Liverpool Message Board
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
Your right that Defoe did bite, and the circumstances are not so different, but because they let the card given on the pitch stand as the only punishment does not mean Suarez should in effect get away with it. But where do you really stand on this, on another thread you stated Suarez should be banned for the rest of the season then sold, but now it seems he should only get a slap on the wrist. Have you changed your mind?
If that was in reply to me Steer.. I'm saying Suarez should've got the exact same punishment as Defoe did.. If the F.A want to be consistent. Anything else would be unduly harsh and would mean Suarez is targeted by the F.A.. Which is unfair. They should treat every player equally. Yes i feel Suarez has put a stain on our club. Ayre himself said Suarez won't be sold.
- 1 Reply to LFC_Armchair_Supporter
"I'm saying Suarez should've got the exact same punishment as Defoe did.." You mean Suarez should have got away with a yellow card armchair ? He bit a player before. He racially abused another player, he's cheated hundreds of times, and now this. 10 match ban.
Like I said Dave, and it's not a "I told you so" (think you know that) and you probably expected as much, 10 games it is... Not surprised at all really, though they have a fair right to appeal, and perhaps get 7 or 8. Doubtful though, as I think this is the FA's way of saying to him, they've had enough of his antics, this offense certainly can't be tolerated, and after Fifa / Uefa gave a 10 match automatic ban for racist conduct, this is something along the same lines of having a consistent theme going forward. So I would imagine the next player who has a Balotelli/Barton moment of madness with spikes or headbutts will get 10 minimum as well..
In the end, it's hard to disagree no matter how disappointed we are, and love Suarez as a player. Biggest problem for me is that it causes such a bad issue to finish out this season strong, and come out of the gates faster next year, especially if we're dealt a hand like this term with City,Arsenal, United, all I the opening 4-5.. Ugg..
- 1 Reply to Jason
On face value I do actually very much disagree with the 10 games, although I'd be very interested to read the report to understand how they came to their conclusions. I know on an earlier post you mentioned the Barton case was not comparable, and it’s not like for like obviously, but both cases are being handled under the same charge, violent conduct. In Barton's case however it was not a single charge it was 3, one for the red card, and then two counts of violent conduct after the card was issued. As the Red was an automatic 3 match ban in effect Barton got 9 games for 2 acts of violent conduct while Suarez gets 10 for a single incident.
Now as I've already stated I don't have an issue with Suarez getting a ban, nor in fact it being longer than the standard 3. However if the FA decides on any case to go beyond its standard punishment it does need to justify why that particular case warrants additional punishment.
I can think of 3 clear areas where they can justify going beyond: where intent is clearly deliberate, where the level of violence is very high, when the individual charged has priors and previous bans have not been effective. Barton ticks every one of those boxes, while Suarez does obviously tick the first, he does not tick the second, and while he does tick the third nowhere near the level of Joey when it comes to violent conduct. So why the difference?