Poll: Suarez has to be banned for a year at least

The the ban fair?

  • Scouser: Fair

    Votes: 11 3.0%

  • Other: Fair

    Votes: 64 17.4%

  • Scouser: Too lenient

    Votes: 7 1.9%

  • Other: Too lenient

    Votes: 228 62.0%

  • Scouser: Too harsh

    Votes: 13 3.5%

  • Other: Too harsh

    Votes: 22 6.0%

  • manyoo fans: derp

    Votes: 23 6.3%
  • Total voters
    368
drunkenmaster said:
I don't recall saying the stamps were all this season either
Click to expand...

drunkenmaster said:
He bit people three times, yet between them he's stamped on ankles, stamped on the back of a player... and that was all just this season.
Click to expand...

?

drunkenmaster said:
If it was Shawcross, if he broke another guys leg after Ramsey, should he face being out of football, what about if he did it to 5 more guys, there should surely be a point where the other players safety is regarded a higher priority than Shawcross's career. I don't believe he meant to hurt Ramsey at all but if someone is reckless and stupid repeatedly and can't change his behaviour, when do you put the other players first, there surely has to be some point at which you say okay, too big a risk, you're done.

So how many people can Suarez get away with biting before it's finally okay to talk about a permanent ban? I presume you don't think if he bit a player every other game he should be allowed to continue, is one a season okay, is two a season too much, there has to be a point somewhere right, so where do you see it?
Click to expand...

If we're going to pick people who risk injuring others seriously frequently then you'd have players like De Jong topping the list, not Suarez
 
wildman said:
No one who is normal is going to look at anything Suarez does with an impartial view point, we all look at this with our pre loaded thoughts because it is Suarez. If this was any other player most of us would probably just go "meh seen worse" and move on to the next story.
Click to expand...

Yep. And people won't accept that whatever evidence they bring that Suarez is somehow "different" from other players makes it all the obvious their willingness to be complicit in his lynching.

Mob mentality.

Someone on Radio 5 this morning, with a presumbably straight face (and didn't get laughed at by all and sundry) that biting someone is worse than breaking their leg because it's a primaeval thing... it runs the greater risk of spreading disease and infection.

I mean seriously? Really?
 
Speaking of Mirallas you failed to mention his potential career ending challenge on suarez, going straight for the knee but that's fine as it wasn't suarez doing the challenge.
 
I think we should leave all the other aspects of him behind, i.e. the bad tackles, the kicking etc. Yes, he is a dirty player and deserves a slap but that's not why we are here. We are here because he bit someone for the 3rd time. The guy is violent, that was assault and needs to be punished.

I would like to see the maximum penalty, 2 years banned from all football, not 24 matches, as the rule is 24 matches OR 2 years. Make it 2 years. Why? Because it is his 3rd time. 3 strikes. You are out !
 
inogen said:
Yep. And people won't accept that whatever evidence they bring that Suarez is somehow "different" from other players makes it all the obvious their willingness to be complicit in his lynching.

Mob mentality.

Someone on Radio 5 this morning, with a presumbably straight face (and didn't get laughed at by all and sundry) that biting someone is worse than breaking their leg because it's a primaeval thing... it runs the greater risk of spreading disease and infection.

I mean seriously? Really?
Click to expand...

He is different because he has done a lot before to be fair, no one has bitten people three times, been rightly or wrongly accused of racism and generally getting on like a petty ****.
 
Needs a 12 month ban imo and would like Liverpool to sack him. 6 months is too lenient and 24 months a bit too long. Hopefully FIFA actually make a stand and statement.
 
Purdy said:
He is different because he has done a lot before to be fair, no one has bitten people three times, been rightly or wrongly accused of racism and generally getting on like a petty ****.
Click to expand...

Yes, he's different. So we can make an example out of him. Like there's sound logic there isn't there?
 
inogen said:
Yes, he's different. So we can make an example out of him. Like there's sound logic there isn't there?
Click to expand...

I'm not saying he should be banned for life time, two years from all football etc. that is pretty retarded but he certainly deserves a large ban from international football.
 
wildman said:
its everything to do with liking/not liking Suarez,

case in point Suarez gets 8 match ban for racial language against Evra, John Terry uses racist language against Anton Ferdinand and gets a 3 match ban. Surely what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Forget about the court case and remember the FA found both of them guilty of the same offence, using racist language, so why didn';t they both get the same punishment.

From the FA...



hmmmm so if he breached the same rules as Suarez why did Terry only see 3 game ban ????

Suarez is the bad boy that everyone needs to hate. Suarez goes down in the box, referee is already thinking that's a dive.

No one who is normal is going to look at anything Suarez does with an impartial view point, we all look at this with our pre loaded thoughts because it is Suarez. If this was any other player most of us would probably just go "meh seen worse" and move on to the next story.
Click to expand...

That's the FA being inconsistent, nothing to do with Suarez, I assume they also take previous incidents into account. With Suarez there are countless and as much as Terry is a **** off the pitch, he rarely does anything to attract attention on it.
 
G|mp said:
That's the FA being inconsistent, nothing to do with Suarez, I assume they also take previous incidents into account. With Suarez there are countless and as much as Terry is a **** off the pitch, he rarely does anything to attract attention on it.
Click to expand...

It was because he called him it multiple times apparently
 
EVH said:
Ask yourself; how many games would you expect for someone going in Keane-style (ending a career)? Now imagine that player did it another 2 or 3 times... Now what?
Click to expand...

I just want to say here (I presume you are referring to the Keane v Haaland altercation), Keane never actually ended Haaland's career. In fact, Haaland finished the game and played another few matches after said match. He retired due to a persistent injury to his other knee.
 
Raymond Lin said:
I think we should leave all the other aspects of him behind, i.e. the bad tackles, the kicking etc. Yes, he is a dirty player and deserves a slap but that's not why we are here. We are here because he bit someone for the 3rd time. The guy is violent, that was assault and needs to be punished.

I would like to see the maximum penalty, 2 years banned from all football, not 24 matches, as the rule is 24 matches OR 2 years. Make it 2 years. Why? Because it is his 3rd time. 3 strikes. You are out !
Click to expand...

Roy Keane assaulted someone and effectively ended their career, he should have been locked up for what he admitted was a premeditated attack, but again Keane was not seen as a figure of Hate in the same way as Suarez is.

Personally I think Suarez is a bell end, and probably derserves what ever comes his way. However the witch hunt on here cracks me up, especially when mugs are saying it's nothing to do with liking/not liking him when it clearly is.

When Rooney stamped on Carvallho's nuts in 2008 no one raelly gave a crap because Rooney was the golden boy of ENgland and everyone liked him. If it was a "Suarez" type figure , there would have been outrage.
 
wildman said:
Roy Keane assaulted someone and effectively ended their career, he should have been locked up for what he admitted was a premeditated attack, but again Keane was not seen as a figure of Hate in the same way as Suarez is.

Personally I think Suarez is a bell end, and probably derserves what ever comes his way. However the witch hunt on here cracks me up, especially when mugs are saying it's nothing to do with liking/not liking him when it clearly is.

When Rooney stamped on Carvallho's nuts in 2008 no one raelly gave a crap because Rooney was the golden boy of ENgland and everyone liked him. If it was a "Suarez" type figure , there would have been outrage.
Click to expand...

But has any of these players done the same act 3 times?

I don't recall Rooney stamped on 2 other players' balls.
 
Purdy said:
It was because he called him it multiple times apparently
Click to expand...

It is still the same offence and wasn't even caught in the full glory of Sky SPorts HD where you can clearly see Terry saying what he said. SO the multiple times is tripe. Suarez got hammered because he is the universal bad boy of the EPL. Terry got a light one because he was the England captain.
 
Raymond Lin said:
But has any of these players done the same act 3 times?

I don't recall Rooney stamped on 2 other players' balls.
Click to expand...

I think you're suffering with selective memory.

The time he chased that lad and kicked him playing for England the FA got his ban reduced cos they wanted him for a qualifier.

They also let him off with that terrible elbow on James McCarthy.

Compared with Suarez, he gets away with murder.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom