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

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

1…3233353738…42

Comments

  • #1022
    Tipsy McSwagger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,072 ✭✭✭Tipsy McSwagger


    1 match
    rarnes1 wrote: »
    That's it in a nutshell.

    If it was Sebastian Coates nobody would give a shyte.


  • #1023
    Shanotheslayer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,191 ✭✭✭✭Shanotheslayer


    6 month global ban
    Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »
    If it was Sebastian Coates nobody would give a shyte.
    Nothing to do with who it was. It was a disgusting act that warranted a ban whoever did it. Couldn't give a shyte if Suarez played against my team or not.


  • #1024
    Pilsbury Doughboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Pilsbury Doughboy


    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.

    Well said.


  • #1025
    Fuhrer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,661 ✭✭✭Fuhrer


    monkey9 wrote: »
    Exactly and at the same time wanting Liverpool fans to agree with them.



    So, just like Uruguay were saying, its just a vast global conspiracy against Suarez.


  • #1026
    Pro. F
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,219 ✭✭✭✭Pro. F


    5 matches
    niallo27 wrote: »
    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.

    You said "Liverpool had a great start to the season last year so I don't think Suarez being out made any difference." and "Who knows they could have lost them all as well." So yes, you are unquestionably trying to pretend that Suarez being available for more games last season wouldn't have made a difference. That is a ridiculous argument.

    I'd say it's a very close call between having a ban prone Suarez (if he gets another ban it could be a whopper) and having, say, £60m, in other players in the team. It all depends on how well you think that money would be spent, how hard Suarez would be to replace and how likely you think he is to get banned again. I'm sure your opinion would be different to mine, but I'm happy if he stays. He's box office for good and bad reasons for all fans.


  • Advertisement
  • #1027
    Pilsbury Doughboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Pilsbury Doughboy


    Also any numpties that are calling him scum, vile and disgusting human being etc need to cop the fack on, if having a few nibbles at players on a football field generates that response then what would be you be calling murderers rapists paedos etc? Try and get a grasp on reality please.


  • #1028
    Fuhrer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,661 ✭✭✭Fuhrer


    Pilsbury Doughboy wrote: »
    Also any numpties that are calling him scum, vile and disgusting human being etc need to cop the fack on, if having a few nibbles at players on a football field generates that response then what would be you be calling murderers rapists paedos etc? Try and get a grasp on reality please.


    Dont forget the Racism.


  • #1029
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,139 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    1 match
    Pro. F wrote: »
    You said "Liverpool had a great start to the season last year so I don't think Suarez being out made any difference." and "Who knows they could have lost them all as well." So yes, you are unquestionably trying to pretend that Suarez being available for more games last season wouldn't have made a difference. That is a ridiculous argument.

    I'd say it's a very close call between having a ban prone Suarez (if he gets another ban it could be a whopper) and having, say, £60m, in other players in the team. It all depends on how well you think that money would be spent, how hard Suarez would be to replace and how likely you think he is to get banned again. I'm sure your opinion would be different to mine, but I'm happy if he stays. He's box office for good and bad reasons for all fans.

    That's fair enough. At least your honest and don't pretend to be morally outraged. You just want the worst for liverpool which I can totally understand.


  • #1030
    Pro. F
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,219 ✭✭✭✭Pro. F


    5 matches
    niallo27 wrote: »
    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.

    No, you weren't talking in general. You said "Some posters here actually sound quiet distressed". Which posters?


  • #1031
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    8 matches
    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.

    That's a load of nonsense and just trying to downplay the reaction.
    I put it to you that you are covering up your feelings on it. If it was one of your mates that got bitten by some scumbag down the pub would you tell him to man up it's only a bite?


  • Advertisement
  • #1032
    Pilsbury Doughboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Pilsbury Doughboy


    Another bs argument ^^^^ If that happened in an office, if that happened it the pub, but it happened on a football pitch that's the problem with that argument.


  • #1033
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    8 matches
    Any use of the word nibble in this thread is also defensive downplaying. The irony of somebody using it while claiming an overreaction in the same post is laughable.


  • #1034
    Tipsy McSwagger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,072 ✭✭✭Tipsy McSwagger


    1 match
    Will I Amnt wrote: »
    That's a load of nonsense and just trying to downplay the reaction.
    I put it to you that you are covering up your feelings on it. If it was one of your mates that got bitten by some scumbag down the pub would you tell him to man up it's only a bite?

    I expressed my feelings shortly after the incident in the Liverpool thread. I said he should be banned.

    I wasn't happy about him being banned to play for LFC when FIFA handed down his punishment.


  • #1035
    Pilsbury Doughboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Pilsbury Doughboy


    Oh sorry I thought it was a nibble, I must have missed the chunk of flesh Suarez had in his mouth and the blood gushing.


  • #1036
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    8 matches
    Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »
    I expressed my feelings shortly after the incident in the Liverpool thread. I said he should be banned.

    Then why do you think opposition fans are faking their feelings on it?


  • #1037
    Shanotheslayer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,191 ✭✭✭✭Shanotheslayer


    6 month global ban
    Pilsbury Doughboy wrote: »
    Another bs argument ^^^^ If that happened in an office, but it happened on a football pitch that's the problem with that argument.

    So it happend at a place of work.


  • #1038
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    8 matches
    Pilsbury Doughboy wrote: »
    Another bs argument ^^^^ If that happened in an office, if that happened it the pub, but it happened on a football pitch that's the problem with that argument.

    No point in replying to me, I just don't have the interest to argue with that kind of logic.


  • #1039
    adox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,038 ✭✭✭✭adox


    6 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 (or even better sold) to play against the team they support.

    That's pretty unfair. Whoever did it(three times remember) is always going to draw attention to themselves for doing such a bizarre thing on the pitch and multiple times at that. They were always going to make the headlines whoever they were. The fact that it was Suarez from Liverpool is just a huge bonus for the rest of us and of course we are loving it really.

    But they aren't both mutually exclusive and I would say most hold both opinions.

    It's kinda karma as well for Liverpool the way they have handled controversies over the last couple of seasons.


  • #1040
    Fescue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Fescue


    Will I Amnt wrote: »
    That's a load of nonsense and just trying to downplay the reaction.
    I put it to you that you are covering up your feelings on it. If it was one of your mates that got bitten by some scumbag down the pub would you tell him to man up it's only a bite?

    Ah heyor, you're losing the run of yourself!

    If someone down the pub slide tackled me I'm sure my reaction would be a little different than if it had been on a football pitch.

    There is no defence for what Suarez has done. I have no sympathy for him whatsoever. What he did wasn't particularly dangerous, it didn't alter Chiellini's career. It was weird more than anything else. Almost insane.

    The faux outrage seems strongest from those people who support Utd. Why is that?

    To be fair if Suarez was a Utd player, most of the Liverpool supporters would be in here hamming it up like wise.


  • #1041
    Grayditch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,347 ✭✭✭✭Grayditch


    7 matches
    Oh Jesus, the off-pitch comparisons again...


  • Advertisement
  • #1042
    secman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,668 ✭✭✭secman


    Pilsbury Doughboy wrote: »
    Oh sorry I thought it was a nibble, I must have missed the chunk of flesh Suarez had in his mouth and the blood gushing.

    It's really irrelevant that he is not very good at biting, it's the biting itself that is the problem and more so that he doesn't see it as a problem.


  • #1043
    Tipsy McSwagger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,072 ✭✭✭Tipsy McSwagger


    1 match
    Will I Amnt wrote: »
    Then why do you think opposition fans are faking their feelings on it?

    I believe the ban was too severe (5 match ban for Uruguay, big fine and treatment) while they agreed with it or wanted a longer ban.


  • #1044
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    8 matches
    Grayditch wrote: »
    Oh Jesus, the off-pitch comparisons again...

    What the hell is wrong with off-pitch comparisons. The blanket dismissal of them is ridiculous.
    The act of biting somebody is the same wherever it happens, it has as much place in a pub as on a football pitch, absolutely zero.


  • #1045
    Shanotheslayer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,191 ✭✭✭✭Shanotheslayer


    6 month global ban
    Will I Amnt wrote: »
    What the hell is wrong with off-pitch comparisons. The blanket dismissal of them is ridiculous.
    The act of biting somebody is the same wherever it happens, it has as much place in a pub as on a football pitch, absolutely zero.

    Agree with this 100%


  • #1046
    Tipsy McSwagger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,072 ✭✭✭Tipsy McSwagger


    1 match
    Will I Amnt wrote: »
    What the hell is wrong with off-pitch comparisons. The blanket dismissal of them is ridiculous.
    The act of biting somebody is the same wherever it happens, it has as much place in a pub as on a football pitch, absolutely zero.

    If that was true then why wasn't Cantona arrested for assaulting a supporter?


  • #1047
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    8 matches
    Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »
    I believe the ban was too severe (3 match ban for Uruguay, big fine and treatment) while they agreed with it or wanted a longer ban.

    That's not what your post was about though. You said opposition fans were faking moral outrage or something to that effect. I find biting deplorable, do you believe me or not? What do you think of it?


  • #1048
    Pro. F
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,219 ✭✭✭✭Pro. F


    5 matches
    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.

    I think you are severely underestimating how much vitriol most fans have built up for the highly paid prima donnas we watch every week.

    If it was a nobody player - who had been caught biting opponents on three separate occasions and received a 4 month general football ban for the most recent bite in a high profile WC game - there would have been one thread with about 30 posts. There still would have been plenty of vitriol because we all do like giving out about footballers. It just would have blown over more quickly because there would have been nobody there who cared to defend the player.


  • #1049
    Royal Irish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,401 ✭✭✭Royal Irish


    12 month global ban
    adox wrote: »
    That's pretty unfair. Whoever did it(three times remember) is always going to draw attention to themselves for doing such a bizarre thing on the pitch and multiple times at that. They were always going to make the headlines whoever they were. The fact that it was Suarez from Liverpool is just a huge bonus for the rest of us and of course we are loving it really.

    But they aren't both mutually exclusive and I would say most hold both opinions.

    It's kinda karma as well for Liverpool the way they have handled controversies over the last couple of seasons.

    Also don't forget that most people on here support the big 4 clubs and Suarez never really used to deliver against them and got most of his goals against the smaller clubs.


  • #1050
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    8 matches
    Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »
    If that was true then why wasn't Cantona arrested for assaulting a supporter?

    Eh, he was...


  • Advertisement
  • #1051
    Tipsy McSwagger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,072 ✭✭✭Tipsy McSwagger


    1 match
    Will I Amnt wrote: »
    That's not what your post was about though. You said opposition fans were faking moral outrage or something to that effect. I find biting deplorable, do you believe me or not? What do you think of it?

    I don't like it but I find career ending tackles to be a lot worse to be honest.

    Edit - I was watching the USA V Brazil game at USA 94 this morning and Leonardo's elbow to the US players head was 100 times worse than what Suarez did and he only got a 3 game ban.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement