Grewks Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Think its a bit harsh personally! What he did seemed unbelivable and completely studpid but no real harm was done! I've seen alot worse things happen on a football pitch leaving much worse injuries that go unpunished. Apparently they couldn't take his 1st biting incident into account so that should not be considered and his ban for racism is a completely different situation! I think 6 game ban would have been a fairer ban and still sent the message. Will probably be reduced after an appeal in true FA fashion! I doubt a 10 game ban would have been given if one of the PL's poster boys like RVP had of done the same thing! The FA are useless though and we all know it! RVP does not have 2 previous offences like suarez, one of which is racism, and another of biting which shows he is a second time offended. He was given a 7/8 match ban for biting the first time, the ban had to be increased to further attempt to make suarez to learn his lesson.
Guest Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Nothing like a good old overreaction Agreed. Why have an opinion if it's not OTT and extreme? It gives you the possibility to movefrom your stance after reflecting on the opinion of others and seeming reasonable. Having reflected I think a life ban is too long. 5 years seems appropriate or a suspended life ban after serving a 10 game ban.
Corky Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Brendan "shocked and bitterly disappointed". Quelle surprise. http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/22295309 Suarez doesn't need to change. He's got plenty of people defending him, saying that the ban is too harsh, victimised etc. He can do all this, get defended and the cycle continues. There's no need for a ban if he doesn't do it. Simple enough. And that rubbish about "not helping his rehabilitation" is ridiculous. Why should the FA be responsible, and not the player or the club who employs him?
Fox in the North Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Rehabilitation? He's not some addict, he's a "normal," but idiotic person. He needs a slap round the face and to be told to grow up.
Guest MattP Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 7 game ban in Holland for biting a fellow pro. 6 game ban here for a 'racist remark' Liverpool fans want a 3 game ban for his 2nd bite? What do they think is suitable when he does it a third time? A yellow card?
Fez of Mahrez Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 It's ludicrous to be haggling over a few games, and even more ludicrous for the FA to be seen in a negative light when they have the insane job of deciding a punishment for something that 99% of humans wouldn't even contemplate. And on the Defoe incident, I'd rather a more sensible level of consistency was established with regard to this kind of thing in the unlikely event that 100 more players bite opponents than for them all to get away scot-free.
anotherharboroughfox Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 I really have utter contempt for him. Great player, but a grade A ****.
Super_horns Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Rodgers is only concerned etc because he knows without Suarez for 6 games next season he needs to get a striker who will score the goals which mean Liverpool start the season in August rather than October....
Rusko187 Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Don't suppose anyone can clear this up but usually the FA say they can't act on anything if the referee hasn't seen the incident ala Aguero on Luiz and Mcmanaman.... Did I miss something or was Suarez booked for the incident?
Haydos Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Don't suppose anyone can clear this up but usually the FA say they can't act on anything if the referee hasn't has seen the incident ala Aguero on Luiz and Mcmanaman.... Did I miss something or was Suarez booked for the incident?
Corky Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 No, the referee did not notice it, therefore the FA intervened.
Rusko187 Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Don't get me wrong he got what was coming to him but just puzzled how the FA take a stance of not being able to do anything unless the ref has seen it.
marko Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Don't get me wrong he got what was coming to him but just puzzled how the FA take a stance of not being able to do anything unless the ref has seen it. You've got that the wrong way around. The FA can only act if the ref hasn't seen it.
StanSP Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 The referee didn't see the actual incident, if I remember correctly. Ivanovic showed the referee his arm, but that doesn't mean the referee saw what Suarez did to Ivanovic.
Rusko187 Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 Ahhhhh gotcha... Been wondering this for a few days but that's fair enough. Just read Haydos correction and yeah that's cleared it up for me... Blonde moment on my behalf.
RobHawk Posted 25 April 2013 Posted 25 April 2013 RVP does not have 2 previous offences like suarez, one of which is racism, and another of biting which shows he is a second time offended. He was given a 7/8 match ban for biting the first time, the ban had to be increased to further attempt to make suarez to learn his lesson. As I quoted, I'm sure I read the 1st bite couldn't be taken into account - cant remember the reason! So you can ignore that for a start! I have no sympathy for Suarez, what he did was ****ing weird and I don't follow Liverpool in the slightests. But in reality, what harm did it actually do? Ban him fine, but Roy keane got a total of 8 games (eventually) for that tackle and that was 1000% times worse than suarezs love bite!
Captain... Posted 26 April 2013 Posted 26 April 2013 As I quoted, I'm sure I read the 1st bite couldn't be taken into account - cant remember the reason! So you can ignore that for a start! I have no sympathy for Suarez, what he did was ****ing weird and I don't follow Liverpool in the slightests. But in reality, what harm did it actually do? Ban him fine, but Roy keane got a total of 8 games (eventually) for that tackle and that was 1000% times worse than suarezs love bite! But you're letting facts get in the way of a witch hunt. If the FA can't take into account what happened in another league, and he has no previous of violent conduct, he has never been sent off in the prem, then it is a very harsh ban. I also think he would be better punished by a smaller ban bigger fine and some sort of community service, I'm not sure if the FA can punish a player like that, but that would be preferable in my eyes.
Ross-Kemp Posted 26 April 2013 Posted 26 April 2013 Bastard murdering scumbags. FIFA should have intervened and given him a 12 month ban. 2nd offence in two different countries, but it's alright, everyone will defend him because he plays for Victimpool. They never do anything wrong, ever.
RobHawk Posted 26 April 2013 Posted 26 April 2013 Bastard murdering scumbags. FIFA should have intervened and given him a 12 month ban. 2nd offence in two different countries, but it's alright, everyone will defend him because he plays for Victimpool. They never do anything wrong, ever. Moron! Read whats actually posted you boring cnut!
MC Prussian Posted 26 April 2013 Posted 26 April 2013 And now Cameron's having a go at Suarez for setting an "appalling example": http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22304322 Wonder if the prime minister would've moaned that much if Ivanovic had been bitten by an Englishman...
RobHawk Posted 26 April 2013 Posted 26 April 2013 And now Cameron's having a go at Suarez for setting an "appalling example": http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/22304322 Wonder if the prime minister would've moaned that much if Ivanovic had been bitten by an Englishman... Whats this got to do with him? Sometimes politicians need to know when to shut up! He really is a greasy, posh boy cretin with an overinflated opion of himself (much like the majority of MP's). What he did was wrong and i don't condone it, but shearer kicking lenny in the face was alot worse and he got toss all! People making such a huge deal out of it just stirs the media circus up into overload and too be honest i'm fed up of hearing about it! (Yes i am in a bad mood today and getting a bit ranty!)
marko Posted 26 April 2013 Posted 26 April 2013 And now Cameron's having a go at Suarez for setting an "appalling example": http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/22304322 Wonder if the prime minister would've moaned that much if Ivanovic had been bitten by an Englishman... I was just about to post that. Brendan even manages to pin some of the blame on the Prime Minister for Suarez's ban - you just can't make it up EDIT: Don't get me wrong I'm no fan of Cameron, but is he really having a go? He's more than likely been asked the question because it was such a ridiculous incident to see on a football pitch and given an honest response. It's not like he's rung 5Live in a fit of mock rage and disgust off his own back.
Fox in the North Posted 26 April 2013 Posted 26 April 2013 Whats this got to do with him? Sometimes politicians need to know when to shut up! He really is a greasy, posh boy cretin with an overinflated opion of himself (much like the majority of MP's). What he did was wrong and i don't condone it, but shearer kicking lenny in the face was alot worse and he got toss all! People making such a huge deal out of it just stirs the media circus up into overload and too be honest i'm fed up of hearing about it! (Yes i am in a bad mood today and getting a bit ranty!) Maybe the media kept asking for a prime ministers opinion?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.