Does it ****. He was already on £200k a week at Liverpool had he stayed, and is on exactly the same at Barca, with a clause in his contract that he could be fined up to £3m if he gets another long ban. Possibly the only player in history to move to a club twice as rich as his old one and not get a wage increase. And his £60m transfer fee was a hell of a lot less than it would have been had he not bitten anyone. You've spent the last four years trying to convince everyone how Suarez is much better than Bale, so how can he have cost around 30% less, and be on wages that are 30% less than Bale if his behaviour has somehow 'benefitted' him?
Completely agree with you there. But as Tobes says, there's a big difference between expecting players not to ever do anything wrong, and expecting them to take responsibility and change their behaviour when they do. Even laboratory rats (no pun intended ) manage to learn from their mistakes.
I get that but in the end many Liverpool fans were not happy because of how it would go down on the forum and how fans of other clubs would react, as if us Liverpool fans have a vested interest in the integrity of the players. Who cares right? I'd happily have kept him no matter what other fans thought of him beause he wa great to watch.
I agree there I didn't care what other fans thought, as if it was their player a majority of them would all of a sudden have a different opinion.
Nope. Suarez didn't cash in on being a dick, he's world class footballer who's flaw is that he's a dick So his flaw isn't the reason for his success, it's the fact that his talent outweigh his downside that has seen him succeed inspite of his idiocy. It's probably a sad indictment on the footballing world, but it's a fact nonetheless.
That's what it boils down to.. tribalism. Your brother can be a right ****, but he's your brother, you can slate him but if anyone else does... This football nonsense is just an extention of that. This "Suarez is worse than Giggs" is just that, but on a moral scale, Giggs is far worse. Imagine what mancs would have been bleating about Gerrard if he was the one doing his brother's wife for 8 years. Those that are offended on behalf of their fellow supporters and the club make me laugh. Most of em don't go to games and don't buy PPV but they talk about all of this garbage like they own 51% of the shares of the club .
What else can you say except, none of this bullshit matters and its even more worthless discussing it and even more worthless again actually caring. Bullshit world (tm) Even Tyson has cashed in on his biting a lump out of yer man's ear, albeit after his boxing career was over, his only currency after boxing ended for him was his bad boy image. He's done well enough out of it too. Suarez did ads that were based on the diving media furore, making money from all that negative press, he earns $$$ whilst the unwashed masses all rant and rave, which goes to show that Suarez' reality is completely different from the reality the myriad of football supports' reality. This is why you had all and sundry claiming this was only bad news for Suarez via their false morals that do not apply to the real world in any way.
I expect nothing from them nor do I feel owed anything by them, except to turn up and entertain me with a football show. I couldn't give two ****s what else they do once they leave the pitch.
"Expecting players to change their behaviour" This coming from people who don't follow that example they are setting down for others, how many of you moral compasses do things you should not and keep doing them Again the loss of touch with reality, public spotlight and bad behaviour have been going hand in hand for ever. Where do you guys live, under a rock?
You still don't get it do you? One was football related, the other wasn't. It was only you clowns that kept trotting out the comparison, as if it somehow justified your crazed, unswerving and quite frankly embarrassing support of a flawed genius. Suarez brought shame on your club and the game in general by his actions - ON THE PITCH. What Giggs did with his brothers wife was between him and his conscience, nothing to do with the game at all.
Which is fair enough, the only thing that pissed me off with Suarez doing his thing is that he got banned and therefor I couldn't watch him nutmeg players week in week out
Sorry but you are again clutching desperately at anything to differentiate the two. If IF, you apply morals and speak morally on a subject, on the pitch and off the pitch is the recourse of someone not willing to accept the reality, that they are talking bollocks. You cannot morally condemn Suarez and say oh well what someone else did was not on the pitch so it's not as bad. If you do, you are just deluding yourself and trying to justify your illogical hatred of a guy you don't even know. The brain is funny like that, but recognising it is a step towards preventing such mental tom foolery.
Absolute nonsense. I go and pay good money to watch a game of football. I see that game ruined by a diving snide who feigns injury, wins bogus decisions by cheating, tries (and sometimes succeeds) to get players sent off, racially abuses a player, and bites a few for good measure. I find this somewhat detracts from my enjoyment of the game and in fact I feel that it has a broader effect on the image of the game in general, and I don't like it. Compared to watching a footballer who wasn't known for anything other than being a long serving quality pro for his entire career, who shagged his brothers wife. How does that impact on the actual game? Answer it doesn't. So you can stick your cod psychology up yer deluded hoop mate.
I get this. The only thing that would have pissed me off about Suarez's behaviour, were I a Liverpool fan, is that his actions kept lead to him being banned, and therefore robbing our team of his world class talent. It was such a Knob thing to do, the bite I mean. The race thing, well, we as the public wouldn't have even known what was said between the players if the media hadn't blown it up, same with Terry and Anton. Were I the FA, I would have ordered everyone to STFU and deal with it internally.
I guess to give an example. Tobes you have tagged Suarez with plenty of labels, Snide, nasty sneaky and cheat and so on, and this somehow made him a worse snide cheat than GIggs because Giggs kept his epicly worse snidey cheatness off of the pitch. But the truth is character is character, a man is what he is whether he is on the pitch or not. Ergo Suarez is probably ultra competitive outside of football and has a childish streak to boot. By that same sound logic Giggs is a sly untrustworthy egomaniac no matter where he is. As for Rooney, I actually have no real issue with anything he has ever done because he's never actually done anything that bad at all. I consider Suarez same. I'll say this, the pinnacle of delusion has been the deeming of what suarez did with his nibbles as worse than an elbow or a punch, that has to be the prime example of the stupidity of fans and the ultimate example of self imposed delusion
In response to your last part, I would much rather be punched than bitten. But I wasnt punched OR bitten so..........infact when he bit Ivanovic, I was sat in my mates garden watching the game on a big TV drinking beer, and it almost made me spill my beer when I leaned forward to see what the **** had happened, thats the sum of the affect that bite had on me, or my moral values.
I guess I am one of those crazy drunk Irish expats who judges people on their actions regardless of where they carry out those actions.
No, one is football related, the other isn't. Is it really that complicated? Loving the shift in tact at the end btw, after realising your argument has more holes than a Swiss cheese, you've now decided to shift the debate onto -which is worse, biting or a punch? The last stand of the deluded kopite defence of the indefenisble. You're turning this into Groundhog day, so I'm out.
I am talking the evident outcome Bo, you can generalise it and say bitten, Yes given the choice of a proper bite or a punch I'd take hte punch for blood test reasons, but Suarez has never bitten anyone like that. Would I rather get what Ivanovic got or an elbow or punch to the face, I'd take the Ivanovic nibble all day, any claim to the opposite is self delusion. I'd take a punch over a Tyson bite for sure, but Suarez has never done anythng like that.
No mate, you constantly generalised as to Suarez character, not on the pitch you called him a horrible human being or soemthing to that effect. You are contradicting yourself. You judged him as a human being not a footballer. Now you are trying to subdivide it into a conventiently compartmentalised argument so you can fit it together with your entirely relative logic depending on which way the wind is blowing
