Liverpool F.c.

[rijit]

You would have thought a 7 match ban at Ajax 4 the same offense would have been enough to put him off doing it again, on that premise is 10 games enough to put him off doing it again ?,but really its bout time the club faced reality,and took care properly of their multi million pound investment and realise he has a personalty disorder that may border on a mental health issue, and needs to put in some serious hours with some top mental health professionals. Gazza spring to mind anyone?

[Travel2003]

I don't understand how they can ban him more than what they have charged him with. Charges are for violent conduct, 3 game ban. The English FA are just trying to make an example out of the boy. Defoe received a yellow card when he bite masherano a few years back, how does that seem fair?

yeah as liniker said the fa need to address this the refs seen itand done something end of story, they need to be able to take action post the refs decision.

This would actually be good for a change. The tackle the Wigan player handed out a few weeks ago nearly ended the Newcastle players career.

FA say no ban needed but then hand out a ban that is more than the ban applied to violent conduct.

The match officials (4th man) had seen that (Wigan-NCstle) incident, which is why FA did not do anything about it.

[mjj]

I think this idea that he has some kind of mental disorder and needs help is typical of the nanny state society. The guy gets frustrated in an highly charged adrenalin game. It's not like he does this week in week out. I'm sure we all know or have known competitive people that take it too far and have been told to calm down. A couple of incidents in however many hours of football is not what I would call a disorder.

That's not to suggest I don't think he should be dealt with harshly, but bonkers he ain't.

[BangrakBob]

chew on that, u despicable human being

"human" you've mellowed

[smokie36]

He should appeal. I don't think the FA have the mandate given the charge levelled at him.

[mrbojangles]

He should appeal. I don't think the FA have the mandate given the charge levelled at him.

They're a law unto themselves smokes.

When it suits!!

[smokie36]

He should appeal. I don't think the FA have the mandate given the charge levelled at him.

They're a law unto themselves smokes.

When it suits!!

Then he should be talking to the PFA. That's his union of course.

"Free kebabs at half time or we're off!"

Edit: My next reply will explain it in better detail from Suarez point of view....

Edited April 24, 2013 by smokie36

[chrisboyo]

I don't understand how they can ban him more than what they have charged him with. Charges are for violent conduct, 3 game ban. The English FA are just trying to make an example out of the boy. Defoe received a yellow card when he bite masherano a few years back, how does that seem fair?

yeah as liniker said the fa need to address this the refs seen itand done something end of story, they need to be able to take action post the refs decision.

This would actually be good for a change. The tackle the Wigan player handed out a few weeks ago nearly ended the Newcastle players career.

FA say no ban needed but then hand out a ban that is more than the ban applied to violent conduct.

The match officials (4th man) had seen that (Wigan-NCstle) incident, which is why FA did not do anything about it.

If so, then how come the 4th official didnt pipe up and tell the ref that the tackle warranted a red card.

Makes me wonder why they are even employed.

[chrisboyo]

He should appeal. I don't think the FA have the mandate given the charge levelled at him.

I think they can ban him for longer if they appeal and its turned down. Is it worth having him banned or longer?

[smokie36]

Luis Suarez 10-Game Ban

Almost sounds as he's a TV member.

I can heartily recommend a five day suspension over the Xmas period.

Had a fantastic time so I did!

[rijit]

I think this idea that he has some kind of mental disorder and needs help is typical of the nanny state society. The guy gets frustrated in an highly charged adrenalin game. It's not like he does this week in week out. I'm sure we all know or have known competitive people that take it too far and have been told to calm down. A couple of incidents in however many hours of football is not what I would call a disorder.

That's not to suggest I don't think he should be dealt with harshly, but bonkers he ain't.

not coming xcross as the brightest of posts mate, best you re read what you've written and have a very long think about it .

[mrbojangles]

He should appeal. I don't think the FA have the mandate given the charge levelled at him.

They're a law unto themselves smokes.

When it suits!!

Then he should be talking to the PFA. That's his union of course.

Yeah. That'll give them something to get their teeth into. Sorry

[smokie36]

cantona karate-kicked a supporter and was lucky not to cause a riot. they're not really comparable incidents unless you're talking about liverpool sacking suarez.

To be fair Stevie, I find its not United fans that are comparing, all over my social media Liverpool fans with less nouse than yourself are clutching at straws and using Cantona references in some kind of mad defence of Suarez.

I agree, totally separate and unrelated incidents regardless..!

redrus

I disagree. the level of loss of control is different and yet the same.

[Travel2003]

I don't understand how they can ban him more than what they have charged him with. Charges are for violent conduct, 3 game ban. The English FA are just trying to make an example out of the boy. Defoe received a yellow card when he bite masherano a few years back, how does that seem fair?

yeah as liniker said the fa need to address this the refs seen itand done something end of story, they need to be able to take action post the refs decision.

This would actually be good for a change. The tackle the Wigan player handed out a few weeks ago nearly ended the Newcastle players career.

FA say no ban needed but then hand out a ban that is more than the ban applied to violent conduct.

The match officials (4th man) had seen that (Wigan-NCstle) incident, which is why FA did not do anything about it.

If so, then how come the 4th official didnt pipe up and tell the ref that the tackle warranted a red card.

Makes me wonder why they are even employed.

I will ask him.

[Travel2003]

I bet there are some obscure laws within FA (sportsman like behavior, etc) they can use, which give them the leeway.

[redrus]

55555

redrus

[Jimjim]

10 matches? Not enough I say!

Should be 20 or even 30.

Clearly the worst thing done on the pitch ever.

[Jimjim]

What incident is he under investigation from?

Edit. Found it, punching someone.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/luis-suarez-punch-new-video-1787505

Oh, dear Suarez.

To put it in context he was being grabbed in the balls at the time.

[Jimjim]

I think this idea that he has some kind of mental disorder and needs help is typical of the nanny state society. The guy gets frustrated in an highly charged adrenalin game. It's not like he does this week in week out. I'm sure we all know or have known competitive people that take it too far and have been told to calm down. A couple of incidents in however many hours of football is not what I would call a disorder.

That's not to suggest I don't think he should be dealt with harshly, but bonkers he ain't.

not coming xcross as the brightest of posts mate, best you re read what you've written and have a very long think about it .

Nice condescension since you can't respond intelligently to mjj's post which actually talked some sense.

Suarez is a beast on the pitch and loses his head sometimes. Mental disorder? Give it a rest, will ya?

He's one of those Jekyll and Hyde type characters who off the pitch is quite a normal, non-controversial person who married his teenage sweetheart and is still with her.

We all know the mad things he's done on the pitch.

Gazza doesn't spring to mind at all, no. It just shows you have no clue what you're talking about.

He's someone who made a mess of his personal life with addiction and probably severe depression. Suarez shows none of those signs. All his issues are on the pitch where he seems to have occasional but serious anger problems in the heat of the moment. There are absolutely no similarities at all.

[katana]

One of the shocking things about the bite was the apparent lack of provocation. If Ivanovic had kicked a lump out of him beforehand it might have gone some way to explaining things.

[Jimjim]

One of the shocking things about the bite was the apparent lack of provocation. If Ivanovic had kicked a lump out of him beforehand it might have gone some way to explaining things.

This is true. It didn't appear to be more than the normal. I had to wonder if something was said like in the Materazzi-Zidane incident. Appears nothing.

They were having a small argument it appeared walking off at half time. But you see that all time so appeared completely out of the blue. Makes no sense.

[mjj]

One of the shocking things about the bite was the apparent lack of provocation. If Ivanovic had kicked a lump out of him beforehand it might have gone some way to explaining things.

Yes and no. They were having words after the first half ended and the had to be separated in the tunnel.

[sharecropper]

Ahh, Suarez again...

Still, after the summer it may be the last we see of him, and your chasing Everton in the league may become an annual 'spectator' sport. So in that sense he has done half the City of Liverpool some good.

What's he worth does anyone reckon? 40m?

[Pormax]

Well the FA has certainly come down hard on him.

I feel that this is rather harsh. By all means punish the player, I have no problem with that. But why punish the club and it's fans by not having a player available to play. The club nor the fans told him to bite the opponent. Saurez should be the one who suffers so I would have thought a 6 game ban and a really hefty fine i.e. 500,000 to a million Pounds would have been better. Lets face it, on his wages he can afford it and would more likely be a harsher lesson to him.

Now all that happens is that Saurez can take a long holiday with full pay while the club, team and fans suffer.

[carmine]

I certainly got this wrong. I thought that Liverpool should have handed him a three match ban themselves and be seen to do the right thing. Then maybe the FA would have just added a couple.

Hopelessly over the top imho. Suarez should be mocked for behaving like a childlike halfwit, especially on such an important day, but a ten match ban <deleted>!! Hopelessly OTT...

[uptheos]

Like it or not, biting is actual bodily harm and is a criminal offence on or off the football pitch.

He might have got far worse if Ivanavic had pressed charges, Ivanavic knows it and responded well.

However, I think 10 games is about right given his previous for the same type of offence.

In the picture he's definitely locked Ivanavic's arm with the intent of biting him,.....quite bizarre.

That being said, there's definitely not enough protection for players like Suarez from potential leg breaking tackles and players get away with it. Someone's got to clamp down on a lot of this stuff!.

[carmine]

I remember watching this creature,when he played for Ajax,and he was despicable at times,even bit someone then.His rants at the refs,with saliva frothing in his mouth,some crazy,stupid tackles,his moans, diving,complaining about everything and nothing,convinced me he was going to be the same creature in the EPL.

The man is BIG TROUBLE,always will be,but he is a great player,so that will win,as Liverpool arent strong enough to get rid,and they have no one else to score,

This post is about as stupid as your manager Tony Pulis claiming he likes to use wingers and promotes attacking football at thug like Stoke City.

I see more violence everytime i see Stoke play. I hope you get relegated.

[Pormax]

While Saurez definetely should be punished severely for his actions why must the club, his team mates and the supporters also suffer?.

No one told him to bite the opposing player.

While I have to agree that a lengthy ban was correct this can only hurt the player if he loses his wages for the time he is unable to fullfill his duties. This is not the case as the maximum under the players union rules is a fine of 2 weeks wages. So now while the team and fans suffer Louis can take a nice long holiday and spend all the time he wants with his family on full pay.

How can that be right?

A more sensible approach would have been a 4 to 6 week ban and a really hefty fine equal to the amount of wages he will be paid for the time of his suspension. Then told he must attend a compulsory anger management course and even given some community service to under priveleged kids in Liverpool.

Meanwhile how can they sell him now with this reputation. Maybe they can but not at his true worth as a footballer. What club would sign a player who could well do the same and risk getting a lengthy ban. Clubs sign players to play.

LFC sold Torres for 50 million. Saurez on footballing skills only is worth at least if not more but I reckon he has lost 20% or more of his value by his stupid, reckless actions.

[LeungKen]

There is no place in football for biting.

I'm fed up of the game being brought into disrepute, acts like this need to be stamped out immediately.

So for me a 10 match ban is a fitting punishment for the despicable act committed.

(and if I was Liverpool's manager I'd have the lad on boot cleaning during the time it takes to see out the ban.)

[carmine]

While Saurez definetely should be punished severely for his actions why must the club, his team mates and the supporters also suffer?.

No one told him to bite the opposing player.

While I have to agree that a lengthy ban was correct this can only hurt the player if he loses his wages for the time he is unable to fullfill his duties. This is not the case as the maximum under the players union rules is a fine of 2 weeks wages. So now while the team and fans suffer Louis can take a nice long holiday and spend all the time he wants with his family on full pay.

How can that be right?

A more sensible approach would have been a 4 to 6 week ban and a really hefty fine equal to the amount of wages he will be paid for the time of his suspension. Then told he must attend a compulsory anger management course and even given some community service to under priveleged kids in Liverpool.

Meanwhile how can they sell him now with this reputation. Maybe they can but not at his true worth as a footballer. What club would sign a player who could well do the same and risk getting a lengthy ban. Clubs sign players to play.

LFC sold Torres for 50 million. Saurez on footballing skills only is worth at least if not more but I reckon he has lost 20% or more of his value by his stupid, reckless actions.

Not a bad idea at all about the fine but i think theres a cap on the amount which is pitifully low in comparison to modern day wages. I doubt though as you say he has lost any of his value. Whoever buys him in the future knows he is probably still the world class football/d*ckhead he is now. They might infact be better off because the cannibalism thing has now run its course