Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I wonder if he'd have gotten such a lengthy ban if it had happened in a qualifying game versus Bolivia or someone

 

Who cares, he got the bums rush when challenging authority? Looks like Luis considers himself the irresistible force...

 

Incidentally, now that Ellan Vannin footballing supremo, Calum Morrissey is detained at Her Majesty's Pleasure, what may be the sanctions on his football future?

 

TBT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 417
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Or Kelvin MacKenzie.

You are such a fucking prick.

Are you three planning on shitting up every thread with this?

Posted Images

I feel sorry for Chile. They did everything right and played football that was good to watch and losing a penalty shoot-out to the host nation must be gut-wrenching.

Brazil have been a bit disappointing so far, but they seem to get the rub of the green, which suggests that they can win without being particularly great or exciting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We didn't deserve to go through. Was nothing to do with the absence of Suarez, Colombia played us off the park and its hard to do anything but applaud that first goal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a completely bias Evertonian I fully applaud the ban and even question "is it long enough?"

 

An Evertonian with a little willie hang-up!

Don't worry, it is said there is someone out there for eveyone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a follower of football but I do think Mr Suarez is being unjustly dealt with.

I understand that this isn't his first incident that he's bitten people and therefore I would suggest that it's psychological and treat as such.

 

My reasoning behind this is that it's unlikely that he would want to be suspended or sent off and therefore what he's doing IMO, is instinctive!

 

I would suggest that counselling should be given to him and also that he use a gum guard like the rugby people use.

 

I do think the papers and such like are making the situation to be worse than it is and although it's not nice to see him bite people, I just put his actions worse than spitting, but less than deliberately standing on a persons leg as his actions are less injurious.

 

It's not nice to see what he done, but at least people will not be crippled for life.

Just seems a bit over the top and although I don't agree with what he did, there are far worse tackles and actions by other people than what he did.

My brother got bitten on the face by a drunken idiot with no previous on a night out. He got two years in prison. Suarez has bitten someone three times, unprovoked, sober, with no remorse. I would suggest he's been quite leniently dealt with. Edited by Lxxx
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not a follower of football but I do think Mr Suarez is being unjustly dealt with.

I understand that this isn't his first incident that he's bitten people and therefore I would suggest that it's psychological and treat as such.

 

My reasoning behind this is that it's unlikely that he would want to be suspended or sent off and therefore what he's doing IMO, is instinctive!

 

I would suggest that counselling should be given to him and also that he use a gum guard like the rugby people use.

 

I do think the papers and such like are making the situation to be worse than it is and although it's not nice to see him bite people, I just put his actions worse than spitting, but less than deliberately standing on a persons leg as his actions are less injurious.

 

It's not nice to see what he done, but at least people will not be crippled for life.

Just seems a bit over the top and although I don't agree with what he did, there are far worse tackles and actions by other people than what he did.

My brother got bitten on the face by a drunken idiot with no previous on a night out. He got two years in prison. Suarez has bitten someone three times, unprovoked, sober, with no remorse. I would suggest he's been quite leniently dealt with.

 

After thinking about for a few days so do I.

 

It has been bandied about that it was not as bad as other 'attacks' such as elbowing, kicking, tackling high etc.

Such attacks are bad but somehow they can be accepted as heat of the moment stuff.

But to BITE someone? Horrific. Unnatural. Not the action of someone normal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm not a follower of football but I do think Mr Suarez is being unjustly dealt with.

I understand that this isn't his first incident that he's bitten people and therefore I would suggest that it's psychological and treat as such.

 

My reasoning behind this is that it's unlikely that he would want to be suspended or sent off and therefore what he's doing IMO, is instinctive!

 

I would suggest that counselling should be given to him and also that he use a gum guard like the rugby people use.

 

I do think the papers and such like are making the situation to be worse than it is and although it's not nice to see him bite people, I just put his actions worse than spitting, but less than deliberately standing on a persons leg as his actions are less injurious.

 

It's not nice to see what he done, but at least people will not be crippled for life.

Just seems a bit over the top and although I don't agree with what he did, there are far worse tackles and actions by other people than what he did.

My brother got bitten on the face by a drunken idiot with no previous on a night out. He got two years in prison. Suarez has bitten someone three times, unprovoked, sober, with no remorse. I would suggest he's been quite leniently dealt with.

 

After thinking about for a few days so do I.

 

It has been bandied about that it was not as bad as other 'attacks' such as elbowing, kicking, tackling high etc.

Such attacks are bad but somehow they can be accepted as heat of the moment stuff.

But to BITE someone? Horrific. Unnatural. Not the action of someone normal.

He needs psychiatric help!

He's not drunk and reacts instinctively like that of an animal. His offence did not do permanent harm to anyone and if it did like that mentioned by Lxxx, then I agree a jail term should follow, but so to should other offences which get off more lightly for far worse actions.

His offence however, was less injurious than those who deliberately try to inflict harm on others and when you watch the replays back, there's a split second where they decide to follow their actions through. These players 'intentional actions' are far worse IMO, than what Mr Suarez did and if his actions and ban is a guideline, then they too should have lengthier bans.

I still agree on him wearing a gum guard like other sports do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to defend Suarez in any way whatsoever. He may well be a brilliant talent but he's a severely flawed person who clearly needs a lot of psychological help before he returns to the game.

 

That said, however, if the injuries he actually inflicted on opponents were worthy of the ban he received, what should have been given for some of these?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, no matter how bad it looks, you can try to claim you just got your timing awfully wrong, or your standing foot slipped and you went in awkward, or the other guy was quicker than you expected or he did something you didn't anticipate. The only real notable exception in that clip is Keane's tackle obviously. Maybe Souness.

 

Biting someone? I'm not sure how you can ever claim any sort of mitigation for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, no matter how bad it looks, you can try to claim you just got your timing awfully wrong, or your standing foot slipped and you went in awkward, or the other guy was quicker than you expected or he did something you didn't anticipate. The only real notable exception in that clip is Keane's tackle obviously. Maybe Souness.

 

Biting someone? I'm not sure how you can ever claim any sort of mitigation for it.

That's right, the point being that tackling, shoulder-charging etc is a normal part of the game that can go wrong - punching, biting... they're not. The consequences of a bad tackle can obviously be far worse than Suarez' biting, and if a damaging tackle can be proven to have been with the intention of causing injury, then it should be punished appropriately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to defend Suarez in any way whatsoever. He may well be a brilliant talent but he's a severely flawed person who clearly needs a lot of psychological help before he returns to the game.

 

That said, however, if the injuries he actually inflicted on opponents were worthy of the ban he received, what should have been given for some of these?

 

Number 3 is quite impressive. Must have been an open tib-fib fracture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez, why is it that people make a sport out of being offended these days?

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2674548/Dutch-airline-KLM-scores-PR-goal-tweeting-offensive-joke-expense-Mexico-following-injury-time-World-Cup-win.html

 

Tonight should be interesting. Algeria or Allemagne, which one will it be? shuriken.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...