Luis Flips the Bird - Fulham fans need counselling to recover
- Thread starter RedZeppelin
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
If this goes against us we should haul their overfed @rses straight into the High Court for judicial review.
neil warnock in support of Suarez
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2072080/Neil-Warnock-FA-needs-focus-abusive-football-fans.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2072080/Neil-Warnock-FA-needs-focus-abusive-football-fans.html
[quote author=KopPoNok link=topic=47805.msg1440621#msg1440621 date=1323441261]
neil warnock in support of Suarez
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2072080/Neil-Warnock-FA-needs-focus-abusive-football-fans.html
[/quote]
Now that IS unexpected. I don't have a lot of time for Worncock but fair play to him for that.
neil warnock in support of Suarez
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2072080/Neil-Warnock-FA-needs-focus-abusive-football-fans.html
[/quote]
Now that IS unexpected. I don't have a lot of time for Worncock but fair play to him for that.
I would say Neil is well aware of what its like to take stick from the terraces and stands and how difficult it is not to respond.
[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=47805.msg1440648#msg1440648 date=1323444769]
I would say Neil is well aware of what its like to take stick from the terraces and stands and how difficult it is not to respond.
[/quote]
:laugh:
I like his point though. Provocation should not be encouraged. By charging and punishing players for their reaction, its indirectly giving thumbs up to opposition fans on such behaviour. Afterall, they've got nothing to lose.
I would say Neil is well aware of what its like to take stick from the terraces and stands and how difficult it is not to respond.
[/quote]
:laugh:
I like his point though. Provocation should not be encouraged. By charging and punishing players for their reaction, its indirectly giving thumbs up to opposition fans on such behaviour. Afterall, they've got nothing to lose.
I knew about Moyes but not Redknapp. What did he have to say from the jeep window?
Pretty much every British manager has agreed now, with one notable exception...
Rooney's suspension for next summer's tournament was cut from three matches to two at a UEFA hearing in Switzerland on Thursday.
Redknapp thinks the FA's stance is hypocritical as he is sure that had the Manchester United player lashed out in a similar manner to his kick at Montenegro's Miodrag Dzudovic in a domestic game, the 26-year-old would be suspended for three matches and an appeal might have brought even more.
Redknapp, the bookmakers' favourite to succeed Fabio Capello as England boss, said: "In all honesty it was a three-match ban for violent conduct.
"You can look at it and say it wasn't that violent, but it doesn't matter. If you cuff someone, you get a three-match ban. Those are the rules.
"If you appealed it (domestically), it would be a frivolous appeal and you would probably get four games if you went to the FA."
They are similar comments to those expressed by Liverpool boss Dalglish yesterday, and Redknapp now expects the FA to be besieged with appeals for domestic red cards.
"For them to get it from three to two, it opens up a can of worms," he said.
"There will be clubs appealing against bans and they will want to know why they aren't getting it cut from three to two for similar situations.
"People will look at it and think, 'Hang on, the FA have gone and appealed against his (Rooney's) red, why can't we?'
"From England's point of view, I'm pleased to see him get two because he's that important to England, but in all honesty, the rules are supposed to be the rules and they have not been adhered to in this situation."
So, once again, the FA find themselves on the back foot.
Yesterday, they attempted to clarify their own position and have done the same again today.
Essentially, there is a significant difference in the manner in which UEFA and the FA deal with discipline.
Whereas UEFA prefer to offer guidance to their disciplinary body, and a sliding scale of punishments, the FA lays down set sanctions, partly due to the time constraints brought about by the huge number of games they must govern.
Had the Rooney incident occurred in a domestic game, he would have known instantly he faced a three-game ban for violent conduct.
However, such are UEFA's rules that when he was shown the red card in Podgorica, Rooney was left facing a minimum one-match suspension, with the likelihood that it would be increased to two or three.
As this punishment did not cover friendlies, and as England had avoided the Euro 2012 play-offs, the first match affected was the Three Lions' opening group game against France in Donetsk on June 11.
Under such circumstances, the FA, whose twin functions are administering disciplinary matters and running the England team, felt they were duty-bound to try to reduce the suspension Rooney faced.
They succeeded in that aim yesterday, partly because Capello admitted he made a mistake not taking Rooney, who had suffered off-field problems involving his father and uncle, off at half-time.
"It is important that people understand that amongst the many duties of the FA we have responsibility for the England team and also, separately, to oversee the domestic game's regulatory function," said FA chairman David Bernstein.
"Our philosophy for the national team is clear. We will run this along the same lines and with the same focus and commitment as any football club in this country. Our fans would expect no less.
"To achieve this we will fully support our manager and our players.
"This is simply what we have sought to achieve in reducing Wayne Rooney's suspension. I am very pleased that we have been successful in this appeal.
"The FAs disciplinary department has stated, from the outset, that the domestic regulatory process is different to that of UEFA's.
"In the case of Wayne Rooney we have been well and independently advised and have followed proper UEFA process throughout.
"Our management and players respect that domestic disciplinary decisions of he FA are made independently of matters relating to the English national team."
At least Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson is happy.
"It is no problem for me," said the Scot, countering suggestions that he was not interested in the well-being of England's national team.
"I am pleased for Wayne Rooney and England. It does give them a better chance."
Redknapp thinks the FA's stance is hypocritical as he is sure that had the Manchester United player lashed out in a similar manner to his kick at Montenegro's Miodrag Dzudovic in a domestic game, the 26-year-old would be suspended for three matches and an appeal might have brought even more.
Redknapp, the bookmakers' favourite to succeed Fabio Capello as England boss, said: "In all honesty it was a three-match ban for violent conduct.
"You can look at it and say it wasn't that violent, but it doesn't matter. If you cuff someone, you get a three-match ban. Those are the rules.
"If you appealed it (domestically), it would be a frivolous appeal and you would probably get four games if you went to the FA."
They are similar comments to those expressed by Liverpool boss Dalglish yesterday, and Redknapp now expects the FA to be besieged with appeals for domestic red cards.
"For them to get it from three to two, it opens up a can of worms," he said.
"There will be clubs appealing against bans and they will want to know why they aren't getting it cut from three to two for similar situations.
"People will look at it and think, 'Hang on, the FA have gone and appealed against his (Rooney's) red, why can't we?'
"From England's point of view, I'm pleased to see him get two because he's that important to England, but in all honesty, the rules are supposed to be the rules and they have not been adhered to in this situation."
So, once again, the FA find themselves on the back foot.
Yesterday, they attempted to clarify their own position and have done the same again today.
Essentially, there is a significant difference in the manner in which UEFA and the FA deal with discipline.
Whereas UEFA prefer to offer guidance to their disciplinary body, and a sliding scale of punishments, the FA lays down set sanctions, partly due to the time constraints brought about by the huge number of games they must govern.
Had the Rooney incident occurred in a domestic game, he would have known instantly he faced a three-game ban for violent conduct.
However, such are UEFA's rules that when he was shown the red card in Podgorica, Rooney was left facing a minimum one-match suspension, with the likelihood that it would be increased to two or three.
As this punishment did not cover friendlies, and as England had avoided the Euro 2012 play-offs, the first match affected was the Three Lions' opening group game against France in Donetsk on June 11.
Under such circumstances, the FA, whose twin functions are administering disciplinary matters and running the England team, felt they were duty-bound to try to reduce the suspension Rooney faced.
They succeeded in that aim yesterday, partly because Capello admitted he made a mistake not taking Rooney, who had suffered off-field problems involving his father and uncle, off at half-time.
"It is important that people understand that amongst the many duties of the FA we have responsibility for the England team and also, separately, to oversee the domestic game's regulatory function," said FA chairman David Bernstein.
"Our philosophy for the national team is clear. We will run this along the same lines and with the same focus and commitment as any football club in this country. Our fans would expect no less.
"To achieve this we will fully support our manager and our players.
"This is simply what we have sought to achieve in reducing Wayne Rooney's suspension. I am very pleased that we have been successful in this appeal.
"The FAs disciplinary department has stated, from the outset, that the domestic regulatory process is different to that of UEFA's.
"In the case of Wayne Rooney we have been well and independently advised and have followed proper UEFA process throughout.
"Our management and players respect that domestic disciplinary decisions of he FA are made independently of matters relating to the English national team."
At least Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson is happy.
"It is no problem for me," said the Scot, countering suggestions that he was not interested in the well-being of England's national team.
"I am pleased for Wayne Rooney and England. It does give them a better chance."
[quote author=Asbo link=topic=47805.msg1440700#msg1440700 date=1323449763]
Rooney's suspension for next summer's tournament was cut from three matches to two at a UEFA hearing in Switzerland on Thursday.
Redknapp thinks the FA's stance is hypocritical as he is sure that had the Manchester United player lashed out in a similar manner to his kick at Montenegro's Miodrag Dzudovic in a domestic game, the 26-year-old would be suspended for three matches and an appeal might have brought even more.
Redknapp, the bookmakers' favourite to succeed Fabio Capello as England boss, said: "In all honesty it was a three-match ban for violent conduct.
"You can look at it and say it wasn't that violent, but it doesn't matter. If you cuff someone, you get a three-match ban. Those are the rules.
"If you appealed it (domestically), it would be a frivolous appeal and you would probably get four games if you went to the FA."
They are similar comments to those expressed by Liverpool boss Dalglish yesterday, and Redknapp now expects the FA to be besieged with appeals for domestic red cards.
"For them to get it from three to two, it opens up a can of worms," he said.
"There will be clubs appealing against bans and they will want to know why they aren't getting it cut from three to two for similar situations.
"People will look at it and think, 'Hang on, the FA have gone and appealed against his (Rooney's) red, why can't we?'
"From England's point of view, I'm pleased to see him get two because he's that important to England, but in all honesty, the rules are supposed to be the rules and they have not been adhered to in this situation."
So, once again, the FA find themselves on the back foot.
Yesterday, they attempted to clarify their own position and have done the same again today.
Essentially, there is a significant difference in the manner in which UEFA and the FA deal with discipline.
Whereas UEFA prefer to offer guidance to their disciplinary body, and a sliding scale of punishments, the FA lays down set sanctions, partly due to the time constraints brought about by the huge number of games they must govern.
Had the Rooney incident occurred in a domestic game, he would have known instantly he faced a three-game ban for violent conduct.
However, such are UEFA's rules that when he was shown the red card in Podgorica, Rooney was left facing a minimum one-match suspension, with the likelihood that it would be increased to two or three.
As this punishment did not cover friendlies, and as England had avoided the Euro 2012 play-offs, the first match affected was the Three Lions' opening group game against France in Donetsk on June 11.
Under such circumstances, the FA, whose twin functions are administering disciplinary matters and running the England team, felt they were duty-bound to try to reduce the suspension Rooney faced.
They succeeded in that aim yesterday, partly because Capello admitted he made a mistake not taking Rooney, who had suffered off-field problems involving his father and uncle, off at half-time.
"It is important that people understand that amongst the many duties of the FA we have responsibility for the England team and also, separately, to oversee the domestic game's regulatory function," said FA chairman David Bernstein.
"Our philosophy for the national team is clear. We will run this along the same lines and with the same focus and commitment as any football club in this country. Our fans would expect no less.
"To achieve this we will fully support our manager and our players.
"This is simply what we have sought to achieve in reducing Wayne Rooney's suspension. I am very pleased that we have been successful in this appeal.
"The FAs disciplinary department has stated, from the outset, that the domestic regulatory process is different to that of UEFA's.
"In the case of Wayne Rooney we have been well and independently advised and have followed proper UEFA process throughout.
"Our management and players respect that domestic disciplinary decisions of he FA are made independently of matters relating to the English national team."
At least Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson is happy.
"It is no problem for me," said the Scot, countering suggestions that he was not interested in the well-being of England's national team.
"I am pleased for Wayne Rooney and England. It does give them a better chance."
[/quote]
Fucking hell. Somebody mentioned this earlier and I honestly thought they were joking.
Rooney's suspension for next summer's tournament was cut from three matches to two at a UEFA hearing in Switzerland on Thursday.
Redknapp thinks the FA's stance is hypocritical as he is sure that had the Manchester United player lashed out in a similar manner to his kick at Montenegro's Miodrag Dzudovic in a domestic game, the 26-year-old would be suspended for three matches and an appeal might have brought even more.
Redknapp, the bookmakers' favourite to succeed Fabio Capello as England boss, said: "In all honesty it was a three-match ban for violent conduct.
"You can look at it and say it wasn't that violent, but it doesn't matter. If you cuff someone, you get a three-match ban. Those are the rules.
"If you appealed it (domestically), it would be a frivolous appeal and you would probably get four games if you went to the FA."
They are similar comments to those expressed by Liverpool boss Dalglish yesterday, and Redknapp now expects the FA to be besieged with appeals for domestic red cards.
"For them to get it from three to two, it opens up a can of worms," he said.
"There will be clubs appealing against bans and they will want to know why they aren't getting it cut from three to two for similar situations.
"People will look at it and think, 'Hang on, the FA have gone and appealed against his (Rooney's) red, why can't we?'
"From England's point of view, I'm pleased to see him get two because he's that important to England, but in all honesty, the rules are supposed to be the rules and they have not been adhered to in this situation."
So, once again, the FA find themselves on the back foot.
Yesterday, they attempted to clarify their own position and have done the same again today.
Essentially, there is a significant difference in the manner in which UEFA and the FA deal with discipline.
Whereas UEFA prefer to offer guidance to their disciplinary body, and a sliding scale of punishments, the FA lays down set sanctions, partly due to the time constraints brought about by the huge number of games they must govern.
Had the Rooney incident occurred in a domestic game, he would have known instantly he faced a three-game ban for violent conduct.
However, such are UEFA's rules that when he was shown the red card in Podgorica, Rooney was left facing a minimum one-match suspension, with the likelihood that it would be increased to two or three.
As this punishment did not cover friendlies, and as England had avoided the Euro 2012 play-offs, the first match affected was the Three Lions' opening group game against France in Donetsk on June 11.
Under such circumstances, the FA, whose twin functions are administering disciplinary matters and running the England team, felt they were duty-bound to try to reduce the suspension Rooney faced.
They succeeded in that aim yesterday, partly because Capello admitted he made a mistake not taking Rooney, who had suffered off-field problems involving his father and uncle, off at half-time.
"It is important that people understand that amongst the many duties of the FA we have responsibility for the England team and also, separately, to oversee the domestic game's regulatory function," said FA chairman David Bernstein.
"Our philosophy for the national team is clear. We will run this along the same lines and with the same focus and commitment as any football club in this country. Our fans would expect no less.
"To achieve this we will fully support our manager and our players.
"This is simply what we have sought to achieve in reducing Wayne Rooney's suspension. I am very pleased that we have been successful in this appeal.
"The FAs disciplinary department has stated, from the outset, that the domestic regulatory process is different to that of UEFA's.
"In the case of Wayne Rooney we have been well and independently advised and have followed proper UEFA process throughout.
"Our management and players respect that domestic disciplinary decisions of he FA are made independently of matters relating to the English national team."
At least Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson is happy.
"It is no problem for me," said the Scot, countering suggestions that he was not interested in the well-being of England's national team.
"I am pleased for Wayne Rooney and England. It does give them a better chance."
[/quote]
Fucking hell. Somebody mentioned this earlier and I honestly thought they were joking.
Anyone see that smarmy git from the FA, Bevington, brownnosing Ginsoak and ManUre yesterday, saying how grateful he was to them for letting Rooney appear at the appeal, and to "Wayne" too for being there? This at the same time as they're doing what they're doing over Luis. Makes me want to puke.
So basically the FA are saying they are being hypocrites but it's ok cos the rules allow them to be.
Nice.
Nice.
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=47805.msg1440708#msg1440708 date=1323450540]
So basically the FA are saying they are being hypocrites but it's ok cos the rules allow them to be.
Nice.
[/quote]
In a word, yes.
So basically the FA are saying they are being hypocrites but it's ok cos the rules allow them to be.
Nice.
[/quote]
In a word, yes.
S
Squiggles
Guest
If Suarez wasn't a stupid cunt we wouldn't be in this situation. Let's not forget that. We know what the FA are like and so should he by now. It's to be expected and we're mugs for allowing them to influence our season.
[quote author=Squiggles link=topic=47805.msg1440858#msg1440858 date=1323496696]
If Suarez wasn't a stupid cunt we wouldn't be in this situation. Let's not forget that. We know what the FA are like and so should he by now. It's to be expected and we're mugs for allowing them to influence our season.
[/quote]
He's not a fucking robot, and we know he's a bit of a wild card. He bit someone's ear for Christ's sake.
If Suarez wasn't a stupid cunt we wouldn't be in this situation. Let's not forget that. We know what the FA are like and so should he by now. It's to be expected and we're mugs for allowing them to influence our season.
[/quote]
He's not a fucking robot, and we know he's a bit of a wild card. He bit someone's ear for Christ's sake.
[quote author=Squiggles link=topic=47805.msg1440858#msg1440858 date=1323496696]
If Suarez wasn't a stupid cunt we wouldn't be in this situation. Let's not forget that. We know what the FA are like and so should he by now. It's to be expected and we're mugs for allowing them to influence our season.
[/quote]
Why? His English isn't up to much yet, and it isn't the sort of thing you'd pick up while you're still trying to remember how to ask for a cup of coffee.
If Suarez wasn't a stupid cunt we wouldn't be in this situation. Let's not forget that. We know what the FA are like and so should he by now. It's to be expected and we're mugs for allowing them to influence our season.
[/quote]
Why? His English isn't up to much yet, and it isn't the sort of thing you'd pick up while you're still trying to remember how to ask for a cup of coffee.
He was guilty of the finger incident, but lets face it. I would have done it too readily if someone was hurling abuse at me. So i'm not going to judge him on a different standard.
But has it been proved regarding the charges on Evra? Why are we assuming he is guilty if its not been proved? He is one of our own for fucks sake......and further Evra has a history of making false allegations.
But has it been proved regarding the charges on Evra? Why are we assuming he is guilty if its not been proved? He is one of our own for fucks sake......and further Evra has a history of making false allegations.
S
Squiggles
Guest
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=47805.msg1440963#msg1440963 date=1323523658]
He was guilty of the finger incident, but lets face it. I would have done it too readily if someone was hurling abuse at me. So i'm not going to judge him on a different standard.
But has it been proved regarding the charges on Evra? Why are we assuming he is guilty if its not been proved? He is one of our own for fucks sake......and further Evra has a history of making false allegations.
[/quote]
It wasn't Evra who made those previous allegations.
And I'm not assuming he's guilty of anything, but he's putting himself into stupid situations the club shouldn't have to deal with.
He was guilty of the finger incident, but lets face it. I would have done it too readily if someone was hurling abuse at me. So i'm not going to judge him on a different standard.
But has it been proved regarding the charges on Evra? Why are we assuming he is guilty if its not been proved? He is one of our own for fucks sake......and further Evra has a history of making false allegations.
[/quote]
It wasn't Evra who made those previous allegations.
And I'm not assuming he's guilty of anything, but he's putting himself into stupid situations the club shouldn't have to deal with.
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=47805.msg1440963#msg1440963 date=1323523658]
But has it been proved regarding the charges on Evra? Why are we assuming he is guilty if its not been proved? He is one of our own for fucks sake......and further Evra has a history of making false allegations.
[/quote]
Ok,
1) I think people are split on Luis' guilt or innocence, but being "one of our own" doesn't preclude him from possibly being a cock.
Tommy Smith was "one of our own".
2) Patrice Evra does not, I repeat, DOES NOT have a history of making false allegations.
But has it been proved regarding the charges on Evra? Why are we assuming he is guilty if its not been proved? He is one of our own for fucks sake......and further Evra has a history of making false allegations.
[/quote]
Ok,
1) I think people are split on Luis' guilt or innocence, but being "one of our own" doesn't preclude him from possibly being a cock.
Tommy Smith was "one of our own".
2) Patrice Evra does not, I repeat, DOES NOT have a history of making false allegations.
I thin innocence until proven guilty applies to everyone and especially one of our own players. I didnt say he was not guilty or that he cant be.
If you would extend the same benefit of doubt you are all too willing to give Evra to Suarez, we wouldnt have a long thread to talk about it.
Racism is a serious allegation, and id like to believe our player is not one untill procen guilty.....if its ok with the two of you.
If you would extend the same benefit of doubt you are all too willing to give Evra to Suarez, we wouldnt have a long thread to talk about it.
Racism is a serious allegation, and id like to believe our player is not one untill procen guilty.....if its ok with the two of you.
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=47805.msg1440978#msg1440978 date=1323525198]
I thin innocence until proven guilty applies to everyone and especially one of our own players. I didnt say he was not guilty or that he cant be.
If you would extend the same benefit of doubt you are all too willing to give Evra to Suarez, we wouldnt have a long thread to talk about it.
Racism is a serious allegation, and id like to believe our player is not one untill procen guilty.....if its ok with the two of you.
[/quote]
Hahahahahahaaaa !
I thin innocence until proven guilty applies to everyone and especially one of our own players. I didnt say he was not guilty or that he cant be.
If you would extend the same benefit of doubt you are all too willing to give Evra to Suarez, we wouldnt have a long thread to talk about it.
Racism is a serious allegation, and id like to believe our player is not one untill procen guilty.....if its ok with the two of you.
[/quote]
Hahahahahahaaaa !
Passion play of the outsiders leads to inevitable crucifixion
Kenny Dalglish's decision to deliver what was, in effect, a PowerPoint presentation to the media last week underlines how seriously Liverpool view the treatment of Luis Suarez.
Dalglish thinks of the press the way Keith Richards would look on One Direction: he knows there's a point to them but he's not very sure what it is.
So for Dalglish to sit down with newspapermen last Thursday and run through a DVD of the fouls committed on Luis Suarez at Craven Cottage and the behaviour of his players in comparison to Fulham's was an act of ecumenical openness.
Dalglish has offered unequivocal backing to Suarez, even when it has seemed uncomfortable and perhaps unwise, namely in the Patrice Evra case, but last week in a matter where he is on much surer ground, he took on those who feel outrage must be compensated.
A few years ago, Javier Mascherano was sent off at Old Trafford, essentially for not reading the Daily Mail. If he had, he would have been aware that the FA were running a campaign to respect match officials and, for the one weekend they ran it, it went very well and resulted in the sending off of Javier Mascherano.
Mascherano seemed ignorant of the climate because he hadn't been reading the paper. Suarez is clearly aware of it, as it is a micro-climate surrounding him.
For all its admirable qualities, English football remains certain that it has something to teach a type of foreign player who plays with swagger and that thing they say they want but never like it when they get it: passion.
Suarez is viewed by the football establishment the way the denizens of Surbiton view illegal immigrants who they feel are denying them some abstract right. They are so convinced their values are being contaminated that their fury is all the more righteous.
Of course, Suarez plays with the charge that he racially abused Evra hanging over him. If this is proved, there are many who will rightly feel he has run out of road. Suarez's defence is believed to be subtle in a world which has no room for subtlety, in a world in which people must be all good or all bad.
His defence may not be the truth. Evra also believes he has been wronged and worse, but until that is decided Suarez is now encountering those who portray themselves as protectors of the integrity of the game. These are not solely referees, although referees seem to have decided that ignoring whatever fouls are committed on Suarez is the simplest way of dealing with the matter.
His opponents, too, have been allowed to set themselves up as moral guardians. In fact, some of them have turned morality to their own advantage, just as everything, sooner or later, gets exploited on a football field. Suarez knows this game, as he plays it too, but the referees' job is to make the correct calls, not assume the man making them is cheating.
Players used to kick the ball out of play so an injured player could receive treatment; now a player feigns injury knowing that play will be stopped and his team will not be attacked when they're unbalanced.
Whenever Suarez goes down, players now stand over him accusing him of diving. There were those who once saw this as an act of good authority. But it is now as likely to be an act of gamesmanship in itself, an attempt to influence a referee into believing that the man they are going to spend the game kicking cannot be trusted.
Suarez is the latest victim of the attempt to impose shrill middle-class values on a game which is not based on shrill middle-class values, certainly not when Luis Suarez is playing it.
Wayne Rooney suffered when he was banned for celebrating a goal through the medium of swearing and now Suarez is finding that there is a prim world trying to assert itself in English football.
Dalglish questioned the FA's appeal of Rooney's suspension last week and also said there was no comparison between Rooney's ban for swearing at Upton Park and Suarez's charge -- "that's like saying a man is a bit like a woman."
Rooney was protected in Nyon because England needs him but he is as alien to the corporate class as Suarez or Eric Cantona. David Moyes once described Rooney as "the last of the street footballers" and English football looks determined to rid the game of footballers who come from certain streets, whether they're in Croxteth or Montevideo.
But Suarez allows them outrage uncluttered by human conflicts like self-interest. The sins of the game can be dumped on him; he is just the latest in the long line of foreigners who dive outrageously, an act never committed by English players like Joe Cole, Michael Owen or Steven Gerrard.
The FA should charge themselves with disrepute after deciding that a man raising his finger to supporters who have booed him should be taken seriously. They have lost their nerve as they respond to the outraged constituencies that demand action immediately if the game and the country isn't going to sink into irreversible decline. The race to be the most sanctimonious was easily won by the BBC website which decided that a picture of a middle finger extended was too much for anyone to see so they pixelated it.
Dalglish feels Liverpool are suffering and he's right. When Jay Spearing was rightly sent off last Monday, a number of Liverpool players surrounded the referee and Liverpool were then charged with failing to control their players. Given that other clubs protest more vociferously over a throw-in, it's easy to understand Dalglish's point.
On Monday, Liverpool had six players on the pitch who only joined the club in the last year. They had no outfield player who had the stature of a Liverpool player -- there was no Gerrard or Carragher to direct the referee in a certain way or shape an agenda. Craig Bellamy is a man of character but he is not a natural diplomat.
If Dalglish had wanted to, he could have added a soundtrack of Ray Wilkins' commentary on Sky to his presentation on Thursday.
Wilkins analysed Suarez's fouls, remarking after Brede Hangeland had elbowed him and shoved him to the ground that it was "almost obstruction if anything, nothing else -- there's a slight obstruction but I don't see why that's a foul."
Suarez now inhabits a world in which he is almost obstructed but never fouled and he is nearly always penalised. In the end, he reacted and he is now in the unfortunate position of being backed by Neil Warnock. People always kick you when you're down.
dfanning@independent.ie
- Dion Fanning
Kenny Dalglish's decision to deliver what was, in effect, a PowerPoint presentation to the media last week underlines how seriously Liverpool view the treatment of Luis Suarez.
Dalglish thinks of the press the way Keith Richards would look on One Direction: he knows there's a point to them but he's not very sure what it is.
So for Dalglish to sit down with newspapermen last Thursday and run through a DVD of the fouls committed on Luis Suarez at Craven Cottage and the behaviour of his players in comparison to Fulham's was an act of ecumenical openness.
Dalglish has offered unequivocal backing to Suarez, even when it has seemed uncomfortable and perhaps unwise, namely in the Patrice Evra case, but last week in a matter where he is on much surer ground, he took on those who feel outrage must be compensated.
A few years ago, Javier Mascherano was sent off at Old Trafford, essentially for not reading the Daily Mail. If he had, he would have been aware that the FA were running a campaign to respect match officials and, for the one weekend they ran it, it went very well and resulted in the sending off of Javier Mascherano.
Mascherano seemed ignorant of the climate because he hadn't been reading the paper. Suarez is clearly aware of it, as it is a micro-climate surrounding him.
For all its admirable qualities, English football remains certain that it has something to teach a type of foreign player who plays with swagger and that thing they say they want but never like it when they get it: passion.
Suarez is viewed by the football establishment the way the denizens of Surbiton view illegal immigrants who they feel are denying them some abstract right. They are so convinced their values are being contaminated that their fury is all the more righteous.
Of course, Suarez plays with the charge that he racially abused Evra hanging over him. If this is proved, there are many who will rightly feel he has run out of road. Suarez's defence is believed to be subtle in a world which has no room for subtlety, in a world in which people must be all good or all bad.
His defence may not be the truth. Evra also believes he has been wronged and worse, but until that is decided Suarez is now encountering those who portray themselves as protectors of the integrity of the game. These are not solely referees, although referees seem to have decided that ignoring whatever fouls are committed on Suarez is the simplest way of dealing with the matter.
His opponents, too, have been allowed to set themselves up as moral guardians. In fact, some of them have turned morality to their own advantage, just as everything, sooner or later, gets exploited on a football field. Suarez knows this game, as he plays it too, but the referees' job is to make the correct calls, not assume the man making them is cheating.
Players used to kick the ball out of play so an injured player could receive treatment; now a player feigns injury knowing that play will be stopped and his team will not be attacked when they're unbalanced.
Whenever Suarez goes down, players now stand over him accusing him of diving. There were those who once saw this as an act of good authority. But it is now as likely to be an act of gamesmanship in itself, an attempt to influence a referee into believing that the man they are going to spend the game kicking cannot be trusted.
Suarez is the latest victim of the attempt to impose shrill middle-class values on a game which is not based on shrill middle-class values, certainly not when Luis Suarez is playing it.
Wayne Rooney suffered when he was banned for celebrating a goal through the medium of swearing and now Suarez is finding that there is a prim world trying to assert itself in English football.
Dalglish questioned the FA's appeal of Rooney's suspension last week and also said there was no comparison between Rooney's ban for swearing at Upton Park and Suarez's charge -- "that's like saying a man is a bit like a woman."
Rooney was protected in Nyon because England needs him but he is as alien to the corporate class as Suarez or Eric Cantona. David Moyes once described Rooney as "the last of the street footballers" and English football looks determined to rid the game of footballers who come from certain streets, whether they're in Croxteth or Montevideo.
But Suarez allows them outrage uncluttered by human conflicts like self-interest. The sins of the game can be dumped on him; he is just the latest in the long line of foreigners who dive outrageously, an act never committed by English players like Joe Cole, Michael Owen or Steven Gerrard.
The FA should charge themselves with disrepute after deciding that a man raising his finger to supporters who have booed him should be taken seriously. They have lost their nerve as they respond to the outraged constituencies that demand action immediately if the game and the country isn't going to sink into irreversible decline. The race to be the most sanctimonious was easily won by the BBC website which decided that a picture of a middle finger extended was too much for anyone to see so they pixelated it.
Dalglish feels Liverpool are suffering and he's right. When Jay Spearing was rightly sent off last Monday, a number of Liverpool players surrounded the referee and Liverpool were then charged with failing to control their players. Given that other clubs protest more vociferously over a throw-in, it's easy to understand Dalglish's point.
On Monday, Liverpool had six players on the pitch who only joined the club in the last year. They had no outfield player who had the stature of a Liverpool player -- there was no Gerrard or Carragher to direct the referee in a certain way or shape an agenda. Craig Bellamy is a man of character but he is not a natural diplomat.
If Dalglish had wanted to, he could have added a soundtrack of Ray Wilkins' commentary on Sky to his presentation on Thursday.
Wilkins analysed Suarez's fouls, remarking after Brede Hangeland had elbowed him and shoved him to the ground that it was "almost obstruction if anything, nothing else -- there's a slight obstruction but I don't see why that's a foul."
Suarez now inhabits a world in which he is almost obstructed but never fouled and he is nearly always penalised. In the end, he reacted and he is now in the unfortunate position of being backed by Neil Warnock. People always kick you when you're down.
dfanning@independent.ie
- Dion Fanning
EDIT: sorry, wrong poster. I didn't get much sleep last night (drank too much alcohol too late in the evening). Soz.
The article's actually supportive of us and the case that we're getting the rough end of the stick over this.
The article's actually supportive of us and the case that we're getting the rough end of the stick over this.
- Status
