• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Keep Suarez?

Sell?

  • YES

    Votes: 19 12.3%
  • NO

    Votes: 135 87.7%

  • Total voters
    154
I think he'll leave now. Although he's brought a lot of it on himself, it's clear that the FA have it in for him and he's not judged on a level playing field. The hypocritical moral high grounders will have their day of celebration and we'll be a worse team for it. I'm looking forward to 10th place already next season. But, hey, at least we'll have our values.

That was my original feeling on it but I suspect the owners will want top value & this will reduce it, so they may well hang on.
 
And there you have what people are complaining about here. I think Suarez deserved a ban, perhaps 6 games for this. He acted like a complete twat but this 10 games is OTT.

All those other incidents are real and ended in lesser bans:

Viera spitting at Ruddock - 6 games - including the three for the red card prior to the incident
Diouf spitting at a fan - 2 game ban from UEFA
Keane on Haaland - 3 game ban from the red card (he admitted he meant to injure Haaland - albeit later)
Thatcher on Mendes - 8 game ban - plus he had form for doing this weeks prior to this
Chris Morgan on Hume - (which resulted in Hume having his skull operated on ) - 0 game !!!

The problem is there is no correlation between punishment and harm - real or potential. I'd say it was random but the minute it was Luis Suarez we all guessed it was going to be heavy - and that smacks of a lack of impartiality in the 'system'

Harm can't be the determining factor, it would lead to crazy results.

I
 
After 44 pages, I still haven't read a good reason to sell him. He's one of our top players and with him will guarantee more wins than not.

Can the "sellers" please provide a good reason for LFC to not keep him? Thanks
 
Harm can't be the determining factor, it would lead to crazy results.

I

I did say potential for harm as well. I'm not saying it should be measured on the degree of harm inflicted. What should be the determining factor then ? Whether your name is Suarez and you wear a Liverpool shirt ?
 
After 44 pages, I still haven't read a good reason to sell him. He's one of our top players and with him will guarantee more wins than not.

Can the "sellers" please provide a good reason for LFC to not keep him? Thanks

Oh I wouldn't sell him but I think he'll leave
 
Oh I wouldn't sell him but I think he'll leave

Forced to leave more like.. Liverpool have had their arm forced.. they will Sell.. 10 games ban for a team that is built around Suarez is far too much..

At the most it will be 5 games in the league, the other in the Carling Cup..

We need to hit the ground running, if we get a tough start to the campaign.. he will be gone..
 
It will probably get reduced to 8 on appeal. That's 4 for the rest of season and 3 at the start of next and cup game thrown in. Not too bad. Keep him unless someone comes in with a juicy £50-60million bid.
 
I did say potential for harm as well. I'm not saying it should be measured on the degree of harm inflicted. What should be the determining factor then ? Whether your name is Suarez and you wear a Liverpool shirt ?

Intent, harm, public policy.

Then you have to consider the players previous disciplinary history
 
How many times has he been punished for violent conduct?
If he gets 3-4 games added because of the rasiscm ban its even more weird.
 
Forced to leave more like.. Liverpool have had their arm forced.. they will Sell.. 10 games ban for a team that is built around Suarez is far too much..

At the most it will be 5 games in the league, the other in the Carling Cup..

We need to hit the ground running, if we get a tough start to the campaign.. he will be gone..

I've not been following the thread too closely but are you (or anyone else) seriously suggesting we sell him because he'll miss a few games next season?

And replace him with who? Someone who we're buying "not for this year, but for the next 5 years" and who needs to a year to settle in?

As for the ban, who gives a fuck. Everyone gets off on hating the leagues villain of the moment and every set of fans think that the FA and the media are a joke when it comes to their club.

We've been screwed over, there is no doubt about that, however the season is over. It doesn't matter and it's not worth fighting over any principles because it won't really change anything.

If we really want to change the status quo in English football we need to start winning titles.
 
Rosco talks like he's the FA's lawyer.
I wish he'd attempt to talk like Liverpool's lawyer every once in a while. You know, considering he supports the club and all.
 
The FA want us to sell him so I'd be fucked if I would be letting them smirk over their tea and croissants because it's job done. They can get to fuck. He's staying, our season's more or less done anyway and next season hopefully we'll have the reinforcements to get through it, it's what we need as a team anyway, we need a stronger squad.

Fuck'em. Solidarity brothers! (apart from the bellend FA sympathisers)
 
its bad news to rely that heavily on suarez anyways, let sturridge in the centre bag some goals and lets get another youngster in (or promote from within) to step it up. top 4 next year
 
Rosco talks like he's the FA's lawyer.
I wish he'd attempt to talk like Liverpool's lawyer every once in a while. You know, considering he supports the club and all.

Like when I said I would argue the harmless bite wasn't violent or brutality?

Oh
 
Surely we're fascinated by it *because* we're disgusted by it?

No, we're fascinated by it, then those in bad faith condemn it while replaying it so as to excuse themselves. If there's anything I've learned from this it's that England loves a good bite.
 
I can't say I'm particularly surprised at the punishment. Right from the moment I read the FA's charge statement it was clear they wanted him to be made an example of and their appointees have duly delivered.

Thinking about it, I can't see the point of appealing either. Appeal* to whom, about what? If we consider the FA to make it up as they go along we could look chumps if they decide to increase the ban.

I think the club should be planning to work with Luis (I don't think he'll leave, he seems the type who will want to make amends) and start looking for another squad striker, which in my opinion we need anyway.

I'm pretty sure Rodgers and his team mates won't want to lose Luis but I'm unsure as to how the owners will react as they have different considerations. This business will also cost them dear, paying a player who can't play and having to dig deep to buy another player.

It's a mess all around but 4 games this season and 6 next isn't the end of the world and we should plan for what we can do rather than concern ourselves with what has happened.

I reckon this might bond Luis to us even more closely.

* For the legal eagles amongst us: what would be the basis for an appeal?
 
No, we're fascinated by it, then those in bad faith condemn it while replaying it so as to excuse themselves. If there's anything I've learned from this it's that England loves a good bite.

But the fascination doesn't mean we can't also be disgusted!

That is my reaction, and I think it's most people's.
 
My immediate reaction was that it reminded me of a toddler who couldn't get his or her way and just bit out of sheer frustration.
 
Forced to leave more like.. Liverpool have had their arm forced.. they will Sell.. 10 games ban for a team that is built around Suarez is far too much..

At the most it will be 5 games in the league, the other in the Carling Cup..

We need to hit the ground running, if we get a tough start to the campaign.. he will be gone..
Forced to sell? Behave.
 
* For the legal eagles amongst us: what would be the basis for an appeal?

I would try the argument that in comparison to Defoe who received a yellow card from an FA appointed official that Suarez received a double yellow(or straight red and 3 game ban) times 3.33 to come up to a 10 game ban or the equivalent of a 660% increase on the punishment that an FA appointed official deemed appropriate and even taking into account that he is a thick cunt with past discretions, that(punishment) is completely and utterly fucked you panel of David Gill fuckidy-cuntidy yes-men.
It sounded ok in my head, it doesn't look so good now I see it written but just because of my considerable effort I'm gonna taste post
 
Are the FA saying today that the punishments refs can hand out is woefully inadequate? So if a player headbutts another player and then bites his nose off, and the ref gives him a red, they've got to stick to the 3game when they'd like to give loads more? Or if a player intentionally breaks another ones leg, it's still 3 games because 'their hands are tied'?
If their hands aren't tied, how did defoe get a no game ban for exactly the same offence.

Why don't they take the ban out of the hands of the ref? -The ref gives him a red which means he leaves the field of play, but then every single red is judged on merit and doesn't get the default 3 games. Same for yellows, if a ref gives a yellow but is doing drugs that day, they can still throw the book at people.
 
Are the FA saying today that the punishments refs can hand out is woefully inadequate? So if a player headbutts another player and then bites his nose off, and the ref gives him a red, they've got to stick to the 3game when they'd like to give loads more? Or if a player intentionally breaks another ones leg, it's still 3 games because 'their hands are tied'?
If their hands aren't tied, how did defoe get a no game ban for exactly the same offence.

Why don't they take the ban out of the hands of the ref? -The ref gives him a red which means he leaves the field of play, but then every single red is judged on merit and doesn't get the default 3 games. Same for yellows, if a ref gives a yellow but is doing drugs that day, they can still throw the book at people.
Because it makes far too much sense and the FA can't do what it wants.
 
I am not in the least surprised by this sadly. I expected 6, but that was through some rational thought. Three for the actual offence and three because of who it is and they might dress that up as previous history.
The FA are doing this because the press and a load of fucking radio phone-in knob-heads wanted it.
We are actually really are being victimised, not Suarez particularly, but Liverpool FC, and there is not a thing we can do about it.
We played the contrition game, the profuse apologies , the fine all that shit and where has it got us? - Nowhere, and whatever we did and however we handled it would not have mattered one fucking jot..
We should say we are revoking Suarez fine, give him his money back as we feel the punishment handed out by the FA is excessive still give the donation to HJC, and stick two fingers up to the FA.
Time and time again we see the FA's "justice" in action, they very seldom get anything right. There is no framework, no consistency , no justice, and it's all completely wrong and ad-hoc, it's like some fucking totalitarian state.
Having stumped up for one and a half season tickets again, I am now deprived of seeing our best player much more than I should be, OK he brought and element on himself, but still WTF.
I am also having all my hopes and aspirations for next year dashed before it fucking starts. I, my friends, am mightily pissed off tonight by being a victim of the FA

I just wonder if it's all worth it, what can I do as a fan and season ticket holder to register my disgust at the way the FA handle things? Stop going to the game, that just injures my club, they really are ruining the game for me, I don't know how much more the football supporting gene in me can take.

I would love to fucking know who sat on this panel

regards
 
Back
Top Bottom