Personally I never defended Suarez for stamping or biting. Only on the diving issue because he dived far less than he was robbed of a penalty by a bad call. My whole issue is that Costa and Suarez are birds of a feather, they do the same things to push it to the limit and get defenders worked up, it's very much a South American football thing, see Simeone during his playing career, and Costa was pretty wild before he arrived at Atletico Madrid, Simeone helped Costa refine his wild side but he goes over the line from time to time. My issue is, Suarez was cast as a monster by certain people and the media and Costa is not. These people deluded themselves now when it comes to that very point. The same yard stick is not used on both players. There is a difference. Suarez liked to press his teeth into people, lets calla spade a spade, he didn't bite as in take a lump out of someone but that's how it was portrayed. Suarez did it out of whatever, frustration, childishness ect, Costa on the other hand sets out to do this. According to an article on BBC atm it's said he went to Terry and said he was going to start **** and asked Terry to have his back, using Fabergas as an interpreter to get the message across to Terry. He sets out to stamp and all the other **** he does. Again.. I did not defend Suarez when he did those sorts of things. But.. I laugh at the muppetry of many who absolutely banged on ad nausea about how snidey and cheaty Suarez was and do not hold Costa in the same regard when he is at least as bad if not a worse offender. I am talking those who are not supporters of Chelsea or Liverpool as both sets of those supporters would be inclined to be protective of their own club's player, I am talking about the other fans and the media and everyone else involved in football, even ****ing Cameron had a say for ****'s sake. And all of those who say the WC handball had nothing to do with their dislike of Suarez, are liars, as if they are a modicom of honesty themselves and many a pro said they would do the exact same thing in Suarez shoes in that game. Costa himself talks of the will to win at ANY cost but for Costa that seems ok, it seems his will to dive, play act, stamp, gob fling and attempt to bite are all just part of his will to win, but when Suarez did it, he was the devil. So, this contradictory garbage spouted by some is what irks me. I as a Liverpool fan have a right to bitch about Costa just as Chelsea fans bitched about Suarez. If my stance is ironic then so would be the stance of every Chelsea fan who defends Costa as I defended Suarez though as I said twice, I never defended him on the over the line stuff, the very things all and sundry are now defending Costa over. It seems more than a few need to look up what irony actually means
MFAO please log in to view this image I must have imagined the hours you spent trying to convince us all that his nibbles were nothing really and far less than a bad tackle and that his stamps werren't really stamps at all etc etc. ad infinitum. You're either completely deluded, have had some form of severe memory loss or you're just a lying ****. Answers on a postcard.
So you're comparing Costa to someone who sunk his teeth into TWO opponents. Not even close. Lying muppet.
Couple of things... 1) you do realise Costa has bitten (or attempted to) before right...? 2) Suarez did it three times! 3) Once a biter, always a biter Costa is every bit as much of a nasty ****er as Suarez. IMO, its not a bad thing for a team to have. I've already gone on record as saying I'd love Costa to be playing for us. Someone like that drives a team on, gets them going and encourages the team to fight for every challenge.
Show me where I compared the bites to anything Costa did. I compared players, their antics vary. Both dive both play act both try rile opponents and both go over the line, trying to differentiate the actual acts of going over the line is an attempt to portray one as worse than the other. Also re your nonsesne media type "sinking in teeth" crap, had Suarez sank those teeth into anything he's have taken a lump out of the opponent, yet not once did he actually break skin, and that shows a measure of control, do you at least understand that? Because if he had just lost it and savaged an opponent he's have left far more than a few indentations, Tyson on Hollyfield is an example of actual biting, what Suarez did is what kids do when they have a temper fit. He certainly as a set of choppers that could do a lot of damage if he so wished. This is pretty much similar to costa, he could have really injured Can, as well as Skrtel with his face clawing but he had a measure of control and didn't go that far, yes you all find Suarez nibbles worse than stamping and many of you lie and say you'd rather a punch in the face (epic lie) than a few indentations on the skin. They are still in the same category of going over the line regardless of which we find more repulsive. So you can say "muppet" all you wish but the contents of your PMs in my inbox show who the real muppet is, maybe I could put them in my sig, you snivelling little bitch. Also you obviously ain't got the cognitive ability to understand the rest of my post you replied to and so, like any average brainless twat you jump on one tiny piece, twisted it and then replied to your own twisted version.
when did I ever defend saurez stamping or biting, answers on a post card and no, typing a few paragraphs takes about 3 or 4 minutes at 60 words a minute. Hours? Maybe work on your typing skills back up your comments, and like blueman, you don't even have the wherewithall to understand my post let alone refute it, he posts one like talking ****e and you talk drivel and post a picture, your usual retort. Why would anyone defend stamping or biting or headbutts ect? Worse still, bluemuppet tried to say Costa didn;t mean it. Talk about delusional. Costa does a lot of stuff that is just part of his game, that's fair enough, but like Suarez he goes overboard because he has anger issues, even a blind cat could see that. It's also a fact he was worse for that **** when he first joined Atletico. You don;t like facts, you like to take what someone says, and twist it and reply to your twisted shorthand version because you just can't be arsed to actually discuss it, unless it's market rates, you spent several days on that one, several days trying to twist and turn to explain how one offer set the market rate, and on several boards too and everywhere you tried it you were told you were talking ****e
Try here; http://www.not606.com/threads/reither-stamps-on-januzajs-leg.235773/#post-5567414 and here; http://www.not606.com/threads/kevin-mirallis.238451/#post-5667569 and here; http://www.not606.com/threads/kevin-mirallis.238451/page-2#post-5667675 and here; http://www.not606.com/threads/the-o...so-get-commenting.267014/page-23#post-6670511 and here; http://www.not606.com/threads/the-o...so-get-commenting.267014/page-72#post-6674703 and here; http://www.not606.com/threads/the-o...so-get-commenting.267014/page-66#post-6673728 and here; http://www.not606.com/threads/suarez.207428/page-36#post-4622307 and here; http://www.not606.com/threads/suarez.207428/page-23#post-4619750 You're Welcome
Currently I am trying to sort out variane calculations in java, I will have a look to be fair like. I did look at the first and I said Suarez bite was not dangerous, I never defended it, it wasn't dangerous. That's my opinion not a defense. So scratch that first one off mate, unless you don't understand a difference between an opinion on the matter and defending it, I'll come back after I read the others and if I am wrong I'll sure eat some humble pie. You actually went through the site looking for my old posts #timeonyourhands
I looked at the second and it is also an opinion on the bite, not a defense, are the rest like this, none of it is defending the bite and are actually my opinions that the bite was, as I stated today, childish stupid but not dangerous or evil. FFS like, are you thick?
Let me explain Tobes, defending Suarez would be saying he was right to bite or had a good reson, my opinion that the bite was nothing but childish stupidity is not defending it or Suarez. I'll wait till I read the others before stating that you don't even have a grasp of the meaning of simple english words. I did think that when I said I never defended it, that you'd not be sad enough to go trolling through the site for old posts. Boy was I wrong
If you don't think it was the most horrific and unprecedented incident to ever take place on a football pitch, and you don't think the ban should be completely disproportionate to any previous bans imposed on footballers, and you don't think it is honestly a major social issue requiring comment from all levels of government up to and including the prime minister himself, then you are defending it.
Quotes added above As I stated I never defended the biting or stamping ever. IMO the bites were nothing, they caused no damage and that's my opinion, I never defended him doing it and there is no attempted mitigation on my part blaming opponents for him choosing to bite. Almost all of it is from sheer amazement at the reaction and of course, a lot of posts without any context of the discussion they were part of. You must be a **** manager mate, you are an idiot Seriously, in plain English, without your point scoring banter nonsense. Are you ****ing thick? Now unless you have any other imaginary defences of the bites? I have a lot of coding to be doing
Tobes actualy doesn't get it though, he sees the words but the meaning is lost on him. I mean, seriously without banter, is he "lacking" in some way? He is confusing my opinions on the bite and the media furore with defending Suarez stupid childish actions.
I guess the years of being in a brawl or two makes me look at the reaction to Suarez nibble and laugh at all the girly ****wits out there, for anyone of ye to have the same opinion on it as David Cameron shows what ****ing lightweight pussies you are #rowdynerd
