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

12357…334

Comments

  • #122
    That_Guy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 51,342 ✭✭✭✭That_Guy


    I knew my new business venture would come into play eventually.

    supporttee.jpg


  • #123
    5starpool
    Subscribers Posts: 32,855 ✭✭✭✭5starpool


    I don't know why anyone is surprised by this. The FA love their big headline cases, whether it be Rooney for swearing or Suarez for a multitude of things. If it was a Norwich player who shouted profanities into a camera, or who give Fulham players the bird I doubt we'd even remember the incidents afterwards, much less hear about them getting bans for them.

    The FA, and FIFA too, have been shown to be a joke organisation when it comes to reviewing incidents,hiding behind technicalities when it suits them and going way OTT when the incident is a big moral outrage thing.

    What they are saying here is essentially that they view biting as worse than racism (I wonder what our buddies in the society of black lawyers have to say about it), never mind leg breaking tackles, forearm smashes, headbutts or elbowing. It makes no sense whatsoever, but who really expected it to be a 4-6 game ban like it probably should have been? I expected 8, but as I said previously wouldn't have been surprised with anything up to a 6 month time ban, and this is effectively a 5 month ban. Of course he deserved a ban, and fair enough more than the standard 3 games one. I think 6/7 would have been the sweet spot for them where they can say they acted to severely punish an act they want to see stamped out, and Liverpool would have said 'disagree with the length, but accept it, etc'. I'm sure there will be crap about prior circumstances, etc, but it is still OTT imo.

    Odds on the fixture computer making Liverpool's 7th competitive game next season against Chelsea or Utd? Far lower than it should be imo. Obviously that is pending him being at the club next season in the first place.


  • #124
    monkey9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,337 ✭✭✭✭monkey9


    I just hope Suarez and other players learn from this. Next time they lose it in a moment of madness, make sure they go in over the ball and snap the player's leg. If they come in from a decent angle, they might be able to end the lad's career. You see that way, they'll only get a three or four game ban.

    The likes of Fellaini and Huth had it right when they elbowed the opposing player in the face.


  • #125
    Nuri Sahin
    Site Banned Posts: 26,456 ✭✭✭✭Nuri Sahin


    That_Guy wrote: »
    I knew my new business venture would come into play eventually.

    supporttee.jpg

    You should tell people how you really feel about Liverpool.


  • #126
    That_Guy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 51,342 ✭✭✭✭That_Guy


    Nuri Sahin wrote: »
    Should tell people how you really feel about Liverpool.

    I don't like Liverpool.

    My horrible secret is out.

    Happy?


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    ShiverinEskimo
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 18,115 ✭✭✭✭ShiverinEskimo


    Why must everything be compared and contrasted to other offences by other players?

    Why, by giving a 10 match ban is the FA saying one thing is worse than the other?

    They aren't. They are saying "Well you didn't learn from the 3, 4 or 8 game bans we gave you before so let's try 10".

    It starts and ends with Suarez' previous conduct.


  • #128
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    It is mental to think that if he cracked Ivanovic in the face and broke his nose he'd be back for the final game of the season.


  • #129
    gimli2112
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,409 ✭✭✭✭gimli2112


    Benimar wrote: »
    Yes, its disgusting but so is spitting. Although I'd rather be bitten by Suarez than have my leg broken by a two footed challenge...even if the FA deem the 1st offence to be 3 times as bad.

    Also, if Ivanovic (the only one to deserve any credit here) had an infection we would know about it at this stage (BTW, you do know you can get infections from saliva?)


    This would only worry me if Suarez was a komodo dragon


  • #130
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    That_Guy wrote: »
    I don't like Liverpool.

    My horrible secret is out.

    Happy?

    So...

    18599545774f575acea145e_excuse.jpg


  • #131
    Mr Alan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,372 ✭✭✭✭Mr Alan


    ShiverinEskimo wrote: »
    Why must everything be compared and contrasted to other offences by other players?

    Why, by giving a 10 match ban is the FA saying one thing is worse than the other?

    They aren't. They are saying "Well you didn't learn from the 3, 4 or 8 game bans we gave you before so let's try 10".

    It starts and ends with Suarez' previous conduct.

    That's all well & good, except it's bull****. It's not the way the FA has ever conducted themselves before. Roy Keane's bans didn't get increasingly more severe over the years based on previous indiscretions.

    Look it's ok to just say you're happy he got a huge ban because you don't like Liverpool & you hate Suarez....you don't need to pretend it makes sense, because it doesn't.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    That_Guy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 51,342 ✭✭✭✭That_Guy


    Knex. wrote: »
    So...

    18599545774f575acea145e_excuse.jpg

    You are aware that superthreads aren't strictly for fans of that particular team/topic right?


  • #133
    ShiverinEskimo
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 18,115 ✭✭✭✭ShiverinEskimo


    Mr Alan wrote: »
    That's all well & good, except it's bull****. It's not the way the FA has ever conducted themselves before. Roy Keane's bans didn't get increasingly more severe over the years based on previous indiscretions.

    So when they do get the process for repeat offences right they should also be lambasted just because it happens to be your player? Right.


  • #134
    opr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,267 ✭✭✭opr


    At what point does Suarez need to get out of England for his own sanity? I'm well aware much of this is of his own making but it will take extreme character for him not to take the side door out to Munich/Madrid if offered it during the summer. Things had just started to calm down with regards to the goldfish bowl attention he was receiving and he's now going to have to go through that all again next season with heightened levels of scrutiny. In his situation I think I'd be slipping gently into the night.

    Opr


  • #135
    Mr Alan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,372 ✭✭✭✭Mr Alan


    ShiverinEskimo wrote: »
    So when they do get the process for repeat offences right they should also be lambasted just because it happens to be your player? Right.

    LOL, so that's what it is? The FA have just so happened to get it right at last & we should all be happy? Brilliant! Next time Scholes gets a red card, should he get a 10 game ban for a career of dangerous tackles? Next time Ferguson gets a charge of talking about officials should he get a life time ban?

    Honestly, stop being silly.


  • #136
    missingtime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,942 ✭✭✭missingtime


    That_Guy wrote: »
    I don't like Liverpool.

    My horrible secret is out.

    Happy?
    That_Guy wrote: »
    You are aware that superthreads aren't strictly for fans of that particular team/topic right?


    I dont like Fair City but I dont go into the Fair City thread mentioning how much I dont like Fair City or making fun of its actors.


  • #137
    Mr Alan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,372 ✭✭✭✭Mr Alan


    opr wrote: »
    At what point does Suarez need to get out of England for his own sanity? I'm well aware much of this is of his own making but it will take extreme character for him not to take the side door out to Munich/Madrid if offered it during the summer. Things had just started to calm down with regards to the goldfish bowl attention he was receiving and he's now going to have to go through that all again next season with heightened levels of scrutiny. In his situation I think I'd be slipping gently into the night.

    Opr

    Yep. Me too.

    To be honest, with our manager being out of his depth & the club showing no signs of advancement he should probably be looking for a way out anyway....add in the crusade against him combined with his seeming inability to stop doing stupid stuff, he'll probably think, "**** this, lets get out of here!"


  • #138
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    That_Guy wrote: »
    You are aware that superthreads aren't strictly for fans of that particular team/topic right?

    I am indeed, and discussing the issues is fine. But coming in just to point out your hate of a team whom 90% of the thread occupants support is a different issue.


  • #139
    kfallon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,775 ✭✭✭✭kfallon


    Knex. wrote: »
    So...

    18599545774f575acea145e_excuse.jpg

    Do Newcastle even have their own thread?


  • #140
    ShiverinEskimo
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 18,115 ✭✭✭✭ShiverinEskimo


    Mr Alan wrote: »
    LOL, so that's what it is? The FA have just so happened to get it right at last & we should all be happy? Brilliant! Next time Scholes gets a red card, should he get a 10 game ban for a career of dangerous tackles? Next time Ferguson gets a charge of talking about officials should he get a life time ban?

    Honestly, stop being silly.
    Suarez was told to watch his future conduct at the same time he was given an 8 match ban.

    The 8 game ban apparently didn't teach him his lesson so up she goes to 10 for another serious offence.

    Blame the FA and everyone else all you like but the only person at fault here is Suarez.


  • #141
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    kfallon wrote: »
    Do Newcastle even have their own thread?

    Yeah, it consists of about 30 pages of "PARDEW OUT" comments.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    kfallon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,775 ✭✭✭✭kfallon


    Knex. wrote: »
    Yeah, it consists of about 30 pages of "PARDEW OUT" comments.

    Each post is from That_Guy :P


  • #143
    JimsAlterEgo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭JimsAlterEgo


    Mr Alan wrote: »
    LOL, so that's what it is? The FA have just so happened to get it right at last & we should all be happy? Brilliant! Next time Scholes gets a red card, should he get a 10 game ban for a career of dangerous tackles? Next time Ferguson gets a charge of talking about officials should he get a life time ban?

    Honestly, stop being silly.

    Its non football offences he keeps getting done for. If Keane had written a newspaper article after his 2nd ban for Haaland incident saying he went to do Viera I would have expected a 10 match ban 2nd time around.


  • #144
    Kess73
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,560 ✭✭✭✭Kess73


    ShiverinEskimo wrote: »
    Why must everything be compared and contrasted to other offences by other players?

    Why, by giving a 10 match ban is the FA saying one thing is worse than the other?

    They aren't. They are saying "Well you didn't learn from the 3, 4 or 8 game bans we gave you before so let's try 10".

    It starts and ends with Suarez' previous conduct.


    Which would be fair enough if all other players who are repeat offenders in terms of red cards/bans got the exact same.

    But if a look is taken at players who get regular red cards/bans, there is a lack of steady examples of their bans increasing with every repeat offence.

    It is very simple. Either every player gets increases in ban length for every ban after their first one, or just the set ban length for the individual offence is applied.

    Suarez deserved a ban, but why should he be hit hard with the reoffending excuse when there are plenty of players who rack up bans for one reason or another who can get a steady 3 (or 4 if the normal +1 is added for exceptional circumstances) match ban every time?


  • #145
    amiable
    Registered Users Posts: 12,206 ✭✭✭✭amiable


    That_Guy wrote: »
    I don't like Liverpool.

    My horrible secret is out.

    Happy?

    It's not a two way thing though. Newcastle are too insignificant for most Liverpool fans to hate.


  • #146
    Mr Alan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,372 ✭✭✭✭Mr Alan


    ShiverinEskimo wrote: »
    Suarez was told to watch his future conduct at the same time he was given an 8 match ban.

    So is anyone who ever gets a ban? :confused:

    Honestly, it's a joke. Even the braindead media will admit this is ****ing ridiculous. You won't. That's ok though. Life goes on x


  • #147
    Bobeagleburger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,734 ✭✭✭✭Bobeagleburger


    Was expecting 10 so no surprise.


  • #148
    ShiverinEskimo
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 18,115 ✭✭✭✭ShiverinEskimo


    Kess73 wrote: »
    Which would be fair enough if all other players who are repeat offenders in terms of red cards/bans got the exact same.

    But if a look is taken at players who get regular red cards/bans, there is a lack of steady examples of their bans increasing with every repeat offence.

    It is very simple. Either every player gets increases in ban length for every ban after their first one, or just the set ban length for the individual offence is applied.

    Suarez deserved a ban, but why should he be hit hard with the reoffending excuse when there are plenty of players who rack up bans for one reason or another who can get a steady 3 (or 4 if the normal +1 is added for exceptional circumstances) match ban every time?

    If you can show me a player who has a history of racial abuse and multiple instances of biting a fellow-pro then fair enough. But Suarez is quite the pioneer.

    If all you've got are scummy tackles to compare these extraordinary offences to when scummy tackles exist up and down football from top to bottom then there's no debate. Not like Suarez isn't guilty of some horror tackles of his own is it?


  • #149
    dfx-
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,693 Mod ✭✭✭✭dfx-


    Baldy Conscience wrote: »
    Suarez was warned about his future conduct, he ignored that warning.

    Are you people not taking that into account, or what?

    Is that taken into account by the FA generally speaking?

    Is there a precedent for the FA doing that.


  • #150
    5starpool
    Subscribers Posts: 32,855 ✭✭✭✭5starpool


    amiable wrote: »
    It's not a two way thing though. Newcastle are too insignificant for most Liverpool fans to hate.

    We are playing them at the weekend. Bad timing for that comment imo.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    event
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,063 ✭✭✭✭event


    Gbear wrote: »
    reallyworse.jpg


    Absolute ****ing disgrace to be honest.

    But then again it is the FA - an organisation that are as corrupt as they are incompetent.

    Please say it wasnt you that made that.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement