Suarez

[BBFs Unpopular View]

6 or more BBC articles on this fiasco.

 

[astro]

I am not disputing whatever bans you said, to be honest. I agree that for Suarez maybe a 6 game ban.
It was the BS you came up with regarding Hazard, you tried to completely demonize him for attempting to retrieve a ball and trolled our board for days.
Now you seem to show outrage because people are saying the same thing about Suarez in what WAS an actual assault.
IF Hazard hit that kid, its clear that wasnt his intention (and thats IF), but Suarez had no other intention but to bite Ivanovic, yet you seem very obtuse about it.

Again, I reiterate, I dont think Suarez should be condemned and I think Liverpool should keep him, I just find your hypocrisy hilarious.

There is no hypocrisy.

My argument was simple and exactly the same for both Hazard and Suarez (the definition of not being hypocritical);

3 games for violent conduct and extra game/s for the stupidity/needlessness of the situation.

If you still want to argue that it was acceptable for Hazard to wrestle with a ballboy when it wasn't even Chelsea's ball then feel free but then you are the hypocrite.

 

[Bodinki]

6 or more BBC articles on this fiasco.

They are really going to town on it arent they!!
They make things so much worse sometimes with their BS.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

Hazard and Suarez have something in common, both foreign.

The FA leap to Rooney's defence after he kicked a player, not a challenge for the ball, but just kicked him from behind, how that is more honourable is up for debate.


how this not deemed just as bad, or worse than what Suarez did is strange at best
[video=youtube;wS9nYTZ_lb8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wS9nYTZ_lb8[/video]

As for Hazard, the only thing he did wrong was not let the official deal with the ball man, then Swansea might have had a case to answer for failing to control their staff

or this
[video=youtube;d7sNO92GPuQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7sNO92GPuQ[/video]

So I am not willing to accept anything from Chelsea fans who have defended the above 2 players

 

[Bodinki]

There is no hypocrisy.

My argument was simple and exactly the same for both Hazard and Suarez (the definition of not being hypocritical);

3 games for violent conduct and extra game/s for the stupidity/needlessness of the situation.

If you still want to argue that it was acceptable for Hazard to wrestle with a ballboy when it wasn't even Chelsea's ball then feel free but then you are the hypocrite.

You seem to keep missing the point, its not your opinion of the bans I am disputing.
Its **** like "Wrestle with a ballboy". Seriously mate? Wrestle?

I wont post quotes, because frankly i cannot be arsed, and you know what you said, but you tried to demonize Hazard and cast him in this worst possible light and your comments now people have done the same to Suarez? #getoverit

How about #stopputtinghashtagsoneverythingandtalklikeahumanbeingandstopbeingoverlydefensiveofaplayerwhocommittedanoffencethatwasworsethananoffenceyoucondemnedanotherplayerforpurelybecauseheplaysforanotherteam................ dot com, or something.

 

[Tobes]

My original post wasn't aimed at you. It was aimed at anyone who wanted to be outraged and boycott. This board doesn't revolve around you.

#getoveryourself

The post I replied to included you quoting my post, so pardon me for thinking it was aimed at me.

Your first point had a glaring omission, which I corrected.

#owned

 

[Tobes]

There is no hypocrisy.

My argument was simple and exactly the same for both Hazard and Suarez (the definition of not being hypocritical);

3 games for violent conduct and extra game/s for the stupidity/needlessness of the situation.

If you still want to argue that it was acceptable for Hazard to wrestle with a ballboy when it wasn't even Chelsea's ball then feel free but then you are the hypocrite.

hahaha, so you're trying to say that the Suarez incident is no worse than Hazard & that nonsense with the ball boy?

****ing hilarious, Astronaut is the right name for you lad, as you're obviously orbiting another planet.

 

[Jimmy Squarefoot]

hahaha, so you're trying to say that the Suarez incident is no worse than Hazard & that nonsense with the ball boy?

****ing hilarious, Astronaut is the right name for you lad, as you're obviously orbiting another planet.

Is biting someone any worse than 2 footed lunges or career ending challenges? ...

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

Is biting someone any worse than 2 footed lunges or career ending challenges? ...

apparently it is according to many, they see those as Manly challenges where as two biting is the domain of the dirty south American you love to hate, wait a minute.. Defoe..

I don't see his or others bile directed at Defoe, well cos, he doesn't play for Liverpool and he ain't that good and he didn't steal progression form under Ghana at the WC, that was when most took a dislike to Suarez in the first place

 

[BCR]

Is biting someone any worse than 2 footed lunges or career ending challenges? ...

These two are nasty but part of the game with challenges, slide tackles, but a bite? Let's not defend it. I think the club has done the right thing here, condemned him, fined him, but saying we will work with him and look to keep him.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

These two are nasty but part of the game with challenges, slide tackles, but a bite? Let's not defend it. I think the club has done the right thing here, condemned him, fined him, but saying we will work with him and look to keep him.

No one is defending it, but the scale you all use to judge this crap is bollox bluff, if you were a player would you rather a nibble or have two feet stuck into your leg
?

Anyone that is not a fool would prefer the nibble.

In rubgy they bite each other all the time in scrums

Vinny jones grabbed balls, also done in Rugby

 

[Tobes]

Is biting someone any worse than 2 footed lunges or career ending challenges? ...

Now that's a different debate.

On the face of it you'd say no, as a bad tackle could be a career ender & therefore would be the worse long term outcome.

However, a tackle is part of the game, even a bad tackle. Biting is alien to the game & therefore shocking. In the cold light of day is it that bad? IMO yes, as it's something that has no part in the game & never should. Kids already dive, feign injury, argue with the ref etc etc, I'd hate to think that biting an opponent could be the next stage in 'gamesmanship'. It's a hideous act, that needs to be treated as such & dealt with by the authorities as such.

 

[Bodinki]

Is biting someone any worse than 2 footed lunges or career ending challenges? ...

If the intent of the tackle was to injure someone then no. But how often does that happen?
There are challenges that are mistimed or are a tad too high because of momentum, or a wet pitch etc that result in injuries, but they result from a tackle.
When you play football you must accept that you will be tackled, and that there is a chance you could receive an injury from said tackles (however small). You dont really expect to be bitten during a game!

 

[Jimmy Squarefoot]

These two are nasty but part of the game with challenges, slide tackles, but a bite? Let's not defend it. I think the club has done the right thing here, condemned him, fined him, but saying we will work with him and look to keep him.

Not defending it and Suarez deserves the ban. But the media condemnation is completely out of proportion - you would think it's one of the darkest days in football history etc etc. Sky News had it as one of their main headlines!

Apparently the PM has made a statement on it as well!

 

[astro]

The post I replied to included you quoting my post, so pardon me for thinking it was aimed at me.

Your first point had a glaring omission, which I corrected.

#owned

Here is the original post: http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/207428-Suarez?p=4621654&viewfull=1#post4621654

You are not quoted.

#oopstoobittertocareaboutreality

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

Not defending it and Suarez deserves the ban. But the media condemnation is completely out of proportion - you would think it's one of the darkest days in football history etc etc. Sky News had it as one of their main headlines!

Apparently the PM has made a statement on it as well!

if true, sweet ****ing jesus

 

[Jimmy Squarefoot]

Now that's a different debate.

On the face of it you'd say no, as a bad tackle could be a career ender & therefore would be the worse long term outcome.

However, a tackle is part of the game, even a bad tackle. Biting is alien to the game & therefore shocking. In the cold light of day is it that bad? IMO yes, as it's something that has no part in the game & never should. Kids already dive, feign injury, argue with the ref etc etc, I'd hate to think that biting an opponent could be the next stage in 'gamesmanship'. It's a hideous act, that needs to be treated as such & dealt with by the authorities as such.

If the intent of the tackle was to injure someone then no. But how often does that happen?
There are challenges that are mistimed or are a tad too high because of momentum, or a wet pitch etc that result in injuries, but they result from a tackle.
When you play football you must accept that you will be tackled, and that there is a chance you could receive an injury from said tackles (however small). You dont really expect to be bitten during a game!

Agreed

 

[BCR]

No one is defending it, but the scale you all use to judge this crap is bollox bluff, if you were a player would you rather a nibble or have two feet stuck into your leg
?

I understand mate, one puts you out for a while ( the wigan player on the newkie one) and one is small in terms of injury. But it is disgusting, it is what little kids do when they don't have their way. I like what the club did and I stand by that. Think this is the tip of a long line of stuff though Sisu, whether we like it or not, agree or disagree he has so many previous things that it is just getting int he way of the club a bit.

I am all for seond chances, innocent until proven guilty ( whether you like America systems with that or not, I still believe in it), and all that but it is getting to a point of when will you learn? Again, glad we learned from previous mistakes and settled this one quickly.

 

[BCR]

No one is defending it, but the scale you all use to judge this crap is bollox bluff, if you were a player would you rather a nibble or have two feet stuck into your leg
?

I understand mate, one puts you out for a while ( the wigan player on the newkie one) and one is small in terms of injury. But it is disgusting, it is what little kids do when they don't have their way. I like what the club did and I stand by that. Think this is the tip of a long line of stuff though Sisu, whether we like it or not, agree or disagree he has so many previous things that it is just getting int he way of the club a bit.

I am all for seond chances, innocent until proven guilty ( whether you like America systems with that or not, I still believe in it), and all that but it is getting to a point of when will you learn? Again, glad we learned from previous mistakes and settled this one quickly.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

Here is the original post: http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/207428-Suarez?p=4621654&viewfull=1#post4621654

You are not quoted.

#oopstoobittertocareaboutreality

And owned?, lol what a ****ing child