So a ten game ban..
- Thread starter 6TimesaRed
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Appeal appeal appeal .
The FA seem to be getting rounded on by all the fuck-wit media that stirred all the thing up out of all proportion in the first place.
The only people that seem to be agreeing with the extent of the punishment are some of our ex players the club should not forget that.
I think we stand a good chance, it's bad enough as it is , I can't see it could be much worse, it's worth the chance.
The FA seem to be getting rounded on by all the fuck-wit media that stirred all the thing up out of all proportion in the first place.
The only people that seem to be agreeing with the extent of the punishment are some of our ex players the club should not forget that.
I think we stand a good chance, it's bad enough as it is , I can't see it could be much worse, it's worth the chance.
As long as some of the matches are removed and not suspended.
Getting some of the matches suspended would be awful imo, we'd have that hanging over his head for ages and a storm brewing about it every time he does something odd.
I'd normally disagree with appealing, but it does a lot of the media are saying it's too long, so even if they don't reduce it I doubt they'd risk increasing it.
I often wonder whether the club is given a nod & a wink as to whether there's any chance of an appeal being worthwhile beforehand. I find it hard to believe if there's was zero chance someone wouldn't tip us off to that by some means.
I often wonder whether the club is given a nod & a wink as to whether there's any chance of an appeal being worthwhile beforehand. I find it hard to believe if there's was zero chance someone wouldn't tip us off to that by some means.
10 fucking games...
I still can't believe it
5 games ban with 5 suspended for a period of 18 months, would be an outcome I'd seek for an appeal.. no way will the cnuts back down..
Basically he does it again he is fooked..
HD
I still can't believe it
5 games ban with 5 suspended for a period of 18 months, would be an outcome I'd seek for an appeal.. no way will the cnuts back down..
Basically he does it again he is fooked..
HD
Last edited:
Yep me too. I was very surprised with the guy from The Independent's view today. Very complimentary towards Suarez. We'll see about tomorrow.
Why can't the club just keep quiet when necessary?
I'm not spending £100's a month on this bullshit anymore. I'd rather spend £100 a year on Maine Road FC.
Pathetic.
I'm not spending £100's a month on this bullshit anymore. I'd rather spend £100 a year on Maine Road FC.
Pathetic.
Yep. Well said.
It was to be expected.
The only thing I find odd is that biting with no lasting/ short term damage gets you a longer ban than being racist in One of the biggest sporting events in the world..
Still Suarez to come in early September time, mega fresh and chomping at the bit. I'd say its entirely possible that he feeds of chaos - so who knows how effective he'll be next season
The only thing I find odd is that biting with no lasting/ short term damage gets you a longer ban than being racist in One of the biggest sporting events in the world..
Still Suarez to come in early September time, mega fresh and chomping at the bit. I'd say its entirely possible that he feeds of chaos - so who knows how effective he'll be next season
Liverpool goalkeeper Pepe Reina has defended team-mate Luis Suarez and claimed the Uruguayan is treated differently by the Football Association and media in England.
Reina says that there is hypocrisy and questioned the fairness of decisions.
Speaking on Spanish radio station COPE, Reina said:
“They treat Suárez differently, because he’s Uruguayan. He knows what he did is wrong, but 10 games is absurd, excessive and unfair.”
“Those [from the FA] who are making decisions lately are using Luis [Suárez] as a scapegoat.”
“Some get 4 games for racism and others 8. Where is the fairness?”
“Whoever knows Suárez knows he’s a great team-mate. He’s aggressive on the pitch, and that sometimes plays a dirty trick on him.”
Reina was asked about the media in England:
“In England many media are very, very, very, very, and I stress it, very hypocritical.”
Asked about the difference between the Suarez incident with Ivanovic, and Jermaine Defoe’s bite on Javier Mascherano in 2006, Reina said:
“They said it was a refereed incident. Anyway, they were other times, I guess… He was an English player, I guess.”
He was then asked whether he thought it was xenophobic:
“Xenophobia in England? (thinks) There’s hypocrisy, I don’t know if xenophobia. I’m very happy here. They’ve treated me very well.”
Liverpool will decide on Thursday whether to appeal the ban, something they have been advised against doing, after they receive the written reasons from The FA.
Reina says that there is hypocrisy and questioned the fairness of decisions.
Speaking on Spanish radio station COPE, Reina said:
“They treat Suárez differently, because he’s Uruguayan. He knows what he did is wrong, but 10 games is absurd, excessive and unfair.”
“Those [from the FA] who are making decisions lately are using Luis [Suárez] as a scapegoat.”
“Some get 4 games for racism and others 8. Where is the fairness?”
“Whoever knows Suárez knows he’s a great team-mate. He’s aggressive on the pitch, and that sometimes plays a dirty trick on him.”
Reina was asked about the media in England:
“In England many media are very, very, very, very, and I stress it, very hypocritical.”
Asked about the difference between the Suarez incident with Ivanovic, and Jermaine Defoe’s bite on Javier Mascherano in 2006, Reina said:
“They said it was a refereed incident. Anyway, they were other times, I guess… He was an English player, I guess.”
He was then asked whether he thought it was xenophobic:
“Xenophobia in England? (thinks) There’s hypocrisy, I don’t know if xenophobia. I’m very happy here. They’ve treated me very well.”
Liverpool will decide on Thursday whether to appeal the ban, something they have been advised against doing, after they receive the written reasons from The FA.
Ollie Holt in the Mirror:
Holt is ignoring that there is probably an element of the ban for cumulative offences, whereas there wasn't for the racist incident.
Should there be though? He's been punished for those offenses already. Ferdinand got a fine for his "choc ice" comment last year. Did anyone consider the multitude of sins he's committed? Did the FA consider Rooney's tarnished record when begging for his ban to be rescinded? Course they didn't. It's inconsistent, and coming out and stating prior to an investigation that "three games won't suffice" just shows them up for what they are. I don't know why people are being so defensive of them, they've grabbed the 10 games out of thin air because of who he is, and the worst thing is, most of us expected it, and got a accused of being paranoid or whatever for it, by the usual blerts on here.
Inconsistent? yes, but at the same time you could argue that Michael Owen would not have got a 2-match ban for swearing after scoring a goal.
Refs are inconsistent and so are the independent disciplinary panels. The media hysteria got Suarez the 10-match ban, just like hostile environments in the stadium affect referee decisions.
So Defoe and Terrys action warrante da 4 game ban combined, and Suarez gets 18 for the exact same offences....
Then certain players should never be on the receiving end of yellow cards, if they're serial offenders. Straight red for a trip. Or why not 20 games?
Should there be? IMO yes, absolutely. Are there inconsistencies? Maybe. Personally I don't much care, but you could well be right. The FA stated that a 3 game ban would be insufficient because they have to. That's been said numerous times on here so not sure why it's not sinking in.
The question is whether or not an appeal is likely to reduce the ban or increase it
Harsher punishments for repeat offences are so common, and so widely accepted in society at large, that it's a pretty big leap to say they shouldn't exist. Yellow cards for a number of fouls? Ever heard of that one? A shorter sentence for first time offenders? Ever heard of that?
I think that's irrelevant, quite honestly. We have to appeal because we think the ban is over the top and we want to support our player, not because we think it's got a chance of being reduced.
That being said, I think Suarez will now decide he's had enough of english football and leave this summer.
All everyday normal legal principles and procedures are greeted with shock and disgust by Liverpool fans when Suarez is being punished.
Margaret Thatcher lovers UNITE!
The accumulated yellow card rule is already written in stone. It's a rule everybody knows. But why should they even allow for the first yellow card in your example? A player that's been sent off multiple times and have got countless yellows in previous seasons should be sent straight off and given a massive ban by your logic.
If only for the hope of keeping Suarez, I think we should appeal.
I think there is a good argument for suspending at least half of his ban..
On that basis it is worth appealing
stpp being a fucking troll.
Who is rohan rickets?
- Status
Similar threads
-
- Locked
