefensible. He deserves a lengthy ban and when you consider it's his third offence for the same thing he deserves even more.

I mean it boggles the mind what he did and why he did it. They were fully in the tie with a winnable Last 16 game on the horizon and he threw it all away over nothing. And it's not even like he was reacting to something that happened like Valencia going mad at Sterling in the England v Ecuador friendly because of the bad tackle on him. The bite came out of nowhere :eek:

The longest ban fifa have imposed for a world cup incident was 8 matches for an off the ball elbow that resulted in a broken nose and the victim losing a pint of blood.


This was a 4 match ban

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30rSHY9aFBI

'Leonardo played well in the first games but was then given a four-match suspension for elbowing the American midfielder Tab Ramos, resulting in a broken malar bone. The stricken Ramos had to stay in hospital for three and a half months afterwards. Leonardo's suspension prevented him from participating in the remainder of the competition. It was the second longest ban imposed in World Cup history, after Mauro Tassotti's eight-game suspension for breaking the nose of Luis Enrique at the same tournament'

RedemptionZ

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Sorry you are quite wrong there, it is not less dangerous. I'm putting on my medical hat here but I'll keep it brief. A human bite is potentially an incredible nasty source of infection. The human mouth is brimming with bacteria and nasty organisms, with Streptococci and Staphylococci being the most potent amongst them. The deeper the bite then the higher the risk of bacterial penetration, replication and infection. While HIV and Hepatitis C pose a very, very low risk, due to the medium of transmission (Salivia) and viral load being an issue. You will still receive the relevant medical treatment protocol. And that can be a very worrying/stressful time for a patient. Oh and just to be clear, there is no treatment for Hepatitis C. So while a headbutt might seem worse, I can assure you a human bite is potentially much worse and that's based on my professional experience.

I could be wrong here but I'm just thinking back to when I was a little nipper and I bit a few people/got bitten and it was pretty hard to actually do any damage. I mean admittedly when you're two or three you won't have the power of Suarez but I imagine it's hard to actually do any serious damage with a bite unless the guy is letting you sink your teeth in, which Chiellini was not. Again no medical expert here but is the chance of infection high?

Anyway he should be banned, but probably won't.

Will I Amnt

Augmerson wrote: »

But you accept that there isn't 31 clubs who could be in for Suarez right?

Arsenal met the release clause for Suarez before the start of last season and Suarez was gunning for a move. John Henry stood firm and said no.

Based on how he performed last season, do you think Henry was right? If your team had a player as good as Suarez despite his faults would you want to sell? Of course not, you'd cream yourself at the prospect.

Yes, I was being facetious, didn't mean for anyone to take it so literally. You made it sound like Liverpool were the only team that could offer him CL football.

Of course he was right. I've never said once that Liverpool should sell him. If Real or Barca come in for him he's as good as gone IMO. They always get their man and they have a lot more to offer than Liverpool in football, climate and location terms to name but a few reasons.

Augmerson

amkin25 wrote: »

Personally i think Barca or teams abroad won't care much about these antics,and they would buy him in a heartbeat but they will know this is leverage to get him cheaper,given he is playing in England.

In England the media will be impossible for Liverpool and Suarez,specially given his comments after he knocked them out,i just don't see them letting it go now that they have ammunition from this last bite.

The media had a field day over the Evra incident and rightly so. And more so after Ivanovic. Players don't really care about what is written in the media. 1 week your a king the next a villain. If they did they shouldn't be playing football in front of thousands every week. Suarez took a deserved stab at the English media and rightly so. The tabloids are a joke at best.

It's up to Liverpool to sell. They've played hardball before. Real can swing their Marca propaganda machine in to effect all they want. Liverpool under no obligation to sell.

Augmerson

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Yes, I was being facetious, didn't mean for anyone to take it so literally. You made it sound like Liverpool were the only team that could offer him CL football.

.

If you don't want to deal in plain English that's up to you. I prefer to get to the point and talk in straight forward terms. That way everbody is on the same page.

amkin25

Augmerson wrote: »

The media had a field day over the Evra incident and rightly so. And more so after Ivanovic. Players don't really care about what is written in the media. 1 week your a king the next a villain. If they did they shouldn't be playing football in front of thousands every week. Suarez took a deserved stab at the English media and rightly so. The tabloids are a joke at best.

It's up to Liverpool to sell. They've played hardball before. Real can swing their Marca propaganda machine in to effect all they want. Liverpool under no obligation to sell.

Personally i think the Evra thing was ridiculous,and cant blame suarez for still being upset about it,never would have held up in any court,was a basic he said she said scenario yet he was convicted but thats a whole other argument.

Agree Liverpool under no obligation off course since hes under contract,but there will be a price lower than the previous one that they might well accept given this whole episode in my opinion.

Will I Amnt

Augmerson wrote: »

If you don't want to deal in plain English that's up to you. I prefer to get to the point and talk in straight forward terms. That way everbody is on the same page.

Ok then, to answer your question, why leave Liverpool?
Because Barcelona or Real Madrid are an infinitely more attractive club to play for.

FatherTed

Fifa will give him a lengthy world wide ban because they are already under scrutiny over 2022 and this is a perfect opportunity to show the world how they have "changed". As much as I despise Suarez, I abhor Fifa more, so I think they will make him a scapegoat. I guess a 6 month worldwide ban.

Augmerson

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Ok then, to answer your question, why leave Liverpool?
Because Barcelona or Real Madrid are an infinitely more attractive club to play for.

Sure, any EPL player would leave for those clubs if they were good enough.

So let those clubs stump up the cash.

Arsenal made the right offer last season and Liverpool said no despite the release clause being activated. They can do it a second time if they like unless they receive an offer that they like.

If some people think that Suarez actions has diminished his worth, that's fine but I cannot see Liverpool accepting an offer lower than Suarez's true worth so Real or Madrid can try lowball all they want, won't happen.

Son Of A Vidic

RedemptionZ wrote: »

I could be wrong here but I'm just thinking back to when I was a little nipper and I bit a few people/got bitten and it was pretty hard to actually do any damage. I mean admittedly when you're two or three you won't have the power of Suarez but I imagine it's hard to actually do any serious damage with a bite unless the guy is letting you sink your teeth in, which Chiellini was not. Again no medical expert here but is the chance of infection high?

Yes you are mistaken, regardless of you being two or three years old, any break to cutaneous tissue is sufficient for bacteria transmission. But if the skin isn't broken, then it is much less likely to occur. Simple kids play fighting would be relatively harmless, but if kids are seriously going at it, then the risk of an infection will be there. Speaking of fighting, in my old workplace 30% of all hand injuries treated annually and follow up treatment, was due to lads fighting. The most common cause was some lad punching another guy in the mouth, going home and sleeping it off. Days later he's in the ER with a nasty hand injury/infection, because the teeth of his victim caused an laceration or an abrasion to the skin on his hand. So once the skin is broken and if left untreated, then infection will very likely occur.

Will I Amnt

Augmerson wrote: »

Sure, any EPL player would leave for those clubs if they were good enough.

So let those clubs stump up the cash.

Arsenal made the right offer last season and Liverpool said no despite the release clause being activated. They can do it a second time if they like unless they receive an offer that they like.

If some people think that Suarez actions has diminished his worth, that's fine but I cannot see Liverpool accepting an offer lower than Suarez's true worth so Real or Madrid can try lowball all they want, won't happen.

I never said anything of the sort. He got a new contract, you can guarantee there'll be no messing about in getting out of there this time around if he wants to.

Augmerson

FatherTed wrote: »

Fifa will give him a lengthy world wide ban because they are already under scrutiny over 2022 and this is a perfect opportunity to show the world how they have "changed". As much as I despise Suarez, I abhor Fifa more, so I think they will make him a scapegoat. I guess a 6 month worldwide ban.

Yes, FIFA banning Suarez from football will certainly pave over the deserved scrutiny and mistrust over the corruption involved in the 2022 Qatar World Cup bid and the still ongoing horrific treatment of workers in Qatar.

I have as much faith in FIFA doing the right thing these days as a baby can be trusted not to **** it's diaper.

Hazys

Damn this was a good bet...Suarez to bite somebody during the WC 175-to-1

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/06/luis-suarez-biting-prop-bet-norway

K-9

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Ok then, to answer your question, why leave Liverpool?
Because Barcelona or Real Madrid are an infinitely more attractive club to play for.

I don't think anybody would argue that. The problem for Suarez is he's now a less attractive option for them, 70 million is a lot for a risky character.

DARK-KNIGHT

K-9 wrote: »

I don't think anybody would argue that. The problem for Suarez is he's now a less attractive option for them, 70 million is a lot for a risky character.

i think suarez actions tonight has cost pool money