In_The_Rough
Tour Winner
4 game ban which means he will miss the meaningless end of season game will be no punishment whatsoever and teach him nothing
Luiz Suarez
- Thread starter Kellfire
- Start date
MadAdey
Money List Winner
I must have missed tha one. When was he convicted of being a racist thug? I do not remember any court case about it, apart from the FA having a kangaroo court. As a Liverpool fan though it is another dark cloud Suarez has thrown over the club. Keep him and change the way he is? By doing that you would have to change his attitude on the pitch that will no doubt change the way he plays. Or sell him and hope that the rumours are true about Bayern and Juventus being interested start a mini bidding war and make a tidy little profit from him. Tough few weeks coming up for the board at Anfield as they need to make a decision on what they will do with him. Personally I would keep him as any team trying to get in the top 4 needs top quality players.
Birchy
Money List Winner
He got 7 match ban last time he did it,yeah let's give him a lesser ban for a repeat offence. That'll show him
That was in a different league in a different country though. That has nothing to do with this or English football. Over there they could different bans for offences to what we do over here.
Birchy
Money List Winner
You cant give out punishments on the basis of teaching somebody a lesson. The ban has got to be relative to other bans that have been dished out or it will become a farce. Nobody has had a 27 game ban for biting before have they?
Liverbirdie
Ryder Cup Winner
Ok maybe we should just deport vile animal. Lets be honest if he got a season ban it wouldn't affect Liverpool,can't see Them having much to play for next season either
You really have a big chip on your shoulder regarding Liverpool, don't you.
Saying the same thing twice, do you follow the chips up with a pint of bitter as well?
I believe LFC have accepted a bid of £32 Million form Borussia Munch engladbach.
Last edited:
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
Not read all the threads so apologies if this has been said.
I think many miss the point of Suarez's actions, the big defender was obstructing him from playing the ball and pushing him out of the way.
This now seems to be common in football and many minutes are wasted by referees sorting these defenders out, seldom penalising them..
The ref should have awarded Suarez a penalty/foul before he started biting him.
I think many miss the point of Suarez's actions, the big defender was obstructing him from playing the ball and pushing him out of the way.
This now seems to be common in football and many minutes are wasted by referees sorting these defenders out, seldom penalising them..
The ref should have awarded Suarez a penalty/foul before he started biting him.
In_The_Rough
Tour Winner
27 game ban who said that
Cant be relative to other bans dished out as nobody as far as I am aware has been twisted/vile enough to bite a fellow professional so we are in a new area here. I thought punishments were to teach people a lesson that is the whole point of them is it not? It will be very interesting to see what the FA do here with him, I think given his record they will be looking to nail him if they can
Pin-seeker
Well-known member
So if some 1 commits a crime in a different country,serves there time in jail,then comes to England & commits the same crime,the previous wouldn't be brought up in court???? Go home ya drunk
Paul_Stewart
Tour Rookie
So it's the referee's fault for Suarez biting a player because he didn't get a penalty? Do you actually know ANYTHING about football?
One Planer
Global Moderator
I'd contest this point Droon.
Defenders, or any player, are allowed to shield the ball using their body. What else are they supposed to do, let an attacking player run through on goal?
If Suarez was running ito the penalty area, knocked the ball around, Ivanovic, and then got obstructed, I'd agree penalty
In this case Ivanovic got into a good position against Suarez and used his body to shield to ball clear. Suarez got frustrated and, well, we know the rest.
Obstructing a player and shelding a ball are completley different things. Ask any striker who has taken the ball into the corner in the 93rd minute when there team is leading.
Liverbirdie
Ryder Cup Winner
Well Doon, I know your no Liverpool fan, but the biggest most biased LFC fan wouldn't have come up with that.
I see your overall point though.
Liverbirdie
Ryder Cup Winner
I think it's you who has been on the meths.
In an English (British? I know they sometimes differ) you are not allowed to bring up previous crimes. The judge can when giving out a sentence, but the barristers can't.
Birchy, take him with you, he's had too many.
In_The_Rough
Tour Winner
Well Doon, I know your no Liverpool fan, but the biggest most biased LFC fan wouldn't have come up with that.
I see your overall point though.
I know that's unreal that one. So the solution now for any striker that is being obstructed by a defender is to start biting their arm and it is the refs fault for not awarding a penalty before the biting started. You couldn't make it up
Birchy
Money List Winner
This is sporting incident not a murder enquiry FGS. Nobody has died and nobody is seriously injured. People seem to want him nailed to suit their own agenda.
Last edited:
Val
Ryder Cup Winner
I think you miss his point, Suarez biting was a retaliation to the manhandling. Still not right but it's a reason.
B
birdieman
Guest
Imagine the scouts reporting back to the manager on the striker they've been watching........." Hi Boss, the lad's not got great pace, he can only pass with his right foot, rubbish at tackling and only mediocre in the air........but you should see the set of gnashers on him....buy him!":ears:
In_The_Rough
Tour Winner
Imagine the scouts reporting back to the manager on the striker they've been watching........." Hi Boss, the lad's not got great pace, he can only pass with his right foot, rubbish at tackling and only mediocre in the air........but you should see the set of gnashers on him....buy him!":ears:
Perhaps the FA should make him wear a gum shield for every match he plays from now on
smange
Journeyman Pro
Find it interesting to see Sky showing Liverpools stats with and without Suarez and contrary to what seems to be popular belief they have actually a better record without him in the team
Im no Liverpool fan but one thing that has been said on here and elsewhere is that if he is banned it will be of no punishment to Liverpool as their season is over and he would miss meaningless games. I dont get this
Why should Liverpool be punished? Suarez is the one who deserves punishment and in the game of football a ban is the only real punishment that can be dealt out. Liverpool have imposed the maximum fine and im sure a stern warning about future behaviour was handed out as well.
Anyone who believes he was going to be "sacked" by Liverpool are way out of touch with modern football, where morals and reputations are sadly placed well behind financial gain. He may be sold in the summer but no way will he be forced out without a major recoup of most/all of the cost of buying him.
His "apology" is meaningless as well, only issued after pressure and consultation from manager/chairman/agent or whoever. If he really wanted to apologise he should have been man enough to go to the Chelsea dressing room after the match and apologise to Ivanovic face to face.
Im no Liverpool fan but one thing that has been said on here and elsewhere is that if he is banned it will be of no punishment to Liverpool as their season is over and he would miss meaningless games. I dont get this
Why should Liverpool be punished? Suarez is the one who deserves punishment and in the game of football a ban is the only real punishment that can be dealt out. Liverpool have imposed the maximum fine and im sure a stern warning about future behaviour was handed out as well.
Anyone who believes he was going to be "sacked" by Liverpool are way out of touch with modern football, where morals and reputations are sadly placed well behind financial gain. He may be sold in the summer but no way will he be forced out without a major recoup of most/all of the cost of buying him.
His "apology" is meaningless as well, only issued after pressure and consultation from manager/chairman/agent or whoever. If he really wanted to apologise he should have been man enough to go to the Chelsea dressing room after the match and apologise to Ivanovic face to face.
Shaunmg
Head Pro
Exactly! and that agenda is to disadvantage and frustrate Liverpool
Liverbirdie
Ryder Cup Winner
Find it interesting to see Sky showing Liverpools stats with and without Suarez and contrary to what seems to be popular belief they have actually a better record without him in the team
Im no Liverpool fan but one thing that has been said on here and elsewhere is that if he is banned it will be of no punishment to Liverpool as their season is over and he would miss meaningless games. I dont get this
Why should Liverpool be punished? Suarez is the one who deserves punishment and in the game of football a ban is the only real punishment that can be dealt out. Liverpool have imposed the maximum fine and im sure a stern warning about future behaviour was handed out as well.
Anyone who believes he was going to be "sacked" by Liverpool are way out of touch with modern football, where morals and reputations are sadly placed well behind financial gain. He may be sold in the summer but no way will he be forced out without a major recoup of most/all of the cost of buying him.
His "apology" is meaningless as well, only issued after pressure and consultation from manager/chairman/agent or whoever. If he really wanted to apologise he should have been man enough to go to the Chelsea dressing room after the match and apologise to Ivanovic face to face.
Well done - the voice of reason (not being sarcastic).:thup:
