Suarez bites player in Holland. Suarez abuses Evra. Suarez admits diving. Suarez bites again. Suarez commits horrendous tackles like these....http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=97C7oA1Sy50 but according to the red scouse he's the victim of an FA vendetta
Who mentioned blindly defending Suarez then? I could have sworn the article was about an FA vendetta. Your **** team been relegated yet?
Not quite. Shouldn't be too long. Will be nice to get back to some real football and away from petty keyboard warriors. Chelsea fans insist Terry does no wrong, Liverpool do the same for Suarez. Suarez gets an arbitrary ban so the "red scouse" will claim he's being singled out, just as you would if Terry was given an arbitrary ban of ten games for something else.
I know I've always thought you were stupid but you don't have to keep proving me right. What the **** does supporting a player have to do with claiming the FA have a vendetta against you. @Drogs....me either but that doesn't fit WatfordRsoles agenda.
The only agenda here is yours. You know what I mean when I say that some Chelsea (Liverpool) fans feel Terry (Suarez) can do no wrong. There are people who will always find someone else to blame, be it Ferdinand (Evra), the FA or anything else. There will always be fans who feel their club is victimised in any situation. People on your board genuinely believe the referee last week refused to let Chelsea win the game. I see that Rodgers felt Suarez was punished too harshly. That's a valid opinion even if you don't agree with it. I don't either. The title of some articles describe Rodgers as claiming Suarez as a "victim of inconsistency", though that wasn't the phrase he was actually quoted as using in the article I read, so it's quite possible the word 'victim' was used to provoke a reaction from people like yourself and you've run with it, quite possibly again to provoke more reaction. Even if Suarez did deserve 10 games (or indeed more), it's a valid gripe that punishments are inconsistent. Nothing I've seen from Liverpool FC or its fans differs much from the stuff that comes out of any big club when their player is penalised. People always find a precedent that was treated more leniently and bleat about it- that's not abnormal.
You're right, every club has fans who do defend their player even if in the wrong, however it depends on the situation. Example would be the Terry racism saga, Terry had an excuse which whilst some thought it was bullshit, it was still possible. Of course Chelsea fans are going to believe Terry. This Suarez incident on the other hand is simply inexcusable, there's footage of him biting, Suarez has admitted he was in the wrong and there are STILL some (I have to highlight I do mean some as the majority have accepted it) Liverpool fans still defending him, which is the laughable part and imo why CPofL has made this article.
It's been said before but needs to be said again: far worse than what Suarez did (a kiddy-like reaction involving a hard suck rather than a bite (see police report) cos he couldn't get his own way), is the tsunami of hypocritical horror from people who claim that biting and spitting is as evil as pederasty while other forms of cheating regularly carried out by pro footballers, a lot of which is potentially hazardous to other players' health and most of which drags the game ever more into disrepute, is somehow "part of the game". Suarez is a nasty piece of work, just like a high percentage of the players he plays with and against each week, but to jump on the bandwagon and demonise him is sanctimonious poppycock, reeking of a witchhunt.
I'll beg to differ on why he's made the article. Personally I think he's just a bit of a pedantic ****. Fair enough if you know anyone who genuinely doesn't think Suarez did wrong. I've not heard or seen that.
Sisu and DDDDDD on the Liverpool board to be exact, and if you have a look on their forum RAWK you'll see a few. I don't mean they think he didn't do ANYTHING wrong, you'd have to be a proper simple **** to think that, but they are defending him to the hilt and making excuses. Like I said, the majority have rightly lambasted him for it though.
Pants on fire. You still haven't explained how defending a player has anything at all to do with claiming an FA vendetta. I'm beginning to think its because you're just a pedantic ****. (see what I did there?)
