Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
urban.spaceman

Suarez ban: Higher or Lower?

Higher or lower?  

119 members have voted

  1. 1. Higher or Lower?

    • Higher
    • Lower
    • Ban the bastard for life
    • He's misunderstood, leave him alone
    • All goals scored by Suarez at the World Cup should be retrospectively expunged, and all results altered accordingly. Bit desperate this one ð???


Recommended Posts

Guest MattP
Posted

I'd have gone 6 months so just higher for me.

Happy with 4 though, with FIFA I honestly wouldn't have been surprised to see him trotting out against Colombia on Saturday.

Posted

Do Uruguay have the option to fill his space?

So say Cahill bit Balotelli, would England have had the option to bring in Jon Stones?

Posted

Do Uruguay have the option to fill his space?

So say Cahill bit Balotelli, would England have had the option to bring in Jon Stones?

Nope, this is their final squad. He's suspended just like if he'd got a red card, but just a but longer.

Posted

Nope, this is their final squad. He's suspended just like if he'd got a red card, but just a but longer.

Cheers :D

Guest MattP
Posted

lol Guess!

Of course, can't see on the mobile! lol

Posted

I actually would have said it's about right, but given the poll forced me to choose I said higher. But it's a swift, reasonable response from FIFA that leaves him under no illusions that his behaviour is unacceptable and that there is further room to up the ante if he offends again.

Posted

Higher, if only for the fact that a four month ban isn't really a four month ban if part of it includes his summer holidays. Shift it to the start of the domestic season and it'll look about right.

Posted

Quick action. If the 4 months starts on opening day, id say its fair

Higher, if only for the fact that a four month ban isn't really a four month ban if part of it includes his summer holidays. Shift it to the start of the domestic season and it'll look about right.

Completely agree with that - what's the point of giving him a ban from playing when there are no games or footballing activity scheduled during that period? It's like when a player is injured while serving a suspension - if he's not actually able to play what's the point of suspending him during that period?

Posted

Having thought about it, having initially said six months, it's about right. The four months isn't a lot but does deny him any kind of pre season and he's got 13 matches across 3 competitions to sit out.

Had it just been an "all football ban" I think six months would of been right but given this international ban they've given him as well actually could keep him out of the international set up for as long as two years and he did commit the offense in a Uruguay shirt it's probably fair enough

Posted

Having thought about it, having initially said six months, it's about right. The four months isn't a lot but does deny him any kind of pre season and he's got 13 matches across 3 competitions to sit out.

Had it just been an "all football ban" I think six months would of been right but given this international ban they've given him as well actually could keep him out of the international set up for as long as two years and he did commit the offense in a Uruguay shirt it's probably fair enough

The Uruguayan FA are frantically organising friendlies as we speak

Posted

The Uruguayan FA are frantically organising friendlies as we speak

They don't count

EDIT: While they shouldn't anyway. They don't normally, if they do it's a disgrace.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...