3 match ban for violent conduct and move on. You can't add on because of who it was, its the same when people stamp on someone, 3 games. I'd much rather bigger punishments for tackles like McMallamums.
yeah this cmon guys the real enemy is the 'horror lunge', not this weirdo
Jason Cundy on talksport just claimed to have bitten Eddie Youds during the play off semi as Youds kept shoving his shoulder in his face at every corner. Eddie eddie eddie...
Yeah right, money is a big worry for him and will hurt a lot. Big detterent.
Liverpool saying they will get him "anger management" coaching. That'll sort it.
Just fcuk him off.
What would a proper football club (not brand) do ?
I think pretty much all clubs would act the same. If it's a top player you want to keep, you take minimal action & if it's a player you want to bin, it gives you the perfect opportunity.
If Kerkar bit someone many would say get rid. If Solly did the same, hardly anyone would say sack him.
If Solly bit a player (on International TV - not that it matters if it was on TV) would we say, " all OK" ?
Fuck would we and you know it.
Fact is normal players don't do that.
What rubbish you're spouting. If we'd played Liverpool in the cup this season on the TV & Solly bit Suarez, you're saying you'd have wanted us to sack him, so he can sign for another club for free ?
If so, you'd be one of an elite few. Solly goes to Palace or Millwall on a free, because we sacked him ?
Ha ha.
Does anyone think Solly would bite another player ?
Did anyone think Suarez would bite yet another player ?
So can you confirm then that if you was the Charlton chairman & Solly bit a Liverpool player on live TV in a FA Cup game this season, you would have sacked him, which would enable him to sign for probably W Ham or say Palace or Millwall for free as he would have no contract ?
Yeah right, money is a big worry for him and will hurt a lot. Big detterent.
Liverpool saying they will get him "anger management" coaching. That'll sort it.
Just fcuk him off.
What would a proper football club (not brand) do ?
I think pretty much all clubs would act the same. If it's a top player you want to keep, you take minimal action & if it's a player you want to bin, it gives you the perfect opportunity.
If Kerkar bit someone many would say get rid. If Solly did the same, hardly anyone would say sack him.
If Solly bit a player (on International TV - not that it matters if it was on TV) would we say, " all OK" ?
Fuck would we and you know it.
Fact is normal players don't do that.
What rubbish you're spouting. If we'd played Liverpool in the cup this season on the TV & Solly bit Suarez, you're saying you'd have wanted us to sack him, so he can sign for another club for free ?
If so, you'd be one of an elite few. Solly goes to Palace or Millwall on a free, because we sacked him ?
Ha ha.
Does anyone think Solly would bite another player ?
Did anyone think Suarez would bite yet another player ?
So can you confirm then that if you was the Charlton chairman & Solly bit a Liverpool player on live TV in a FA Cup game this season, you would have sacked him, which would enable him to sign for probably W Ham or say Palace or Millwall for free as he would have no contract ?
If Solly was a scum bag, it was the 2nd time he had done it and he wasn't long over an 8 game ban for racism ? Yes.
Whats a proper club then some team that can afford 30 million ? what total bollox
Miller scored for us at the battle ofthe bridge-- kept us in the top division---- lennie kicked him out the next season for spitting at a player.
Or did you just think it was only Curbs that got us in the top division ?
Exactly. Miller scoring at Stamford bridge earned us another year in the top flight, nowadays they would be calling it th £100,000,000 goal not £30m. Also as for not selling your best player to rivals, two words, John Humphrey.
Yeah right, money is a big worry for him and will hurt a lot. Big detterent.
Liverpool saying they will get him "anger management" coaching. That'll sort it.
Just fcuk him off.
What would a proper football club (not brand) do ?
I think pretty much all clubs would act the same. If it's a top player you want to keep, you take minimal action & if it's a player you want to bin, it gives you the perfect opportunity.
If Kerkar bit someone many would say get rid. If Solly did the same, hardly anyone would say sack him.
If Solly bit a player (on International TV - not that it matters if it was on TV) would we say, " all OK" ?
Fuck would we and you know it.
Fact is normal players don't do that.
What rubbish you're spouting. If we'd played Liverpool in the cup this season on the TV & Solly bit Suarez, you're saying you'd have wanted us to sack him, so he can sign for another club for free ?
If so, you'd be one of an elite few. Solly goes to Palace or Millwall on a free, because we sacked him ?
Ha ha.
Does anyone think Solly would bite another player ?
Did anyone think Suarez would bite yet another player ?
So can you confirm then that if you was the Charlton chairman & Solly bit a Liverpool player on live TV in a FA Cup game this season, you would have sacked him, which would enable him to sign for probably W Ham or say Palace or Millwall for free as he would have no contract ?
If Solly was a scum bag, it was the 2nd time he had done it and he wasn't long over an 8 game ban for racism ? Yes.
And if he wasn't, then you wouldn't. In other words you would do the same as Liverpool & virtually every other club. You would only sack him if it benefits you to do so. Case closed :-)
Listened to Neville's take on it which is argued from an ex professional viewpoint. Fair enough. Maybe it is to some extent a "cultural thing". But my viewpoint is just from an ordinary fan. Personally I think it was a dreadful action from a professional player on another caught on national television. For me that has NO place in the game. I am not expecting Liverpool to get rid of him, because football is largely about money, and no club in the Premiership would likely sell their star striker for such an action, the morality of all this would probably not loom large in their thinking. But I do think the FA should ban him for a noticeable number of games. It is a second offence. Otherwise it will appear that you can do pretty much anything to an opponent in the heat of the moment, and that cannot be right, can it?
Neville says that spitting and biting are not in our culture - as though they exist in other cultures. They don't and saying that he made a mistake is fudging it a bit, this wasn't a rash or dangerous challenge but something that perhaps reveals something about his character.
As long as Suarez is scoring goals Liverpool will not want to ditch him. For the same reasons Fergie was tolerant of Roy Keane, Wenger forgave players with poor discilinary records etc but as soon as their form dropped they became expendable. Suarez scores goals and has kept a poor Liverpool side in with a shout of getting into Europe next season and that's all that matters.
He was banned for seven matches for biting the player in Holland, he got eight matches for the Evra incident and was banned for a deliberate handball in stopping a goal bound shot in the last world cup that prevented Ghana from getting a goal that would have seen them advance into the semi finals. It isn't anger management he needs but a visit to a psychiatrist. He's wrong in the head and his teammmates just accepting him back is not the same as excusing a player sent off for doing something wrong.
Listened to Neville's take on it which is argued from an ex professional viewpoint. Fair enough. Maybe it is to some extent a "cultural thing". But my viewpoint is just from an ordinary fan. Personally I think it was a dreadful action from a professional player on another caught on national television. For me that has NO place in the game. I am not expecting Liverpool to get rid of him, because football is largely about money, and no club in the Premiership would likely sell their star striker for such an action, the morality of all this would probably not loom large in their thinking. But I do think the FA should ban him for a noticeable number of games. It is a second offence. Otherwise it will appear that you can do pretty much anything to an opponent in the heat of the moment, and that cannot be right, can it?
You are right, it doesn't have a place in the game and neither should punches, elbows, head-butts and lunging high tackles. In my opinion, it's a physical assault on a similar level of severity to those other actions - Zamora's recent head-high, studs up attack was far more likely to cause severe injury but that did not generate half the fuss this has.
It's not about defending Suarez's actions, it's about keeping the response to it in proportion. Personally I don't think serious foul play and violent conduct are punished harshly enough anyway but if Suarez is going to get the book thrown at him, then the FA need to start doing it to more players and for a wider variety of offences.
That is all fair stuff Exiled, the only point I would make that it is my understanding that human bites can potentially be fatal if the skin of the recipient is punctured in the process. It is due,I believe,to bacteria which may be present in the mouth that can cause infection and worse case septicaemia. My understanding is that this is fairly rare, but it is still a factor in this. It's down to the FA now....
That is all fair stuff Exiled, the only point I would make that it is my understanding that human bites can potentially be fatal if the skin of the recipient is punctured in the process. It is due,I believe,to bacteria which may be present in the mouth that can cause infection and worse case septicaemia. My understanding is that this is fairly rare, but it is still a factor in this. It's down to the FA now....
So can punching people, stamping and Elbowing someone again rare but you catch someone in the wrong place and it can cause death. 3 matches just like any of the offences above IMO.
Neville has it right from the perspective of the team, ie you don't throw one of yOur teammates "overboard" because you're a team. But it's not really their decision.
If the most popular bloke at work goes and bites the nastiest fecker in the firm then no doubt his co-employees may be supportive of him. But the employer still has to do the right thing.
Comparing a bite to a late challenge - even one that results in injury - is just not in the same ball park for me. One could be a genuine accident. The other is never going to be.
Best thing to do would be to send him to someone who can sort him out and not let him play again worldwide until he is cleared. Biting is something a 4 year old would do, not a full grown man, there is something very wrong with him.
Comments
Also as for not selling your best player to rivals, two words, John Humphrey.
You would only sack him if it benefits you to do so. Case closed :-)
Suarez is a scum bag, has previous and racist tendencies. Get rid.
To be fair Liverpool have handled this better than the Patrice Evra racism where they went into complete denial.
There were calls for Liverpool to sack Suarez..that was never going to happen.
Cannot afford to lose their top player regardless of what stupid things he does.
But my viewpoint is just from an ordinary fan. Personally I think it was a dreadful action from a professional player on another caught on national television. For me that has NO place in the game. I am not expecting Liverpool to get rid of him, because football is largely about money, and no club in the Premiership would likely sell their star striker for such an action, the morality of all this would probably not loom large in their thinking.
But I do think the FA should ban him for a noticeable number of games. It is a second offence. Otherwise it will appear that you can do pretty much anything to an opponent in the heat of the moment, and that cannot be right, can it?
As long as Suarez is scoring goals Liverpool will not want to ditch him. For the same reasons Fergie was tolerant of Roy Keane, Wenger forgave players with poor discilinary records etc but as soon as their form dropped they became expendable. Suarez scores goals and has kept a poor Liverpool side in with a shout of getting into Europe next season and that's all that matters.
He was banned for seven matches for biting the player in Holland, he got eight matches for the Evra incident and was banned for a deliberate handball in stopping a goal bound shot in the last world cup that prevented Ghana from getting a goal that would have seen them advance into the semi finals. It isn't anger management he needs but a visit to a psychiatrist. He's wrong in the head and his teammmates just accepting him back is not the same as excusing a player sent off for doing something wrong.
It's not about defending Suarez's actions, it's about keeping the response to it in proportion. Personally I don't think serious foul play and violent conduct are punished harshly enough anyway but if Suarez is going to get the book thrown at him, then the FA need to start doing it to more players and for a wider variety of offences.
It's down to the FA now....
If the most popular bloke at work goes and bites the nastiest fecker in the firm then no doubt his co-employees may be supportive of him. But the employer still has to do the right thing.
Comparing a bite to a late challenge - even one that results in injury - is just not in the same ball park for me. One could be a genuine accident. The other is never going to be.
Just my view.
We'd rather get our shirts off and knuckles out but he'd rather bite and spit ?