Suarez Ban

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Sapphire

Sapphire

Well-Known Member
Jul 24, 2011
2,365
179
63
Out of town
I see the Liverpool contingent are whingeing that 10 matches is too long for the biting incident. I reckon Suarez should be lucky if he doesn't finish up in gaol for a sentence of common assault!

How do people justify their hypocrical attitudes when only the disadvantage of how it affects them personally is their main reason for disagreement with a sensible decision? They would have been better off to keep their mouths shut and take any form of medicine dished out!

Its a bit like the crap dished out by some folk over blatant tax avoidance!!

Sorry guys i Didn't spot the typo earlier!
 
To be fair Sapphire, I wouldn't have thought that Brendan Rodgers would put him in goal, common assault or not, he's far too short!
 
Lost all liking for Liverpool over this. Their response to the Evra incident was, I thought,
very poor...now this. The Liverpool Official (Chief Exec ?) interviewed a few days ago
could only talk about his importance to the team. I reckon that if it was a player with
a lower league club he'd be out through the door by now. There is so much to dislike
about the Premier League!<grr>
 
It's 10 games just because it's "Luis Suarez", someone else would probably get a slap on the wrist or something, and he's also not a racist
 
Sapphire said:
I see the Liverpool contingent are whingeing that 10 matches is too long for the biting incident. I reckon Suarez should be lucky if he doesn't finish up in goal for a sentence of common assault!

How do people justify their hypocrical attitudes when only the disadvantage of how it affects them personally is their main reason for disagreement with a sensible decision? They would have been better off to keep their mouths shut and take any form of medicine dished out!

Its a bit like the crap dished out by some folk over blatant tax avoidance!!
Click to expand...


Goal?? Or Gaol

If he was in the lower leagues he would crap, but he's not that's why Liverpool are sticking with him like Man U did with Cantona.

This is the difference with comparing players with players we are normally seeing. Yes Suarez is a nutter, yes what he did was unbelievable but at the end of the day he is worth a fortune to them so they have a few choices.

1- let him serve his 10 match ban come back and score a shed load of goals for them.
2- Put him on the transfer list and watch his valuation tumble from probably 25 million to not even half that.

Your choice? No brainer to me.
 
10 games is too long. the fa banned him for 8 games for racial comments.

the fa have made a very bad decision to come to this conclusion. the fa are basically saying there is a bigger punishment in biting than racist comments. but they didnt even ban defoe for a single game for biting. shocking.

sorry but racist comments is a worse crime than biting someone.

10 games is too much when comparing to other bans for other people and crimes.
 
Captain Jack Sparrow said:
10 games is too long. the fa banned him for 8 games for racial comments.

sorry but racist comments is a worse crime than biting someone.

10 games is too much when comparing to other bans for other people and crimes.
Click to expand...

You're right of course cjs, but I think this is a cumulative punishment. Had this been his first offence he might have
been given a lesser sentence. But after the Evra incident the FA may have thought that this guy isn't taking any
notice, so this time he might. Just my take on it.
 
I have to say that I agree with the reservations expressed above, but do not entirely agree with the way things should be dealt with.
The biting incident has been shown world-wide as an extremely unpleasant example to every person who loves football or simply watches the news broadcasts. It's an example of entirely unjustifiable behaviour which most of us disuade our tiny children from doing.
In my view he will be lucky if he is not legally charged over this.

The racist issue is not always such a visual offence. We are always pretty much unaware of precisely what has been said or done. However, I do feel that we should not set our standards of penalty for all misdemeanors by the ones for racism which have been handed down in the past. In my view the Suarez incident has exposed the failures of the FA's internal justice system in that it has been negligent in its levelling of suitable justice for the racist acts.

The racist penalties were far too light IMO. If the racist offence can be proven unequivocally then the offenders should receive more stringent penalties. Hit them where it hurts in their pockets and their egos!

These footballers are paid extraordinary sums of money to perform on a worldwide televised stage. Whether we or they like it or not they are examples for all young people across the world. The uniqueness of their position means that they carry an extra responsibility to respect that trust and behave accordingly.
 
My youngest was bitten by another toddler at nursery last week (true!) and the perpetrator didn't even receive a ban from the nursery!

I was outraged and am now seeking redress through the courts, both civil and criminal. Hopefully, the offending baby will receive a lengthy custodial sentence and I will receive at least £2 million in compensation for the pain and distress caused to my son.

Bloody biting babies - summary execution's to good for them!
 
Bluebaldee said:
My youngest was bitten by another toddler at nursery last week (true!) ....................
Click to expand...

They say that children copy what they see on TV....here's proof indeed.
Whatever were the parents doing letting their child stay up late to watch MoD?!:smiley:
 
Agree with the racist comparison CJ

The FA needs to have a more robust system in place as the number of matches a player is banned for is rather than being based on any reason or system is arbitrary.

Suarez deserves to be banned but how many matches appears to be led by the press not by logic or reason

If I was an Everton fan they would probably suggest a 20 match ban

What a farcical way of dealing with an important issue.

COR
You must log in or register to see images
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back