opinions4u Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Starts at seven. In line with the Dutch FA. Overlay 3 more for it being a repeat offence of the same nature. Add on 2 more for his poor disciplinary record. 12 would be where my money is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 It's all very well and good throwing x amount of bans at Suarez and calling him all names under the sun, but you've got to ask yourself what possessed him to do it to start with? It seems to be natural in the walk of life to call someone because of a moments madness, it's like trying to understand those who self-harm, why? Why did George Best drink himself to death, why is Gazza on the same path? Why did Roy Keane do what he did to Haarland? Why did Cantona Kung fu kick the Palace fan? How has Pistorius found himself in the position that he is? I really can't see Liverpool selling him in the transfer window: he's one of the best centre forwards in the world for a start and selling him on the back of what has happened at the weekend I'd say that they wouldn't receive what they'd expect. His disciplinary record has been somewhat shocking when you sit and look at the bad publicity that he's brought on LFC, dealt with very poorly in some cases by LFC but still reverts back to the same denominator. I don't know what the solution is but I'd stick a £ on that it won't be the last moment of madness that he has in his playing career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaddyKid Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Imagine if suarez had bitten oldhams ex manager.... I can see the headline... Suarez bites dickov. Had a bad day, that cheered me up! Also Suarez is a phenomenal player to watch just a shame he's a bit of a prick! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 According to some he needs help, maybe there's some underlying reason for his behavior? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 According to some he needs help, maybe there's some underlying reason for his behavior? Maybe there is. I don't really give a flying one though. Ban him. If he chooses to see a shrink, that's fine too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Maybe there is. I don't really give a flying one though. Ban him. If he chooses to see a shrink, that's fine too. I couldn't give a toss if they throw him to the wolves, I just thought that the act of biting, is indeed an odd way of venting frustration, anger or whatever he's doing it for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusoe Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 (edited) http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22278258 10 match ban. Edited April 24, 2013 by Crusoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 According to some he needs help, maybe there's some underlying reason for his behavior? There is. He's :censored:ing deranged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/22278258 10 match ban. they forgot my 2 match "poor disciplinary record" overlay. Starts at seven. In line with the Dutch FA. Overlay 3 more for it being a repeat offence of the same nature. Add on 2 more for his poor disciplinary record. 12 would be where my money is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 I think he has been harshly treated here. I'm in the minority, but sod it. Ben Thatcher on Pedro Mendes - 8 games. Racism - 8 games Keane - 3 games Punishment should fit the crime. He has not got to end someones career or worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Past soft sentences should not be a precedent for fair ones now. Hopefully this is symptomatic of the FA taking a more hard line attitude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 I think he has been harshly treated here. I'm in the minority, but sod it. Ben Thatcher on Pedro Mendes - 8 games. Racism - 8 games Keane - 3 games Punishment should fit the crime. He has not got to end someones career or worse. I think the ban is fair, particularly in light of his track record. Having said that, I think you're right to suggest that it's disproportionate to other sanctions dished out in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 1.) The FA needs to be consistent, Defoe didn't get banned for his bite. Keane got a total of 6 games (3 for the original red card and 3 for admitting he deliberately went to "do him" in his autobiography) for his tackle on Haaland. Suarez got 8 games for racism (when it was his word against Evra's) but Terry got 4 with video evidence. Thatcher got 8 games for knocking out Mendes. Whilst his previous record doesn't stand him in good stead the severity of the crime IMHO doesn't match the severity of the punishment. 2.) Liverpool's season could be over at the weekend. Aside from the derby their remaining games will likely mean little to either side after this weekend. It is in effect is 8 games especially as they are likely to appeal. 3.) Think any appeal is likely to mean a reduced ban as any appeal will focus on the reasoning for the length of ban. It seems like the FA have made it up as they went along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLatics Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Biting someone else is a very risky thing and I'm sure I've heard of people contracting HIV that way (would need to draw blood but it happens). Even without blood borne viruses biting is a significant infection risk, especially with dirty skin and a grassy surface. I'd expect Ivanovic and Suarez to have been put on prophylactic anti-biotics, especially if the bite drew blood. Not that it makes it any better but it's as near to impossible as you can get to transmit HIV by biting - spent the whole first term of one module on HIV :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Not that it makes it any better but it's as near to impossible as you can get to transmit HIV by biting - spent the whole first term of one module on HIV :P It does happen though which is what I said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 All getting a bit silly with the health and safety :censored:e, no wonder the kids are like they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Liverpool showing a lack of class again. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22295309 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Liverpool showing a lack of class again. http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/22295309 I think he is right - not sure about a "lack of class". I can't think of many managers who just don't stick up for their players if tehy believe they are wronged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 I think he is right - not sure about a "lack of class". I can't think of many managers who just don't stick up for their players if tehy believe they are wronged. Perhaps they should have asked the Dutch FA to handle it. That 7 match ban will almost certainly have been the baseline from where the independent panel started. They've not been wronged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 (edited) I think 6 games would have been fair. When defoe did his bite he got 0 games. The ref saw it, but the ref saw the Ben Thatcher incident too (he received a yellow card). A precent was set there that in extreme cases the FA could wave the "if the ref sees it" rule. I would say that if someone has done something worthy of a 10 game ban, they could have well stepped in an overrode the Defoe incident? But they didn't - why? Personally I think he has been harshly treated. I know I'm in the minority - but I agree with Rodgers. Edited April 25, 2013 by pukka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Rapists, killers, women beaters 0 game bans, biters 10 games. sounds about the right punishment to me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLatics Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 It does happen though which is what I said. They do teach impossible now - stats are apparently 4 reported (unconfirmed) cases ever :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejh45 Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 (edited) Couldn't have happened to a nicer player or team. I've hated them since I worked in Bootle in the 80's..........their so-called humour towards the one Everton, one Utd. fan and the sole Latics fan (me) was vicious and arrogant. They still view themselves as the Rolls-Royce team of English football and think that every other team is against them. Read some of the rubbish on the Beeb.........it's all about them being victimised........not one of their fans acknowledges the disgraceful disciplinary record of Suarez. And one prat even said that the commitee who gave the ban was made of Man. Utd. directors. I really hope the American owners tell Rodgers to sell him as they won't want the bad publicity.......mind you, I think he wants out. Edited April 25, 2013 by mikejh45 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kasper Eriksen Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 The problem for me is that FA do whatever they want, when its Suarez he gets more days than other players, why is that? Tottenhamplayer bites Hammers defender 0 days, and now Suarez get 10? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejh45 Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 The problem for me is that FA do whatever they want, when its Suarez he gets more days than other players, why is that? Tottenhamplayer bites Hammers defender 0 days, and now Suarez get 10? Because the ref saw it and booked him and I don't think Defoe has a rap sheet that reaches 10% of what Suarez has. Can anyone tell me why the worst cheat in the Premiership bar none deserves this outburst of sympathy? Even at 15, he was a wrong 'un because he punched a referee and his behaviour hasn't improved. Rodgers said at today's press conference that Suarez has never let him down.......WHAT? Give me a break......Rodgers must have been drinking too many dry sherries!!! It's Liverpool , their fans, Rodgers and Suarez all bleating on about victimisation......no acknowledgement that Suarez was out of order. Funniest story around at the moment watching their fans sobbing into a pan of Scouse. Can't wait to see what t-shirts the players will wear at the next match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.