UKC

...in public relations.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/apr/25/luis-suarez-suspension-pepe-...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/apr/25/brendan-rodgers-luis-suarez-...

Really, have these people learned *nothing*!!

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

'The punishment is against the man rather than the incident'

I read that comment, earlier on, and assumed that my eyes were on the blink.

In reply to Clauso:

Quite.

Generally speaking I wish LFC well, but they're really testing my patience.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Doesn't surprise me at all.

Expect T Shirts and 2 mins silence at their next home game.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

LFC eh? Devoid of dignity, class, self-awareness, decency, brains. Oh and trophies.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Beggars belief, although we are talking about football, so nothing should surprise us.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Some quality stuff here: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=646110535414884&set=a.5208641779...

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
i don't know how Brendan Rodgers kept a straight face through that press conference, I'm pretty sure i know what a certain mr Shankley would have done.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


A ban is correct but 10 games is not proportionate to the crime.

I think everyone has to admit that "False Outrage" and Suarez goes hand in hand from all sides. Listening to some people it's like Suarez has invented cheating and bad sportsmanship or the first player to lose his temper on the pitch!

Take Daniel Sturridge. Dives for fun a lot more than Suarez, see the Man City game for evidence were was the outrage? he got booked for diving!! That's right there wasn't any...why?

What about the greatest diver the premier league has ever seen. Gareth Bale. The Biggest cheat in the game since Ronaldo. how many times has he been booked for cheating? Any outrage?

Apart from the racism thing the rest of his antics have been nothing more than the antics of a pratt. They don't warrant the actions of the press or others trying to make out that he should be sacked.

The FA have shown a sinister side in how they dealt with Suarez's offence compared to John Terry. Suarez was convicted on the balance of probabilities by men in suits (Business Men). John Terry was arressted and taken to a court of law but recieved a lesser punishment by the FA! The FA's response does not stack up, John Terry should have got 8 games or more as arguably it was a worse event considering the crown prosecution had enough evidence to prosecute.

Remember Defoe biting Mascherano? he was still picked for England only recieved a Yellow.
Remember When Alan shearer kicked Neil Lennon in the head?
What about Duncan Ferguson's hand around Stefen Freunds throat?
Ben Thatcher smashing Pedro Mendes in to the hoardings causing the guy to have a seizure - 8 Match Ban by the FA

The FA is not consistent were was the sanctions against England supporters chanting racist songs in San Marino?

Suarez is an idiot but no more of an idiot than a lot of players in the league.

In reply to chad halfwit:

Brendan Rodgers or David Brent?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/quiz/2013/apr/02/brendan-rodgers-david-b...

In reply to Alan M:
>

I'm not sure 'idiot' is the first adjective that comes to mind for most people outside Liverpool concerning Suarez.

In reply to Glyno:

8 out of 10 for me.

guessed em all mind.

In reply to Alan M:

1. Defoe was lucky..

2. You reap what you sow..

3. 10 matches is harsh.. but this is his second biting offence.. the last one was what 6? game ban.. this is after 1 long ban in the UK.. I expected 6-8 games.. 10 slightly harsh but understandable.

3. Shearer was a disagrace..the FA weak.

4. Thatcher a thug.. the FA Weak.. they do react more to high profile players.. Rooney getting 3 matches for swearing..

5. Terry was found innocent.. he was prosecuted so the FA had to ignore the criminal proceedings.. But he got a significant ban, rightly

Ronaldo.. stopped diving towards the end.. but he did leap challenges.. but he was the most fouled player in the league.. Bale similar.. TBH diving.. not great.. no huge threat.. McManaman challenges are.. we need to stamp them out before diving..

In reply to Glyno:

That might be the case, but, you can't get away from the fact that Suarez in no more sinister than most other players in the league.

Maybe it's a North west England thing because the Blue side of the city worship a bloke that was sent to prison. The Red blokes down the M62 worship a bloke that admitted going out to end another blokes career as well as a kung fu French man who attacks supporters.

Suarez is an idiot but no more than most past, present and still to come.

In reply to Alan M: Apart from Haaland played again...

Eric attacked one supporter who abused him...

You worship moral gods..

Gerrard.. no smudge against that mans name.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/video/2009/jul/21/steven-gerrard-trial-c...

Best lawyer in Liverpool.. how the hell he got off that..

Carragher.. lobbed a coin at the crowd..

Fowler.. Homophobe..

Souness.. broke someones jaw...

Come on...

In reply to Alan M:


than *most* other players?

that's a bit of a slur on the vast majority of players who manage to get through the season without racially abusing opponents or sinking their teeth into fellow professionals


there you did it again, minimising what he did. that there are some other players who have done the same, or worse (rape for example) doesnt alter the fact that suarez's actions are far more unpleasant that the routine diving and gamesmanship that goes on.

as JCM suggested, this is likely to be harming liverpools reputation significantly. thuggery on the pitch followed by petulant whining off it. its not an attractive sight, and it would have been much better if they had said, "we accept the punishment. it was a serious offence. we will be working with Luis to help him channel his anger better in future into doing what he is best at- scoring goals"

a shame to see a great club reduced to this

gregor

In reply to IainRUK:

Agreed very luck. Its why they should scrap the rule that they can't go back retrospectively if it was seen by the ref.

Agreed again, hence my pratt comments. But the outrage is still over the top by most people on all sides

His ban in Holland is not applicale in this instance. In England he has served an 8 game ban for racist comments and he has bit someone (warranting a ban). Even with it being a second event infront of the panel were violent behaviour would normally receive a 3 game ban a more suitable punishment for the crime would have been 5-6 games. (3 game ban as stipulated and further 2-3 for second event).

Agree - But how much was the fact that he was also an England player/captain come in to it?

Agreed, the Thatcher event was probably the worst player to player incident I have ever witnessed. 8 Match ban when the Mendes could have died!!

Yes they were correct to ignore the criminal aspect but the ban should have been the same as they gave to Suarez. My argument is that Suarez was found guilty by business men using the balance of probabilites no witnesses etc etc etc. Terry was found to have said something that the LAW could get involved in. The FA did not require balance of probabilities to decide Terrys fate. The bans should have been the same.

Bale gets a lot of slack and protection from the Refs. Similar to what Michael Owen used to get. Owen has come out and admitted that he cheated. Bale is a cheat, I'm trying to find the youtube vides of him holding his face rolling around on the floor when the replays show the impact to be his chest. There are also video's of him holding his ankle and again replays show no contact. He's a cheat plain and simple.
Ronaldo I hate him because he was so good I take your point though he did stay on his feet a lot more near the end of his Man U career.

Totally agree they need to get a grip of Mcmanaman style tackles and two footed challenges first. I don't care what anyone says leading with the studs or jumping in two footed is not a reflex action.

In reply to Alan M:

let's not forget also, he's currently being investigated by FIFA for punching an opponent in a recent international game.

In reply to Glyno:

Lets not forget the other bloke grabbed his nuts!!

In reply to Alan M: Thatcher should have been a criminal charge..

Shearer bullied the FA as he was captain.. Terry tried to..

Totally agree with our last statement.. these players know what they are doing..

Re the Holland ban.. I think it would have been a factor.. I rate the guy a lot, would love to see him at OT.. hes just so passionate.. but he needs very careful management.. Fergie could give him that. Rodgers needs to show his worth here..

In reply to Alan M:


November 2007 - Just months after joining Ajax on a five-year contract from Groningen, Suarez was fined for a dressing room bust-up with team-mate Albert Luque

June 2010 - Suarez invoked worldwide fury when infamously handballing on the line to deny Ghana a late extra-time winner in their World Cup quarter-final against Uruguay. Asamoah Gyan missed the penalty and Ghana lost the shootout, with Suarez celebrating wildly from the sidelines having been dismissed for the incident. "Mine is the real Hand Of God," said the striker. "I made the best save of the tournament."

November 2010 - In the first biting controversy of his career, Suarez received a seven-match ban for chomping PSV Eindhoven's Otman Bakkal on the shoulder during an Eredivisie game. He was immediately suspended by Ajax and never played another league game for the Amsterdam club. Suarez said after the match: "No, I do not regret what happened. Normally I always keep calm but I didn't ... I'm a little tired. This week I had to travel a lot."

December 2011 - Suarez was found guilty of racially abusing Manchester United defender Patrice Evra on seven occasions during a Premier League fixture

December 2011 - The striker was hit with another FA ban after admitting a charge of improper conduct. Suarez gave the finger to Fulham fans

February 2012 - Facing Evra again at Old Trafford, Suarez refused to shake the Frenchman's hand prior to a match at Old Trafford, invoking the fury of the man he racially abused. Suarez later issued an apology and Liverpool publicly criticised their player for "misleading" the club over his intention to shake Evra's hand.

November 2012 -The Liverpool striker was accused of stamping on the ankle of Wigan midfielder David Jones, with the ugly challenge drawing criticism from the normally mild-mannered Roberto Martinez, who said: "It wasn’t a nasty game, a bad game. But when you see the replay it is a clear stamp. It could have been a red card if the referee had seen it."

January 2013 - An FA Cup tie against Mansfield was marked by controversy as Suarez used his hand to help knock the ball over the line before wheeling away in enthusiastic celebration.

February 2013 - The striker was once again accused of stamping as he trod on Zenit St Petersburg defender Tomas Hubocan during a Europa League tie at Anfield.

March 2013 - Football's authorities have another video to carefully study after Suarez was seen to strike Chile defender Gonzalo Jara in the face during a World Cup qualifier against Uruguay. FIFA has begun an investigation into the incident, with Uruguay's lawyers looking into the matter.

really?

In reply to IainRUK:

Never. regardless of any talent he may have.

In reply to IainRUK:
Ten match ban?! Completely over the top punishment for a brilliant player. The Guardianistas would have him imprisoned in Gitmo if they could, for a childish 'bite' that looked more like a suck.

In reply to Glyno: RVP had a dodgy past.. never that bad.. but still.

The man is awesome. tbh this week he has looked like a scared kid.. I did feel a bit sorry for him.. I'd welcome him at OT.

In reply to Glyno:

Come on mate, read some of the things you have put forward. Research the topic, don't just go on google type in his name and try to pass it of as evidence.

Just picking on a few events.

The FA Cup handball....Watch the replays it was not intentional. The officals saw the incident clearly and have even said they let it go as they did not believe it to be intentional either. Wheeled away in enthusiastic celebration....Watch the event again he clearly expected it to be ruled out. He kissed his wrist like he does for every goal. Are you going to say that other players would not have stuck it in the back of the net in similar situations?

Stamping on Tomas Hubocan....you haven't seen the event have you? he stood on the blokes arse. UEFA looked at the event and decided it didn't warrant any action. Most would describe it as a footballing incident they were challenging each other for the ball in the Zenit box.

The punch watch the incident, the video in online. If the story is correct then Jara manhandled Suarez's genitals should he be investigated for sexual assault?

The stamp of David Jones, is bad but it can't be proven to be intentional. The FA considered it to be an on the ball incident...No action taken.

You must do better

In reply to IainRUK:

each to their own.

In reply to IainRUK:
Probably too late now, his fellow countrymen are urging him to leave England, as they say he's being persecuted here.

In reply to Alan M: As I said.. you reap what you sow.. Rooney has transformed himself discipline wise.. look at his record since Montenegro. Suarez has to now.

I still think he's not a bad bloke.. I didn't think JT was a racist.. just a wind up merchant.. but they play dangerous games.

In reply to Pinged:

+1

In reply to dioliahary: They make silly errors.. we have Sir Bobby as our moral compass.. which is why JM will most likely not be the next boss.. even though I'd like him to be..

But they seem to push out the old guard away from the club... against the boot room philosophy

In reply to IainRUK:

I have to admit Iain I agree with most of what you say in this thread apart from a few small areas . Suarez is his own worst enemy at times and I agree he plays a dangerous game.

I still stand by the fact that there is a lot of false outrage relating to Suarez. Like you say he needs to do a Rooney and take a look at his behaviour on the pitch (definitely keep him away from Barton though).

In reply to Alan M: I hope so.. he reminds me of Scholes.. play ground footballer.. plays for the pure love of football. I actually admire him but just shake my head so much but I do think, and I'm a United fan, that he's a great player and not a bad person to know.. which Keane was.. which I hate to say.. but all his team mates hated him.

Not some. All. I still rate the guy but he's damaged himself too much, but again I feel sorry for him as he could be best/gazza mk 2..

In reply to IainRUK:
JM would never be my pick for Old Trafford, why would you have a personality like him?

In reply to IainRUK:


Yes, good point. They used to be a club with class, like, well, us. Now they're getting like Chelsea. I thought Rodgers might be the man to turn it around, but he's making a right cock of this. Not that it's easy; maybe they calculate that this sort of nonsense is the price they have to pay for keeping Suarez and not ending up lower-midtable.

They're just totally deluded at the moment. Look at that idiot above going on about Defoe, for example. I can't even be bothered with his other comparisons, but as to Defoe, we all know that literally absolutely everyone except the FA thinks that the no-review-if-the-ref-saw-it rule is stupid. That's got nothing to do with this incident. If Suarez had been better brought up when he was a toddler he'd know that two wrongs don't make a right, as well as that biting people is bad.

jcm

In reply to IainRUK:

>he could be best/gazza mk 2.

Do you think? He's not self-harming, is he? He's just a genuine borderline psychopath.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: he was an alcoholic..

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

If LFC had an ounce of intelligence or integrity they'd have made an immediate announcement that Suarez would not be appearing for them for the remainder of the season - considering a ban was inevitable, they'd have had nothing to lose, but a huge amount of respect to gain.

Instead, they've hidden behind this pathetic self-pitying, 'everyone hates Liverpool' mentality, just like they did when they wore the T Shirts in support of Suarez after the racism issue.

In reply to IainRUK: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/roy-keane-reveals-his-alcohol-abuse-26...

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


Not deluded ... As a liverpool fan I agree with a ban. I still personally think the 10 games is not proportionate to the crime.

Before you go accusing people of being an idiot put your points forward. The whole point of a discussion is to engage put thoughts forward and by the end of it we may agree, we may disagree even more or we may find some common ground. To claim someone is an idiot with out engaing first in conversation to clarify points just proves ignorance and a self worth that is pretty ugly to be honest.

I don't know about you but I was brought up to put my point out there, listen, to absorb other peoples opinions and to reassess my thoughts if required. Like how I have stated that after a a few clarification points with Iain I have stated that I agree with most of what he says.

In reply to Glyno: Agree.. like Utd after EC.. instant ban.. it also may shorten the eventual ban..

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Well this topic confirms my believe that Liverpool are the most irrationally hated club in England.

Siege mentality time.

In reply to Skip: You are kidding.. us against them is Fergie's mantra..

In reply to IainRUK:

True but ironic as it's never been the case.

In reply to Skip: City player missed test.. fine.. Rio missed test 8 month ban..

In reply to IainRUK:

Ah, OK, I didn't know that. Not that it's a huge shock.

jcm

In reply to IainRUK: You're starting to sound like Brendan Rodgers now in your attempts at painting Utd as being victimised and whiter than white. I'm assuming that you're referring to Kolo Toure's failed test, which he was banned for by the way, however his reason for it was reasonable compared to Ferdinand's lame excuse.
I basically agree with the OP that LFC are complaining too much about this - the ban is more than I expected but not dramatically so. In the end they are just taking on this behaviour that has become so prevalent in the game these last few years of defending everything that they're own players do, no matter what. Managers like Fergie and Wenger have been doing it for years.

In reply to wynaptomos:


Im sure David Gill (if that was his name) and the united board claimed that the FA were victimising United a few seasons ago. I cant remember the incident exactly but rooney and fergie both got bans (I think)

I also remember fergies advisor Graham something or other! making the claim also.

In reply to Alan M:

Like I said, I really can't be bothered to refute everything you've said, because it's laughable.

So just a few.

>Suarez was convicted on the balance of probabilities by men in suits (Business Men)

What's your point, man? You think FA disciplinary panels shouldn't wear suits. Seriously?

>The FA's response does not stack up.

You know these punishments are not set by the FA but by independent panels, right?

>John Terry should have got 8 games or more as arguably it was a worse event considering the crown prosecution had enough evidence to prosecute.

Total bollocks. You know nothing about how sentencing works. Once someone is convicted, how strong or not the evidence was doesn't have anything to do with sentencing. I'm not saying it necessarily ought to be like that, but that's how it is.

>Remember Defoe biting Mascherano? he was still picked for England only recieved a Yellow.

See above re yellow card. As for being picked for England, no-one is suggesting Suarez shouldn't be picked for Uruguay. I'm not sure anyone's ever been not picked for England for disciplinary reasons.

>Remember When Alan shearer kicked Neil Lennon in the head?

What about it? He got off because the referee had seen the incident and deemed it accidental.

>What about Duncan Ferguson's hand around Stefen Freunds throat?

What about it?

>Ben Thatcher smashing Pedro Mendes in to the hoardings causing the guy to have a seizure - 8 Match Ban by the FA

What about it?

As to Suarez's handball against Mansfield being 'accidental' or 'instinctive', obviously no-one can prove anything. But his hand went towards the ball. And these people are superb athletes who earn vast sums of money for controlling the ball instinctively. From my own very modest playing of the game, I don't think I ever felt my instincts telling me to move my hand towards the ball. If his do, I'd suggest it's because he's a cheat to his bootstraps. And as to how every player would have celebrated like he did - well, probably most. I wonder what Bobby Charlton would have done.

>>Suarez is an idiot but no more of an idiot than a lot of players in the league.

Yes, he is. Just in this one season he's done three things which would had have him thrown out of any decent club. His only real rival is Joey Barton, and *perhaps* John Terry.

Anyway, the main reason I think you're an idiot isn't so much the above as your notion that the outrage against Suarez is somehow fake. I'm not sure which part of it you don't understand. You can't go round calling someone a blackie seven times during a game in an attempt to wind him up. And you can't bite people. If you do, then expect severe sanctions, specially if you do both of those things in the course of a single season.

And most of all, if you're Liverpool, you don't come out and apologise and say something is unacceptable, and then say nothing more than the usual three-game ban would be appropriate. If it's truly 'unacceptable' then don't accept it. Make a stand and sell the player. Conversely, if you're going to accept it, don't say it's unacceptable. It's hypocrisy, and worse than that, it's bad PR.

jcm

In reply to Alan M:

Oh yeah, United are always claiming it. It's laughable. But then United are a strange club, sometimes they show a bit of class but quite frequently ridiculously classless.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I generally think United show class - the exception was Ferdinand's missed drugs test, where they were arrogant. I'm not sure how much that was down to Peter Kenyon being in charge.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Thanks for your reply. You have missed the context of my points completely but never mind its an internet forum.

I would agree with some of your assertions in other contexts but not in the context of our discussion

Re false outrage: did you not notice the bit were I said from both sides? Did you not notice the examples used including another liverpool player? Were did I mention that it related to the biting or racism events? Did you not read the bit were I said a ban is warranted? Did you not see the post from someone with all his alleged bad behaviour on? Most of that was laughable ie the zenit stamp UEFA thought so as well hence no action. You cant hang everything around the blokes neck which a lot of people try to do. Yes punish him for the real bad stuff racism and biting etc but not common footballing incidents.

Call me an idiot all you like your last reply proves your worth in a discussion. Ignorant, bad attitude and a potential trouble maker.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
suarez-biting

The response by club and player to the Evra incident vs the Ivanvich incident?

My 4-month old daughter would be better at "spot the difference" than you.

Therefore you are either:

a. Troll
b. A fan of an alternate football rolling out the age-old anti Liverpool/Suarez stuff
c. A halfwit

Could be any or all of the above.

In reply to Glyno:


'Idiot' - adjective......try again!

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Apart from Liverpool's response (which I agree is daft - they were doing so well with an immediate condemnation and then they go an spoil it by whinging), I think it's ludicrous of Cameron to claim he was speaking "as a dad" when he chose to wade in and say he hoped the FA would give him a lengthy ban before the hearing - yeah, Dave, you're just a dad like anyone else. The telly frequently ask my opinion on things like this. I can't imagine you'd be specifying the length of sentence a judge should give someone in a court case as that would be seen as the PM trying to influence an independent body.

And now that weevil Clegg's joining in - "Me too, Dave!! Can I say something please? Dave! DAVE???"

In reply to andy:

I don't quite get this and don't quite get why some of the responses seem to suggest that LFC are not allowed an opinion on the punishment and are not allowed to express it.

They have waited until after the ban and expressed their disappointment - which they are entitled to do. They are not fighting it, but as it is 10 matches (over 25% of a season I would point out) then that's a massive impact. To suggest that they should just stay silent is to suggest that a club should have no opinion.

In reply to wynaptomos: No.. but thats also one.. a city player missed a test.. many players did.. but then the FA wanted to get serious and used Rio to make a point..

But missed test should equal the same ban as using drugs.. yet Stam, Divids, Toure all had lesser bans for using drugs..

But it underlined how football treated drugs.. United didn't think it was a serious issue..

Fergie and Wenger don't support no matter what.. they don't see it.. thats very different. United have come out and said a few players were wrong, but rarely.

But agree.. ban harsh but not overly so.

In reply to Rampikino:

I reckon you, and LFC as a whole are missing a key point. Course LFC are entitled to have an opinion on this matter. The fact is that their opinion does nothing but compound the widely held view that LFC are a shower of whinging, self-pitying huns with very little grasp of decency or honour.

It appears that its is ALWAYS everyone elses fault in LFCs eyes. They seem incapable of looking at themselves and realising that its actually them that stink.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

As are Arsenal. The difference is many Arsenal fans actually believe their own bullshit.

I'm from Miseryside. My whole family support Liverpool, (being protestant they would). I don't. I hate football, but that stems from the 'picking of teams' at school.

In reply to New POD:

Why do you call it Miseryside?

In reply to Pinged:

A very odd, poisonous and biased view to hold, though you are entitled to it.

They haven't refused to take responsibility - it's the severity of the punishment they are unhappy with.

What is a "self-pitying hun"? I don't understand the phrase.

If you want to talk about decency and honour in relation to LFC then I suggest you attend the annual Hillsborough memorial at Anfield. Then you can talk about decency and honour. It's a million miles away from your nasty rant.

In reply to Papillon:

Really?? I don't recall Arsenal ever complaining the FA had singled out their players to make an example.

>The difference is many Arsenal fans actually believe their own bullshit.

Er, right. And the Ure fans complaining about Rooney's thoroughly deserved three match ban for swearing into a TV camera are just doing it to wind up the liberal establishment, I suppose?

jcm

In reply to Rampikino:


Jeez, man. Does the phrase 'wallowing in victimhood' mean nothing to you?! What has Hillsborough got to do with anything?

I think most of all it's just the way they make themselves look so overwhelmingly *stupid*. Like Rodgers saying they're punishing the man and not the offence. I mean, on a basic level, which part of 'previous disciplinary record will be taken into account', and 'just returning from eight-game ban for sustained and deliberate racial abuse' is it that he is failing to grasp?

jcm

In reply to IainRUK:

>Wenger don't support no matter what.. they don't see it.. thats very different

Actually, this is no longer AW's practice at all. I've watched every pre- and post- match press conference Wenger's given for the last five years. He's never once said he didn't see something and can't express an opinion on it. Of course, that doesn't stop the likes of Alan Green repeating hilarious jokes about it every time they get the chance (my God that man's a tw*t - actually, isn't he a Liverpool fan?!).

jcm

In reply to andy:

Yes, I don't bother condemning CallMeDave every time, but his comments were an embarrassment, obviously.

jcm

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

I don't know about that being the only exception. Ferdinand racially abusing Ashley Cole, going on a Far East money-making tour instead of playing in the FA Cup, Fergie's serial abuse of referees, Ferdinand holding auditions for the prostitutes at the club's Christmas party, etc. I won't mention Rooney.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I think, for me, the disappointing thing is that posters can't break away from the club-based loyalties and prejudices to look at things as a whole rather than resorting to "yeah but he did this and he did that."

My own view, as a Liverpool fan is this:

1. Suarez doesn't do himself any favours, clearly.

2. He has admitted the charge, hasn't fought it, has apologised and been fined and the punishment is severe. He and LFC are ENTITLED to have an opinion about the severity of it and are ENTITLED to appeal - otherwise there is nothing more to say. It's the process, it's the way it works, we also live in a land of free speech. They may or may not yet appeal. To slam them for defending the impact on their club and the impact on the rehabiliation of their player is simply vindictive nonsense. I want to support a club that will acknowledge and deal with the bad (which they have) but support their players (which they are). I don't want my club to meekly lay down and say nothing when it gets a kicking.

3. Other cases are very hard to compare - even Defoe's is hard to compare despite the fact that it is a biting incident etc. Everything has to be done on a case-by-case basis unless you have a direct like-for-like. So to talk about how Player X did something to Player Y in 1997 and got away with it is simply a diversion.

4. Suarez has compounded the problem by having more than one major controversy in his career. The impression that he is being victimised is partly true, but also comes from his own actions. The latest one will only add to that and he will have the biggest spotlight on him yet, no matter where he ends up next season.

5. Club loyalties have nothing to do with the debate - but on these posts they clearly play a major part, in some cases really very nasty and poisonous.

6. The FA comes across as grossly inconsistent with the way it deals with various incidents on the pitch. Personally I can see the distaste and disgust in a biting incident, but I can also see the oddity of being the subject of a nasty, leg-breaking, career ending tackle that results only in a red card at worst.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

You can see other views of mine on other posts. But I'm afraid the above comment of yours is grossly offensive and has no place in this.

So I'm out of this one now based on this.

If I'm wallowing in victimhood it's for the sake of Carl Brown, died at Hillsborough in 1989, classmate, friend and fellow Liverpool supporter.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I don't get the far east trip at all..

He was off for a few days.. flying first class so could sleep.. legs up.. england included him without checking his condition.

He is an exceptional athlete. Look at his physique? He's playing more than ever now because he really does prepare well, weeks, months in advance. We've had a few players stay playing well into their 30's because Fergie has a great setup to deal with them. They have a very strict routine.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

'Class' has become one of those silly things fans say to each other to wind each other up. I wouldn't describe any club as such (even though the word itself in this context is informal and fairly vague), and not Arsenal after loosing their unbeaten run to United, or Arsene's amnesia and eyesight issues after his players negative behaviour.

I'm very aware that United, Liverpool and City fans have their own 'foibles', as most groups of fans seem to.... the Arsenal one is they seem to think their club occupies some moral high ground.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: The punishment is there to stop him offending again as he has past form for this and other incidents.

7 games didn't stop him.

The response is that he has learnt his lesson, and on Sunday he comes straight out and apologises. OK all good, maybe he's learnt something

Next day he comes out and says it's not that bad. So clearly he hasn't learnt too much(and I'd imagine that this lack of remorse got him a couple more)

Honestly I tihnk he's an idiot, and I think it shows Ian Ayres as an idiot and that LFC haven't learnt so much. Do you think he'll do it again?

In reply to IainRUK:

Think we're talking about different things, Iain. I'm talking about the entire club deciding to play a friendly in the Far East rather than enter the FA Cup in about 2001.

jcm

In reply to wbo:

Exactly.

>Do you think he'll do it again?

My guess is he'll leave, whining about how unfair it is, and try and start over again somewhere else. He'd fit in better somewhere with an even less ethical approach to certain aspects of the game than the UK.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: World club cup.. that the FA asked us to play in...

They then wanted us to field a second IX in the FA cup...

Kate Hoey.. arsenal fan thought we were arrogant to asssume we'd get to the third round of the fa cup... yes.. the sports minister at the time..

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Are you talking about this

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/fa_carling_premiership/381662.stm

In reply to Rampikino:

>He and LFC are ENTITLED to have an opinion about the severity of it and are ENTITLED to appeal

Oh, to be sure, they're ENTITLED to say whatever they like. It's just that saying that a given behaviour is unacceptable and then complaining about a player who's been found guilty of something else totally unacceptable in the same season being banned for a quarter of a season makes them look like tw*ts, that's all, and much worse when what they say shows no grasp at all of the basic principles of sentencing.

jcm

In reply to Papillon:

Yes. Brazil, was it? I could have sworn it was the Far East.

jcm

In reply to IainRUK:

KH is a halfwit. No arguments there.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: No there are two world club cups.. one was in Japan.. and this was a tournament in brazil.. 3 games or so.. we were awful.. but while we were away everyone dropped points so we came back and cantered to the title.. 18 points clear when we won..

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Have to disagree again. For exactly the same offence - Defoe no ban, some lad playing for Chester 5 games.

In reply to Skip:

Christ. You're an idiot too, aren't you?

Look - we all know it. Defoe was booked. So the FA couldn't do anything by their stupid rules. We all know they're stupid, but they have nothing to do with this specific incident.

>some lad playing for Chester 5 games.

And had this lad just returned from an eight-game ban? I think not.

Honestly.

jcm

In reply to IainRUK:

Yeah, but that's not the point. KH was right about this much; you should have entered and played a youth/reserve/whatever team for one round. That would have been the classy thing to do.

I never understood why you didn't, either. It just seemed like such a no-brainer. Give the kids a game at OT, let people in for a fiver or whatever. What's the worst that could have happened? You could have scored a minor PR coup, instead of looking like tossers.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I think it was just stubborness.. neither would shift their stance.

In reply to IainRUK:

But why did they find themselves in a position where they'd taken a stance? It was just the obvious thing to do.

Anyway, whatever the reason, they allowed themselves to come over as totally classless.

Which as I say is not *always* what MU do; I'm always impressed in Fergie's autobiographies by the amount of time he spends on dinners and functions for various causes. And with Ferdinand/Rooney/Keane etc, they've had the same problem as Arsenal had with the Invincibles - very, very good players with serious behavioural problems. It's never easy to solve that problem, though I don't think MU have handled them particularly well in a reputational sense since Cantona.

jcm

In reply to Rampikino:

Because it never fails to make me miserable.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I think Fergie struggles with the modern player as its so different.. especially rooney.. but Rooney comes from a terrible back ground so has awful advisers.. tbh I doubt many other managers would have had such progress..

He just opened my olds mans apprenticeship scheme..

http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/news/nr/alex-ferguson-keith-ridgway-amrc-trainin...

For things like that he's great. Even the United haters were impressed with him giving up a full day, he's really passionate about things like the youth employment.

In reply to IainRUK:

Yes, he is. I suspect he's someone who is held in a lot more respect and affection than is immediately apparent, and that this will become clear once he's gone.

And you're probably right that no-one else would have done much better.

jcm