How long will Suarez's ban be? Mod warning in OP and post#455

Aidric

That statement is an insult to everyone with the gift of sight.

Pro. F

Pro. F wrote: »

The reaction from the Uruguayan manager, public, president and the president of their FA makes the country look pretty bad too.

I would say they don't give 2 fcuks what people think and that's not me being a smart árse. I'd expect them to even ramp up the publicity on this

CSF

6 month global ban

The ban should be increased for the frivolous nature of the appeal, no question.

Grayditch

7 matches

If he went with the "OK I did it, but..." that's sort of the end of an appeal and more of a plea for lenience... Which, who knows, might have been better.

niallo27

1 match

Pro. F wrote: »

No, I'm laughing at Liverpool for having a player who regular bites opposition players which obviously makes the club look bad and gives me something to slag you, the fans, about. Of course I care if Liverpool look bad. If Liverpool were some super respectable club I wouldn't have as much to slag you about.

He did not play more than all the other top scorers last season. I just had a check there, and while he played 33 games, the first one I checked, Yaya (apparently City finished first), played 35. If Suarez had played in the games he was banned for last season, there's a good chance Liverpool would have won the league. And I'm supposed to not be happy about this turn of events?

I meant his time at the club including all his bans. Liverpool had a great start to the season last year so I don't think Suarez being out made any difference. Where do you think Liverpool would have come without Suarez.

Rayne Wooney

If he had admitted it was an idiotic thing to do but argued the severity of the ban when compared to breaking someones nose and the like, I think there would have been a good chance it would be reduced

That statement is insulting the intelligence of everyone with the ability of sight

J. Marston

5 matches

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Not really surprised he got the four month ban if that was his defence. It's basically taking the piss.

niallo27

1 match

I think it's brilliant. Just proves how bonkers he is. They should reduce the ban for the balls it took to give that statement.

Pro. F

5 matches

niallo27 wrote: »

I meant his time at the club including all his bans. Liverpool had a great start to the season last year so I don't think Suarez being out made any difference. Where do you think Liverpool would have come without Suarez.

You lost by one goal to Southampton and drew with Swansea, so to say you think that one of the best strikers in the world wouldn't have made any difference is ridiculous. You can work out yourself how much use 4 extra points would have been in such a close title race.

Shanotheslayer

6 month global ban

niallo27 wrote: »

I think it's brilliant. Just proves how bonkers he is. They should reduce the ban for the balls it took to give that statement.

Jesus Christ.

Benimar

CSF wrote: »

The ban should be increased for the frivolous nature of the appeal, no question.

It's his original statement, not the appeal.

Any additional penalty for his defence is included in the 4 month ban.

secman

Fcking liar , really don't get the guy, nothing between the ears, hard to have any sympathy for him at all. Liverpool owners must be really really pissed off with him, complete toe rag.

CSF

CSF wrote: »

The ban should be increased for the frivolous nature of the appeal, no question.

It's not his appeal

Corholio

Yet again, the impact of something Suarez done could have been lessened with a reasonable response, but instead it is met with a bat**** crazy one.

He's lucky the ban isn't increased with such an insulting defence. It's a pity his football brain seems to be a completely separate part from his actual brain.

niallo27

1 match

Pro. F wrote: »

You lost by one goal to Southampton and drew with Swansea, so to say you think that one of the best strikers in the world wouldn't have made any difference is ridiculous. You can work out yourself how much use 4 extra points would have been in such a close title race.

Who knows they could have lost them all as well. What about the 33 he did play. They were quiet impressive.

Grayditch

7 matches

I'm not sure he had a choice. I'd say that was drawn up before the game was even over and the Uruguay camp handed it to him and said "here dopey-hole, here's what you say".

More speculation, but I'd say the "supportive" Uruguay team and staff are letting their feelings be know to him. There's no way they're all smiles and backpats behind the scenes, when he's just taken a dump on their chances.

Fescue

rarnes1 wrote: »

It's not his appeal

This was his defence to the original hearing?

Insane as it was, they obviously chanced their arm at some kind of excuse in the hope he got off.

Pro. F

5 matches

niallo27 wrote: »

Who knows they could have lost them all as well. What about the 33 he did play. They were quiet impressive.

Yeah, or he could have broken his leg in his first game back.

The 33 games he played, were amazing. To try and pretend that him being available for more games, games where you dropped points against mid-table opposition, wouldn't have been a huge benefit is nonsense.

niallo27

1 match

Are people here actually genuinely upset at what Suarez has done. Some posters here actually sound quiet distressed and upset at the whole thing.

Pro. F

5 matches

niallo27 wrote: »

Are people here actually genuinely upset at what Suarez has done. Some posters here actually sound quiet distressed and upset at the whole thing.

Who?

Fescue

Fescue wrote: »

This was his defence to the original hearing?

Insane as it was, they obviously chanced their arm at some kind of excuse in the hope he got off.

That's it, it was a pathetic defense but one they hoped might pay off and he might get off.

I do expect him to be some sort of apology but tbh I don;t really give a fcuk about Uruguay and if he never plays for them again, I hope he doesn't actually. I just hope he apologies to the Liverpool management and players for letting them down.

niallo27

1 match

Pro. F wrote: »

Yeah, or he could have broken his leg in his first game back.

The 33 games he played, were amazing. To try and pretend that him being available for more games, games where you dropped points against mid-table opposition, wouldn't have been a huge benefit is nonsense.

I'm not trying to pretend that at all. I was replying to your post where you said you now hope liverpool keep him. For me a liverpool with a 30 game Suarez is better than a liverpool with a 38 game top striker.

Fr. Ned

12 month global ban

niallo27 wrote: »

Are people here actually genuinely upset at what Suarez has done. Some posters here actually sound quiet distressed and upset at the whole thing.

Outraged, I'd call it....

Will someone pleeeeeease think of the children.........

niallo27

1 match

Pro. F wrote: »

Who?

I'm talking in general. From people who didn't want to explain Suarez actions to his son to people calling him every name I can think off. I know you find it funny yourself, I want to know what other people are thinking.

Tipsy McSwagger

1 match

Pro. F wrote: »

It's a weird one all right. I'm delighted he's making Liverpool look bad and giving me a laugh at the club's expense. I had been hoping that they would sell him because he's so good, but the laughs he provides, coupled with the lengthy bans (which limit all forms of damage he can do) mean I'd be sad now if that happened.

This is what it comes down to really. Fans of other premiership clubs are faking moral outrage to hide the fact that they are afraid of what Suarez can do to their team. They don't care about bringing the game into disrepute or thuggish behaviour, they just want him to be unavailable (or even better sold) to play against the team they support.

Fuhrer

Fr. Ned

12 month global ban

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

This is what it comes down to really. Fans of other premiership clubs are faking moral outrage to hide the fact that they are afraid of what Suarez can do to their team. They don't care about bringing the game into disrepute or thuggish behaviour, they just want him to be unavailable to play against the team they support.

That about sums it up ok.

Tipsy McSwagger

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

This is what it comes down to really. Fans of other premiership clubs are faking moral outrage to hide the fact that they are afraid of what Suarez can do to their team. They don't care about bringing the game into disrepute or thuggish behaviour, they just want him to be unavailable to play against the team they support.

That's it in a nutshell.

monkey9

Pro. F wrote: »

Who?

Read the thread.

monkey9

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

This is what it comes down to really. Fans of other premiership clubs are faking moral outrage to hide the fact that they are afraid of what Suarez can do to their team. They don't care about bringing the game into disrepute or thuggish behaviour, they just want him to be unavailable (or even better sold) to play against the team they support.

Exactly and at the same time wanting Liverpool fans to agree with them.