How long will Suarez's ban be? Mod warning in OP and post#455

Liam O

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

Whether he was retiring or not shouldn't matter. Why suspend him at all then?

I'm not familiar with the rest of Suarez' transgressions, perhaps you could bring me up to speed on them. All i know is the 3 bites and they are not nearly as bad as what Zidane has done throughout his career. A bit more mental, yes. But as bad, no.

Ah right so you didn't hear about the racism and going out to do a player that has been shown here in the last few days multiple times. Zidane? Get it together, seriously.

DARK-KNIGHT

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/world-news/man-killed-after-attacker-rips-3777324

cannibals everywhere

niallo27

1 match

Godge wrote: »

I didn't bring up Cantona, Aids or sexual assault but if diversion works for you, go ahead.




Can you point me to the relevant exceptions in employment legislation? Where does the law differentiate between football employments and other employments?

In normal employment employees aren't worth 70 million quid.

Zico

1 match

K-9 wrote: »

Threads ridiculous, aids and sexual assault but don't bring up Cantona!

We're talking about an adult who bites people of course it's ridiculous.

In normal society a discussion about something like this starts and ends with "there's no excuse for that, take your punishment". You don't need to refer to every past act of stupidity and madness for comparison.

Vanolder

3 matches

Cheillini calls the ban drastic and unfair. Argument over. Lock the thread.

pqdvdplayer

6 month global ban

Vanolder wrote: »

Cheillini calls the ban drastic and unfair. Argument over. Lock the thread.

Cheillini also bit somebody in 2009.. look it up. I'm shocked that most people don't know about this incident.

Edit: He didn't actually

egghead.

niallo27 wrote: »

In normal employment employees aren't worth 70 million quid.

So all morals and ethics Should go out the window because it's win at all costs and a player is worth 70 million?

Godge

K-9 wrote: »

It was obviously a general comment, yet you didn't bother address the actual relevant points I made, and accuse me of diversion. Hmmmmmmm.......

Cantona, Aids and sexual assault are irrelevant to this discussion. We are in agreement then.

Now you can address the points I have raised.

niallo27 wrote: »

In normal employment employees aren't worth 70 million quid.

Oh yes, I forgot, the law does not apply to rich people.

niallo27

1 match

egghead. wrote: »

So all morals and ethics Should go out the window because it's win at all costs and a player is worth 70 million?

Yes that's generally the feeling across most football clubs would you not agree. I mean if liverpool cancel Suarez's contract and come 7th next year do you think it will be acceptable because it's the right thing to do.

niallo27

1 match

Godge wrote: »

Cantona, Aids and sexual assault are irrelevant to this discussion. We are in agreement then.

Now you can address the points I have raised.




Oh yes, I forgot, the law does not apply to rich people.

Cantona broke the law so if your going down that line and morally utd should have sold him.

ArielAtom

18 month global ban

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/columnists/donal-og-cusack/donal-og-cusack-suarez-is-just-another-crazy-mixed-up-kid-not-a-bad-person-273535.html

Excellent article on Suarez.

Smithwicks Man

6 month global ban

The content in this thread is an embarrassment to Boards

smileyj1987

4 matches

egghead. wrote: »

So all morals and ethics Should go out the window because it's win at all costs and a player is worth 70 million?

So cantona can assault a fan serve a ban and can be kept by man utd ?

Football has no morals and no ethics . If it did people wouldn't be getting paid excessive amounts of money to play it and also the fact that players can be sold for ridiculous sums of money .

Plus factor in all the cheating of the players in the game too . Diving and simulation . Waving imaginary cards at referees . The game had changed big time in the last 20 years .

K-9

Godge wrote: »

Cantona, Aids and sexual assault are irrelevant to this discussion. We are in agreement then.

Now you can address the points I have raised.




Oh yes, I forgot, the law does not apply to rich people.

I did address them, you just ignored them and went on a tangent. The club obviously did work with him, his on field antics have dropped dramatically. This occurred after a month away. The club treated it very seriously the last time, no doubt will again if he stays.

egghead.

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes that's generally the feeling across most football clubs would you not agree. I mean if liverpool cancel Suarez's contract and come 7th next year do you think it will be acceptable because it's the right thing to do.

So we should just let footballers do whatever they like on the pitch, because it's win at all costs.

Who cares about injuring players etc.

You're been so ridiculous can you not see this?

Zico

1 match

niallo27 wrote: »

Cantona broke the law so if your going down that line and morally utd should have sold him.

You have point there but do you think Man Utd would have kept him if he Kung-fu kicked a fan for a second or even a third time?

niallo27

1 match

egghead. wrote: »

So we should just let footballers do whatever they like on the pitch, because it's win at all costs.

Who cares about injuring players etc.

You're been so ridiculous can you not see this?

I never said that. I was replying to the post saying Liverpool should cancel his contract because of what he did. He deserves his ban of course he does.

niallo27

1 match

Zico wrote: »

You have point there but do you think Man Utd would have kept him if he Kung-fu kicked a fan for a second or even a third time?

I don't know. For me what cantona did was a lot worse than a single bite but the 3 bites is of course a lot more crazy. I just think he is too valuable to the club for them to take the moral high ground.

K-9

Cattermole, Barton etc. Would be fecked if we went all Health and Safety mad.

Zico

1 match

K-9 wrote: »

Cattermole, Barton etc. Would be fecked if we went all Health and Safety mad.

Joey Barton is more of a danger to his own health than anyone else to be fair.:)

He got a 12 match ban for tarnishing the image of the game didn't he?

DARK-KNIGHT

niallo27 wrote: »

Cantona broke the law so if your going down that line and morally utd should have sold him.

the discussion is about suarez why are you dragging only united players in here?

Dcully

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

the discussion is about suarez why are you dragging only united players in here?

Thats rich coming from you considering your history of having a go at everything Liverpool
up the lillies lol :P

smileyj1987

4 matches

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

the discussion is about suarez why are you dragging only united players in here?

Well it's easy to drag in the cantona incident . When has a player ever assaulted a fan ? If he did that on the street he would be up in court for assault .

Godge

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes that's generally the feeling across most football clubs would you not agree. I mean if liverpool cancel Suarez's contract and come 7th next year do you think it will be acceptable because it's the right thing to do.

Nobody said his contract should be cancelled. What I said, and I was very clear on this, is that Liverpool have a responsibility to ensure that Suarez has dealt with his mental health issues (be they as simple as anger management or more complicated like psychosis, which is for a professional to assess) before he is let on the field again.

That is Liverpool's responsibility as an employer. I am also sure that it is part of the You'll never walk alone philosophy.

niallo27 wrote: »

Cantona broke the law so if your going down that line and morally utd should have sold him.

Never said that Suarez should be sold. This is really interesting test of what type of club Liverpool are. I am very interested in what happens.

niallo27 wrote: »

I never said that. I was replying to the post saying Liverpool should cancel his contract because of what he did. He deserves his ban of course he does.

This is the post you were replying to:

egghead. wrote: »

So all morals and ethics Should go out the window because it's win at all costs and a player is worth 70 million?

Where does it say Liverpool should cancel his contract?

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't know. For me what cantona did was a lot worse than a single bite but the 3 bites is of course a lot more crazy. I just think he is too valuable to the club for them to take the moral high ground.

We are agreed that what Cantona did was worse but was his first offence. We can also agree that because it is Suarez' third offence, he got off easy because Cantona got a longer ban.

A Primal Nut

The punishment makes no sense. When he got banned in 2013 for an act while playing for Liverpool; he missed a load of Liverpool games but still played for Uruguay in the Confederations Cup while he was banned for Liverpool.

Now he gets banned for an act while playing for Uruguay. He will likely miss one competitive game for Uruguay; and a load of games for Liverpool.

He should have been banned for two years international or something like that, so he also misses a Copa America for example. Right now Uruguay get off almost completely; apart from the ban for the next game but that's the same punishment as if he had got two yellow cards; or a typical red card if they also get to the quarters; which is very light.

There is no precedent for what happened where he also misses games for his club and I'd like to see if FIFA apply these rules consistently in future - very unlikely.

Don't feel sorry for Suarez himself but definitely feel sorry for Liverpool.

DARK-KNIGHT

Dcully wrote: »

Thats rich coming from you considering your history of having a go at everything Liverpool
up the lillies lol :P

i was only saying how much i liked suarez since he changed attitude great player but a nasty individual biting people

DM_7

smileyj1987 wrote: »

Well it's easy to drag in the cantona incident . When has a player ever assaulted a fan ? If he did that on the street he would be up in court for assault .

He was in court for Assault and got a two week prison sentence that ended up as community service.

DM_7

A Primal Nut wrote: »

The punishment makes no sense. When he got banned in 2013 for an act while playing for Liverpool; he missed a load of Liverpool games but still played for Uruguay in the Confederations Cup while he was banned.

Now he gets banned for an act while playing for Uruguay. He will likely miss one competitive game for Uruguay; and a load of games for Liverpool.

He should have been banned for two years international or something like that, so he also misses a Copa America for example. Right now Uruguay get off almost completely; apart from the ban for the next game but that's the same punishment as if he had got two yellow cards; or a typical red card if they also get to the quarters; which is very light.

There is no precedent for what happened where he also misses games for his club and I'd like to see if FIFA apply these rules consistently in future - very unlikely.

Don't feel sorry for Suarez himself but definitely feel sorry for Liverpool.

His ban includes a 9 game competitive ban for Uruguay

Will I Amnt

8 matches

You would swear Cantona got off scot free the way some people go on.
People do remember his ban right?

smileyj1987

4 matches

DM-ICE wrote: »

He was in court for Assault and got a two week prison sentence that ended up as community service.

He should have been jailed for a few years for that . I would let anyone take a bite at me over getting a Kung fu style kick .

Godge

A Primal Nut wrote: »

The punishment makes no sense. When he got banned in 2013 for an act while playing for Liverpool; he missed a load of Liverpool games but still played for Uruguay in the Confederations Cup while he was banned for Liverpool.

Now he gets banned for an act while playing for Uruguay. He will likely miss one competitive game for Uruguay; and a load of games for Liverpool.

He should have been banned for two years international or something like that, so he also misses a Copa America for example. Right now Uruguay get off almost completely; apart from the ban for the next game but that's the same punishment as if he had got two yellow cards; or a typical red card if they also get to the quarters; which is very light.

There is no precedent for what happened where he also misses games for his club and I'd like to see if FIFA apply these rules consistently in future - very unlikely.

Don't feel sorry for Suarez himself but definitely feel sorry for Liverpool.

You obviously didn't read the ban. He is banned for nine competitive international matches.

Assume Uruguay lose to Colombia, that is one match.

If Uruguay go out at group stage in 2015 Copa America, that is three matches.

There is a 2016 Copa involving North American teams, that would be another three matches if Uruguay go out early.

That would mean he could miss two matches of World Cup qualification for 2018 and could mean he doesn't play for Uruguay until October 2016.

K-9

Tbh, Lfc would have handled this much better. They got praised widely for their handling of him since the whole saga last Summer. He's always going to be contoversial, its about curtailing that and bringing out the good side of his obsessive need to win.

DM_7

smileyj1987 wrote: »

He should have been jailed for a few years for that . I would let anyone take a bite at me over getting a Kung fu style kick .

Two+ years in Jail? hardly. Cantona was lucky not to go to prison for two weeks but when it comes to criminal charges it wasn't that serious.

In football he was lucky it wasn't longer ban that would have made him too old to return from.

It has no real relevance to Suarez and his third biting incident anyway.

Will I Amnt

8 matches

smileyj1987 wrote: »

He should have been jailed for a few years for that . I would let anyone take a bite at me over getting a Kung fu style kick .

Do you know much about sentencing?
A few years for a kick in the chest?

Would you let someone take a bite out of your nose before a Kung Fu kick or is it just a specific bite you're talking about?

Liam O

smileyj1987 wrote: »

He should have been jailed for a few years for that . I would let anyone take a bite at me over getting a Kung fu style kick .

How's your knowledge of assault law? Is it based around what you think should happen on a case by case basis i.e. if it's Cantona or not? I'd more likely bring someone to court for an unprovoked bite than him going for me after abusing him. You'd be different presumably?

feargale

Sandraevra wrote: »

He should be ok if he's muzzled 3times.?

Sorry! Computer glitch.

smileyj1987

4 matches

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Do you know much about sentencing?
A few years for a kick in the chest?

Would you let someone take a bite out of your nose before a Kung Fu kick or is it just a specific bite you're talking about?

Yeah cantona should have had the book thrown at him for that . Plenty of players get abused on a weekly basis and walk away .
Yeah I would rather someone bite me . The wounds will heal after time . Since you brought getting bit in the face into then a king fu kick to the face could end up with a broken jaw , factued skull or if the blow was hard enough death .
So yeah I would take being bitten any day of the week .

smileyj1987

4 matches

Liam O wrote: »

How's your knowledge of assault law? Is it based around what you think should happen on a case by case basis i.e. if it's Cantona or not? I'd more likely bring someone to court for an unprovoked bite than him going for me after abusing him. You'd be different presumably?

Did cantona recieve abuse yes he did . How many players put up with abuse on a weekly basis ?
If you are getting abuse it's easier to turn around and walk away then it is opening up a can of worms on yourself by throwing a punch or the likes .

K-9

Suarez did get a match ban for putting the finger up at a fan.

Too Tough To Die

Over 10 matches

Liam O wrote: »

Ah right so you didn't hear about the racism and going out to do a player that has been shown here in the last few days multiple times. Zidane? Get it together, seriously.

Eh, talking about physical transgressions here mate, not one man's word against another man's word.

Zidane what?

DM_7

smileyj1987 wrote: »

Yeah cantona should have had the book thrown at him for that . Plenty of players get abused on a weekly basis and walk away .
Yeah I would rather someone bite me . The wounds will heal after time . Since you brought getting bit in the face into then a king fu kick to the face could end up with a broken jaw , factued skull or if the blow was hard enough death .
So yeah I would take being bitten any day of the week .

smileyj1987 wrote: »

Did cantona recieve abuse yes he did . How many players put up with abuse on a weekly basis ?
If you are getting abuse it's easier to turn around and walk away then it is opening up a can of worms on yourself by throwing a punch or the likes .

So you don't know much about sentencing or the judicial law system (parts of the questions you didn't answer in the above).

If Cantona did more damage then he would have been punished a lot more and first offence of its type got him leniency.


If he bit a chunk of someone's ear off like Tyson then he would be in much more trouble. He didn't do any damage but as its the third time taking a bite at someone the punishment had to be more than the last couple of times etc.

I agree that any suggestions that Liverpool need to make sure he doesn't play again until he is "cured", is nonsense. I completely disagree with the idea that a footballer who on three separate occasions has decided to bite another footballer should not be punished for those actions both internationally and domestically. I did have sympathy for Liverpool initially, then I remembered they bought him while he was banned for a bite and kept him after the second incident so its hard to have that much sympathy, especially when he will probably miss less league games than he did for the last bite.

niallo27

1 match

Cantona was bonkers and utd loved him. Suarez is probably more bonkers and we love him. It's simple enough.

DM_7

niallo27 wrote: »

Cantona was bonkers and utd loved him. Suarez is probably more bonkers and we love him. It's simple enough.

What has that got to do with his ban and biting people though?

Being a fan of a player shouldn't stop a person ignoring reason while deciding if something is fair or not, its not like a debatable penalty decision, he bit someone, again!

Cantona Kung FU kicked someone the facts are pretty clear in both cases even if they are not that relevant to one another and almost 20 years apart.

DARK-KNIGHT

niallo27 wrote: »

Cantona was bonkers and utd loved him. Suarez is probably more bonkers and we love him. It's simple enough.

but suarez wants a move away so he cares not for the fanbase

niallo27

1 match

DM-ICE wrote: »

What has that got to do with his ban and biting people though?

Being a fan of a player shouldn't stop a person ignoring reason while deciding if something is fair or not, its not like a debatable penalty decision, he bit someone, again!

Cantona Kung FU kicked someone the facts are pretty clear in both cases even if they are not that relevant to one another and almost 20 years apart.

I think the ban is fair. He deserved the 4 months after I calmed down and thought about it. I'm more defending him on the part that people think liverpool should get rid of him. He is too good for that and any player that's gives everything when he is on the field will always get my support. Give me a player like Suarez any day with a streak of madness instead of a player who is happy to go through the motions.

cournioni

niallo27 wrote: »

Cantona was bonkers and utd loved him. Suarez is probably more bonkers and we love him. It's simple enough.

United loved him enough to enforce a ban of their own on him. What have Liverpool done about Suarez thus far apart from wearing t-shirts supporting him after racially abusing a player?

niallo27

1 match

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

but suarez wants a move away so he cares not for the fanbase

Did he tell you this.

niallo27

1 match

cournioni wrote: »

United loved him enough to enforce a ban of their own on him. What have Liverpool done about Suarez thus far apart from wearing t-shirts supporting him after racially abusing a player?

Gave him all their support they could and made him the best striker in the premier league.

cournioni

niallo27 wrote: »

Gave him all their support they could and made him the best striker in the premier league.

United banned Cantona until the end of the season. When he returned, he was the catalyst in making United double winners by scoring vital consecutive winning goals.

Maybe you should ban Suarez and you might win something.

DARK-KNIGHT

niallo27 wrote: »

Did he tell you this.

you know he wants the move away to win stuff. you cant seriously say he doesnt