Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2013

1…194195196197198200»

Comments

  • #9952
    Francie Barrett
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,761 ✭✭✭✭Francie Barrett


    amiable wrote: »
    As proved in the Ben Thatcher case with his elbow on Pedro Mendes
    Incidentally, Thatcher got an 8 match ban for what was a vicious assault on another player.


  • #9953
    Mr Alan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,372 ✭✭✭✭Mr Alan


    mike65 wrote: »
    Defoe was dealt with at the time - yellow card. Clearly a mild punishment and one that the FA could not change under the rules.

    You're wrong, the FA could change it if they deemed it exceptional. They didn't for Defoe. But now they seem to be saying that the Suarez offence is exceptional & worthy of a longer than normal ban. A very strange double standard.


  • #9954
    gafferino
    Registered Users Posts: 4,724 ✭✭✭gafferino


    Francie Barrett wrote: »
    Incidentally, Thatcher got an 8 match ban for what was a vicious assault on another player.

    I would imagine this is what Suarez is looking at.


  • #9955
    pitythefool
    Registered Users Posts: 716 ✭✭✭pitythefool


    Mr Alan wrote: »
    You're wrong, the FA could change it if they deemed it exceptional. They didn't for Defoe. But now they seem to be saying that the Suarez offence is exceptional & worthy of a longer than normal ban. A very strange double standard.

    most likely based on the players form with contreversy


  • #9956
    Mr Alan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,372 ✭✭✭✭Mr Alan


    Francie Barrett wrote: »
    Incidentally, Thatcher got an 8 match ban for what was a vicious assault on another player.

    The real interesting one is that Terry got a 4 match ban for racist abuse. Surely everyone can agree if Suarez gets more than that it's absolutely ridiculous?


  • #9957
    JimsAlterEgo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭JimsAlterEgo


    Francie Barrett wrote: »
    Incidentally, Thatcher got an 8 match ban for what was a vicious assault on another player.

    Didn't the referee hear say he had dealt with it but on review deemed it not enough


  • #9958
    pitythefool
    Registered Users Posts: 716 ✭✭✭pitythefool


    Mr Alan wrote: »
    The real interesting one is that Terry got a 4 match ban for racist abuse. Surely everyone can agree if Suarez gets more than that it's absolutely ridiculous?

    circumstances and content were taken into account


  • #9959
    Mr Alan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,372 ✭✭✭✭Mr Alan


    pitythefool wrote: »
    circumstances and content were taken into account

    What are you talking about? He was found guilty of racial abuse. He got a 4 game ban.

    If Suarez is found guilty of violent conduct & gets more than that it's actually a shocking indictment of the incompetence in play with the FA.


  • #9960
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    The FA have no consistency in any of their decisions. Nothing will surprise me, unfortunately.


  • Advertisement
  • #9961
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    pitythefool wrote: »
    circumstances and content were taken into account
    Mr Alan wrote: »
    What are you talking about? He was found guilty of racial abuse. He got a 4 game ban.

    He means to say that Terry is English, Suarez is not.


  • #9962
    Mr Alan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,372 ✭✭✭✭Mr Alan


    JimsAlterEgo wrote: »
    Didn't the referee hear say he had dealt with it but on review deemed it not enough

    Yes, he did. Obviously. Exactly the same as they could've done with Defoe, but they decided against it as it wasn't "exceptional" enough.


  • #9963
    Gbear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    mike65 wrote: »
    I wonder if people would be so flippant/sanguine about the bite if blood had been drawn.

    That's a bit like saying:

    I wonder if people would be so flippant/sanguine about the slap if it'd actually been a punch.

    How serious the attack was has quite a large bearing on how people should view it.

    If he had gone all Mike Tyson then he should've been banned for life or at least a year or so.


  • #9964
    gafferino
    Registered Users Posts: 4,724 ✭✭✭gafferino


    Mr Alan wrote: »
    The real interesting one is that Terry got a 4 match ban for racist abuse. Surely everyone can agree if Suarez gets more than that it's absolutely ridiculous?

    The FA.

    Nothing would surprise me. I dont think there is a team in the PL or manager who hasnt had a pop at the ridiculousness of their methods. They make it up as they go.


  • #9965
    Kess73
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,560 ✭✭✭✭Kess73


    Knex. wrote: »
    The FA have no consistency in any of their decisions. Nothing will surprise me, unfortunately.




    Exactly. If one is hoping for any kind of consistency from the FA, regardless of what club is involved, then it will become a dashed hope fairly quickly.


    The FA have a long history of turning a blind eye to plenty of incidents of violent conduct that were missed or unpunished by the ref. Would imagine that supporters of any english club could rattle of a list of such offences against their team that went unpunished by the FA.


  • #9966
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Also given the fact the FA warned him as to his future conduct when he got his 8 game ban means it will be harsh
    "Mr Suárez shall be warned as to his future conduct, be suspended for eight matches covering all first-team competitive matches and fined the sum of £40,000;

    Since then they banned him for giving the finger.
    ‘Suarez was also fined £20,000 and warned as to his future conduct following a gesture he made towards the Fulham fans at the end of the fixture.

    So expect them to take the same line as Barton, 6 months probably starting now.


  • Advertisement
  • #9967
    Blatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,832 ✭✭✭✭Blatter


    Does anybody actually think that if the ref had booked Suarez, that the FA wouldn't have taken any retrospective action?

    I think they almost certainly would have. Not that I think it'd be a witch hunt against Suarez, I just think high profile incidents (and hence huge media involvement) affect their actions. I'm fairly sure the same would have happened with Rooney for example.


  • #9968
    pitythefool
    Registered Users Posts: 716 ✭✭✭pitythefool


    Mr Alan wrote: »
    What are you talking about? He was found guilty of racial abuse. He got a 4 game ban.

    If Suarez is found guilty of violent conduct & gets more than that it's actually a shocking indictment of the incompetence in play with the FA.

    he found to have used innapropriate racist language

    not abuse

    remember he was cleared in a real court
    Knex. wrote: »
    He means to say that Terry is English, Suarez is not.

    hate John Terry, dont care if he is English or not
    RasTa wrote: »
    Also given the fact the FA warned him as to his future conduct when he got his 8 game ban means it will be harsh



    Since then they banned him for giving the finger.


    So expect them to take the same line as Barton, 6 months probably starting now.

    did they warn him, if so then a larger ban will be in place

    form will come into it#

    Defoe has very few disciplinary problems


  • #9969
    Bobeagleburger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,734 ✭✭✭✭Bobeagleburger


    Cheers lads.

    That's put that untruth to bed.


  • #9970
    citytillidie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,262 ✭✭✭✭citytillidie


    pitythefool wrote: »
    he found to have used innapropriate racist language

    not abuse

    remember he was cleared in a real court



    hate John Terry, dont care if he is English or not



    did they warn him, if so then a larger ban will be in place

    form will come into it#

    Defoe has very few disciplinary problems

    Same as Saurez who got 8 games for it.

    Warning a player on future conduct would more often than not be in statements on players being banned or fined

    ******



  • #9971
    Bobeagleburger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,734 ✭✭✭✭Bobeagleburger


    I wouldn't waste my time folks...


  • Advertisement
  • #9972
    Sappy404
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,181 ✭✭✭Sappy404


    Excellent read.

    http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2013/04/this-weekend%E2%80%99s-lowest-point/
    So let’s forget this Suarez stuff. He’s guilty and he’s going to either serve a deserved ban or an inflated one to keep Patrick Barclay and his ilk happy. Fine. Get on with it. F**k them. Who wants to be liked by those people? Let’s get past it and tell Sturridge that he’s leading the line from now on and he’s got some boots to fill so get working. Does haranguing and harping stop United winning the title next season? It does not. Does it pull focus from the whole raison d’être of the club? Yes. Liverpool first, dramas second.


  • #9973
    NukaCola
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,983 ✭✭✭✭NukaCola


    One thing is for sure, we'll now see how good Sturridge actually is.....


  • #9974
    pitythefool
    Registered Users Posts: 716 ✭✭✭pitythefool


    Mr Alan wrote: »
    Yes, he did. Obviously. Exactly the same as they could've done with Defoe, but they decided against it as it wasn't "exceptional" enough.

    If you are still on about the Suarex incident

    The ref did not see it, therefore did not punish


  • #9975
    pitythefool
    Registered Users Posts: 716 ✭✭✭pitythefool


    citytillidie wrote: »
    Same as Saurez who got 8 games for it.

    Warning a player on future conduct would more often than not be in statements on players being banned or fined


    was Suarex cleared in a court of law?

    he probalby could have been if they took in the context of what he was saying but dont think he was

    "little black man" is common place is Uraguay, he has black ancestry etc

    Its still worse than the Terry incident

    Terry was cleared because he repeated a statement in anger


  • #9976
    super_furry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,348 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    NukaCola wrote: »
    One thing is for sure, we'll now see how good Sturridge actually is.....

    Oddly enough I think this may have its benefits. Getting to see Coutinho and Sturridge play together up front for the last four games is going to be really exciting.


  • #9977
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    citytillidie wrote: »
    Same as Saurez who got 8 games for it.

    Warning a player on future conduct would more often than not be in statements on players being banned or fined

    True but how often does player repeat controversy? As I mentioned Barton is one in recent memory and he got 12 games. Suarez on his 3rd strike now so possibly the same.


  • #9978
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Only 2nd strike with the FA and his first for violent conduct. His yellow card tally however is another story :p

    When can we expect a judgement on this anyway? I just want to have a figure, accept it, and move on TBH.


  • #9979
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,972 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    We'll know by 6 pm Thursday I think. By which time we'll have a new thread to discuss the fall out on.


  • #9980
    kfallon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,775 ✭✭✭✭kfallon


    mike65 wrote: »
    We'll know by 6 pm Thursday I think. By which time we'll have a new thread to discuss the fall out on.

    Come on Mike, you're round here long enough to know that discussion of these things goes out the window by about post 5 and it turns into a shít slinging match between fans of rival clubs!


  • #9981
    Kerrigooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,987 ✭✭✭Kerrigooney


    mike65 wrote: »
    We'll know by 6 pm Thursday I think. By which time we'll have a new thread to discuss the fall out on.

    We'll know today. It was just on the news.


  • Advertisement
  • #9982
    Cantona's Collars
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,709 ✭✭✭✭Cantona's Collars


    mike65 wrote: »
    We'll know by 6 pm Thursday I think. By which time we'll have a new thread to discuss the fall out on.

    Thought it'd be made at ate o' clock this evening.:p


  • #9983
    super_furry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,348 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    Yep should be around 4pm today.


  • #9984
    Kess73
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,560 ✭✭✭✭Kess73


    Kerrigooney wrote: »
    We'll know today. It was just on the news.



    Yep the 24th was the set date for the hearing if Liverpool FC did not appeal.


  • #9985
    skydish79
    Registered Users Posts: 843 ✭✭✭skydish79


    The FA are unlikely to give him just a 5 match ban seeing as Liverpool aren't going to be challenging for champions league and it will not hurt us as much as if we were.

    With all the media attention that sky have given it, kids being interviewed, david cameron throwing in his penny worth they will want to be seen to be doing the right thing


  • #9986
    Gbear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    One thing I've discovered over this is that an awful lot of people don't know what condone means.


  • #9987
    kfallon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,775 ✭✭✭✭kfallon


    Knowing the FA they will just ask one member of the panel to pick a number between 5 and 20 and that will be the number of games ban Suarez will get :rolleyes:


  • #9988
    el dude
    Registered Users Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭el dude


    http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/poll/2013/apr/24/ban-luis-suarez-bite-branislav-ivanovic-poll?

    Already been posted?

    I voted for five, think that's fair.


  • #9989
    GavRedKing
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 53,262 ✭✭✭✭GavRedKing


    Nearly at 10K posts.

    New thread here : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=84305947#post84305947


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement