Form from non-violent conduct does not count towards punishments for violent conduct. The FA has also never before considered form from previous seasons.
The charge of Violent Conduct carries a suspension of 3 matches. However the FA can increase that suspension only in consideration of the following factors: Increasing the standard punishment Where no offer of the standard punishment is made in the charge letter, the Regulatory Commission may only increase the applicable standard punishment where The FA has claimed in the Charge that the standard punishment would be clearly insufficient. In such cases, the Regulatory Commission shall increase the standard punishment only where it is satisfi ed so that it is sure that the circumstances of the incident under review are truly exceptional, such that the standard punishment should not be applied, and the standard punishment would be clearly insufficient, having regard to the following – a. The applicable Law(s) of the Game and any relevant FIFA instructions and / or guidelines; b. The nature of the incident and the Player’s state of mind, in particular any intent, recklessness or negligence; c. Where applicable, the level of force used; d. Any injury to an opponent caused by the incident; e. Any other impact on the game in which the incident occurred; f. The prevalence of the type of incident in question in football generally; g. The wider interests of football in applying consistent punishments for dismissal offences. If the Regulatory Commission is so satisfi ed, the Player shall not be subject to the standard punishment applicable to the incident. The Commission shall determine what level of punishment shall apply instead, having regard to the factors at a-g above. If the Regulatory Commission is not so satisfi ed, the player shall be subject to the standard punishment applicable to the incident. In all cases, the Regulatory Commission may increase any punishment that it imposes if it believes a denial of the Charge or any claim by the Player that the standard punishment would be clearly excessive in their case, to have been an abuse of process or without any signifi cant foundation. Whilst I doubt that either Suarez or LFC will take the option they do have the right to appeal any decision that suspends the player for more than 3 matches. However, there appears to be no limit to the amount of games that a player can be banned for. Having said that, if they were to go completely OTT and award a penalty in excess of say 12 matches then they could be referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport as acting contrary to common justice and being in restraint of trade (though such a referral would be extreme). If I were to put a bet on it then I think I'd go for banning him for the rest of this season and the first 3 games of next. Whilst that will hurt the club I think it would be fair in the circumstances.
The OP trying to turn this into Liverpool vs the rest of the world. The culprit is Suarez and no one else. He is the one giving everyone else a reason to criticise. He wasn't pushed into this act of savagery, The club did the right thing as they learnt their lesson from the Evra debacle. It was good that they immediately condemned Suarez and fined him. I think a ban of 8 matches will be imposed and will be reasonable.
I think anything up to 8 is fair, I'd keep him because he is word class but clearly he isn't mentally stable, but then again some of the best players have been like that i.e. Cantona. He should take his punishment take up some anger management and move on however for some fans thats not enough.
SAF: Suarez should receive a lifetime ban, and Liverpool should be dealt with harshly, for fielding a rat/vampire in a game of football. Discuss.
Just bagged no 20 and you are here talking ****e, what a sad git are you, real united fans are celebrating, the leftover waste are here wuming or trying to. Go tell someone else United are great in europe for reaching the knockout stage and losing to the first good but well under performing team they faced, we don't care
"Having said that, if they were to go completely OTT and award a penalty in excess of say 12 matches then they could be referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport as acting contrary to common justice and being in restraint of trade (though such a referral would be extreme)." FA know Liverpool would never go to CAS after they bottled out of going last time over the Suarez business, even though the FA's report had enough inconsistencies and contradictions in it to be laughed out of a real court.
What really irks me is that with the Evra thing we had solid ground upon which to support Suarez. This time we don't. All we can do is try and ask for some sanity when it comes to the penalty he must face.
He headbutted a ref when he was 15 what sort of sane person does that? he is a ****ing nutcase but he is our nutcase
The most important thing is for Suarez to learn from his mistakes. I do not know if three or more match ban would prevent him from controlling his anger. Up to you FA.
You're wrong - anyone can make a complaint to the police. Obviously it helps if the victim will support any prosecution - but the Crown Prosecution Service then has to decide if it is the interest of justice to bring Suarez to court.
